EL LÍDER DE HEZBOLÁ CARA A CARA CON ASSANGE: EL FICHAJE ESTELAR DEBUTA EN RT

NOTA:
La REPETICIÓN de la entrevista en directo pueden verla en RT a las 17:31 ,21:31 y 22:59 HORA DE MOSCÚ, DOS HORAS MENOS EN ESPAÑA

"Terrorista" para millones de personas y "combatiente por la libertad" para otros. En el primer programa del proyecto televisivo 'El mundo del mañana', Julian Assange conversa con el líder de grupo extremista libanés Hezbolá, Sayеd Hasan Nasralá, quien se encuentra en una ubicación secreta en el Líbano.

Nasralá, que ha luchado en muchos enfrentamientos armados contra Israel y ahora está involucrado en la lucha internacional en Siria, concedió al fundador de WikiLeaks su primera entrevista en Occidente desde el conflicto entre el estado hebreo y el Líbano de 2006.

Israel, "asesino" y "usurpador"

La razón original por la que se estableció Hezbolá fue "liberar su tierra de la ocupación". "Israel es un país ilegal, establecido a partir de ocupar las tierras de otro pueblo, de usurparlas, de controlarlas por la fuerza, de cometer matanzas contra los palestinos que fueron expulsados", proclama Nasralá, instando que por esa razón "la justicia mantiene su carácter unilateral".

Victoria a ojos de Hezbolá


No obstante, en tiempos de guerra, el líder de Hezbolá afirma que el movimiento no busca ni quiere matar a nadie, ni tratar a nadie de manera injusta. "Deseamos que la justicia sea restaurada y el único remedio es crear un Estado, un país en el territorio de Palestina donde vivan en paz y en democracia los musulmanes, los judíos y los cristianos".

Israel ataca, Hezbolá responde

Israel declaró en varias ocasiones que Hezbolá lanza misiles contra áreas civiles del Estado hebreo. Justificando el hecho, Nasralá hace hincapié en que "siempre dijimos que si ellos no atacaban nuestras ciudades y pueblos nosotros tampoco atacaríamos las suyas. Hezbolá recurrió a este método tras muchos años de ataques a civiles libaneses con el simple objetivo de evitar que Israel continuara matando a civiles libaneses".

Siria, en busca del diálogo

Nasralá le confesó a Julian Assange que Hezbolá se puso en contacto con algunos partidos de la oposición siria, pero aquellos rechazaron dialogar. "En Siria lo que pedimos es negociar, es el diálogo o llevar a cabo varias reformas. Porque la alternativa actual a esto es empujar al país a la guerra civil que es precisamente lo que quieren EE. UU. e Israel", subraya el líder del movimiento.

Por otro lado, afirma que el problema se ubica en que "la oposición no está preparada para el diálogo y no está lista para aceptar ninguna de las reformas, todo lo que quiere es derribar el régimen".

Miedo estadounidense

Tras haber creado Hezbolá una red mediática internacional, EE. UU. está bloqueando en su territorio la emisión de su estación de televisión por satélite, Al-Manar. Según Nasralá, lo único que pretende la administración estadounidense es tachar la organización de "terrorista". "Nos acusa pero ni siquiera tenemos el derecho básico de defendernos y presentar nuestros argumentos a la gente del mundo, no dejan que esta voz les alcance", afirma.

"La cuestión de resistir a la hegemonía estadounidense u oponerse a la ocupación es una cuestión moral e instintiva y también humana. Cuando en un país o incluso en una casa hay dos líderes, eso es algo que conduce a la ruina. Así que, ¿cómo podría el universo existir en una hermosa armonía con más de un dios?", concluye el líder de Hamás.

Hezbolá, ¿amigo de la corrupción?

Según las filtraciones de WikiLeaks que provienen de la embajada de EE. UU. en el Líbano, entre algunos miembros de Hezbolá, que conducen potentes vehículos 4x4 y visten con trajes de seda, existe un gran nivel de corrupción. No obstante, Nasralá niega categóricamente dicha información, tachándola de "la guerra mediática, cuyo objetivo es desacreditar a Hezbolá y distorsionar su imagen".

Hezbolá representa una organización islamista, fundada en el Líbano en 1982 como respuesta a la intervención israelí. Varios países, entre los cuales se encuentran EE. UU., Australia, Canadá, Israel, Países Bajos, Reino Unido y Egipto, tachan oficialmente a Hezbolá de una "organización terrorista". Por el contrario, gran parte de los Gobiernos del mundo árabe consideran a la organización un movimiento de resistencia legítimo.

Artículo completo en: http://actualidad.rt.com/actualidad/internacional/issue_38855.html

JULIAN ASSANGE EMPEZARÁ A REVELAR LOS SECRETOS DEL 'MUNDO DEL MAÑANA' EN RT EL 17 DE ABRIL

RT Publicado: 13 abr 2012 | 12:07 MSK
Última actualización: 13 abr 2012 | 12:39 MSK

El 17 de abril, fecha en la que se cumplen 500 días del bloqueo financiero de WikiLeaks, el fundador de este polémico sitio y uno de los activistas políticos más famosos, Julian Assange, empezará a revelar secretos a nivel mundial en la cadena RT. El primer programa saldrá el martes a las 11:30 GMT en nuestra cadena.

El proyecto de Assange, titulado 'El mundo del mañana', contará en total con 10 entrevistas de 26 minutos de duración cada una. El objetivo principal del fundador de WikiLeaks es analizar el futuro de la comunidad mundial.

El rodaje fue realizado en el mismo lugar donde Julian Assange, de 40 años, lleva más de un año y medio bajo arresto domiciliario sin que se haya presentado ninguna acusación oficial en su contra.

"Cuando pasas tanto tiempo en arresto domiciliario es un placer invitar a alguien a tu casa y conocer qué pasa en el mundo. En este proyecto conseguimos presentar a personas muy interesantes e importantes desde un lado inesperado. Esto es porque esas personas no hablaban con un periodista común y corriente, sino con una persona que se encuentra bajo arresto domiciliario que se ha tropezado con los mismos problemas políticos que les preocupan a ellos", comentó Julian Assange a RT.

"Mucha información que aspiramos a comunicar no está presentada de una manera confiable en el 'mainstream'. De hecho, de todas las cadenas de noticias internacionales se pueden tomar en serio solo dos: RT y Al Jazeera", explica así Assange la elección del medio que usa para comunicarse con el mundo.

"RT une una audiencia global de personas de mente abierta que cuestionan lo que ven en los medios tradicionales y estamos orgullosos de presentar un nuevo proyecto de Julian Assange. Hemos proporcionado una plataforma para que Julian pueda hablar con el mundo y le hemos dado una absoluta libertad editorial. Es la persona idónea para ofrecer opiniones alternativas a nuestros televidentes en todo el mundo", declaró la directora del Grupo RT, Margarita Simonián.

El fundador del sitio WikiLeaks llamó por primera vez la atención en julio de 2010 cuando publicó en su página miles de documentos secretos del Pentágono sobre la guerra en Afganistán. Más tarde, sacó a la luz unos 134.000 cables filtrados de la diplomacia de EE. UU.

Julian Assange fue detenido en Londres en diciembre de 2010. Se encuentra actualmente en libertad condicional en el Reino Unido a la espera del fallo del Tribunal Supremo sobre su extradición a Suecia, donde es reclamado por un supuesto delito de agresión sexual. Assange, igual que muchos expertos, considera que es blanco de una persecución por motivos políticos.

Artículo completo en: http://actualidad.rt.com/actualidad/internacional/issue_38662.html

Al-Qaeda already possesses nuclear bomb, hidden in Europe?

According to classified materials of interrogations of prisoners at the US Guantanamo Bay camp published by the Daily Telegraph, al-Qaeda is already possessing a nuclear weapon and is ready to bring it into action in case of capture or killing of Osama bin Laden.

According to documents, provided by the WikiLeaks on Monday, one of the senior al-Qaeda commanders commented on the topic of the nuclear bomb, hidden at the moment in Europe.

According to him, the organization will explode the bomb if the head of al-Qaida, Osama bin Laden, captured or assassinated.

US intelligence suspects that the Mujahideen of the organization have already managed to acquire uranium in sufficient quantities.

Other documents speak of a whole set of plans of al-Qaeda on the attacks on the infrastructure of the West: from putting cyanide in the air conditioning units of government buildings in the US to recruiting ground-staff at London's Heathrow Airport to facilitate the commission of sabotage with the use of aircraft.

WikiLeaks documents also reveal the fact that information about the nuclear bomb has been obtained by tortures, writes British Daily Telegraph. Ordinary prisoners of the Mujahideen and entirely peaceful Muslims, who were later released, were subjected to tortures.

Only about 220 prisoners at concentration camp Guantanamo, according to the Americans, were dangerous members of al-Qaeda. 380 people were ordinary Mujahideen, members of the Taliban or volunteers who came to Afghanistan from other countries. The remaining 150 people were completely innocent Afghans or Pakistanis, farmers, truck drivers, cooks, who were captured or kidnapped and imprisoned in American concentration camp in Cuba.

WikiLeaks posted a dossier only for one prisoner, apparently, from the Caucasus. Abdullah Kafkas born 1984 was captured in Afghanistan in late 2001.

According to US intelligence, he might have information about the uprising in the Afghan city of Mazar-i-Sharif in November 2001, about the Uzbek Islamic organizations, as well as about the members of the Taliban.

As stated in the dossier, the US military could not get useful information from Kafkas. Later the prisoner was decided to give to Russia, who agreed to share with the US all the information that they will be able to knock out of Kafkas in the future.

It is reported that Russian security services were also interrogated Kafkas in Guantanamo Bay from 14 to 19 November 2002.

Department of Monitoring
Kavkaz Center

http://www.kavkazcenter.com/eng/content/2011/04/26/14174.shtml
____________________________

Jihadis Speculate on al-Qaeda’s Nuclear Strategy


By: Abdul Hameed Bakier (jamestown)

Model of a suitcase bomb, a weapon referred to by a jihadi forum member discussing nuclear weapons remaining from the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Jihadi forums occasionally discuss whether al-Qaeda possesses nuclear bombs and the strategies involved in their deployment. The latest discussion on this topic was triggered by a posting on a jihadi website entitled “Al-Qaeda’s nuclear bombings - Where would the battle start?” (muslm.net, August 25).

Jihadi forum members insist the videotaped speeches of al-Qaeda’s Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri contain hidden messages for al-Qaeda sleeper cells, instructing them to commence planned terror attacks on pre-selected targets. A forum member nicknamed “Youba” said al-Qaeda attacks lead to retaliatory actions from the West in which the victims are Muslims in both cases. “The Western world is far from the battlefield and in deep sleep, but that will not last long.” According to Youba, al-Qaeda operates within a sequential policy in escalating the war with the United States and its allies. Bin Laden offered the West a truce if it pulls out of the Islamic world, otherwise they would face a catastrophe worse than what the United States suffered in Vietnam. Youba claims that terror attacks with conventional weapons have resulted in harassment of Muslims living in the West. This has afforded al Qaeda several strategic advantages:

• Violence and discrimination against Muslims reversed the migration of Muslims to the West. Many Arab Muslims have returned to their home countries since 9/11.

• Terror attacks led to the expulsion of Islamic figures who had sought political asylum in the West. Those shaykhs will have to go back and resume the path of jihad by instigating young Muslims to take up arms.

Evacuating Muslims from Western countries would pave the way for a massive terror attack by al-Qaeda with unconventional weapons without the fear of causing a large number of Muslim casualties, according to al-Youba, who insists that America’s concern over al-Qaeda’s possible possession of chemical or nuclear weapons indicates that such an attack is only a matter of time.

The logical sequence of al-Qaeda’s actions and methods of operation, including the decentralized sleeper cells ready to carry out preplanned terror actions and the secret codes and messages in al-Qaeda video statements supposedly pertinent to unconventional attacks, suggest to jihadis like Youba that al-Qaeda might have bought and stored weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) during the collapse of the Soviet Union. Youba notes that in 1997, the late General Alexander Lebed, former secretary of the Russian national Security Council, claimed on U.S. television that 100 Russian-made nuclear suitcase bombs were missing from Russia’s arsenals, though he added these might have been destroyed, stolen, sold or stored without proper records (Sixty Minutes, CBS, September 7, 1997). Russian officials denied the existence of such bombs and accused Lebed of spreading false information for his own political gain in the forthcoming presidential elections.

The suitcase bombs were developed in the 1970s for the former Soviet committee of state security- the KGB. There are two types of WMD suitcase bombs, says Youba; the first type has the destructive power of one kiloton of TNT and the second type is radioactive and when detonated, using conventional explosives, releases “nuclear radiation” (in the second type Youba appears to be describing “dirty bombs’ rather than nuclear weapons).

In another post in the same forum, Youba contends that the scenario al-Qaeda is considering involves the collapse of the United States and the beginning of the end of its puppet regimes in Islamic countries, paving the way for the gradual return of caliphate rule in the Islamic world. The United States is enduring its worst economic, social and military days, says Youba, adding that the financial crisis is strangling the nation and rich U.S. states are contemplating secession from the union as a consequence. Militarily, a close look at what the U.S. military is suffering in Waziristan, the Hindu Kush Mountains, the Swat valley and Baghdad reaffirms the dilemma of the United States, said Youba, repeating the Jihadi stereotype that any Western or local military activity against Islamic extremists is either led by or instigated by the United States. Even at home, Americans live in fear of a martyr crossing the ocean with a chemical, biological or nuclear bomb with the intention of detonating it on American soil.

On the other hand, alleges Youba, al-Qaeda and other Mujahideen are on the rise. For example, Islamic Shari’a is applied in Somalia by the Mujahideen Youth Movement (al-Shabaab). Similarly, 80 percent of Afghanistan is ruled by the Taliban. In Iraq the so-called Islamic State of Iraq has forced the occupier out of the cities. The collapse of the United States would result in the return of Taliban rule in Afghanistan, in which case Waziristan, the Swat valley, Kashmir, Eastern Turkistan and the Sunni areas of Iran would join the Islamic Caliphate of Afghanistan. On the western side, the Mujahideen Youth Movement will control the whole of Somalia, joined by Djibouti, and would probably march to Khartoum to rid Sudan of its “treacherous ruler.”

“Al-Qaeda’s Nuclear Bombings” was posted in a few other jihadi forums. Although many forum members approved of a nuclear terror attack by al-Qaeda that would rid the Muslim world of U.S. tyranny, some members disputed the religious permissibility of using nuclear weapons (majahden.com, August 29).

Circulating a false impression about al-Qaeda’s possible nuclear capabilities could only help improve its ability to fundraise and recruit extremists longing to join a triumphant Islamic entity capable of restoring the Islamic caliphate. Al-Qaeda has long sought to buy or manufacture bombs of mass destruction and would have likely used them had it succeeded in obtaining them.

http://www.jamestown.org/

Ultima hora Egipto: Wikileaks ha comenzado a publicar los cables sobre la opresión policial en Egipto

Los documentos comenzaron a filtrarse el día 28 de enero 2011, hoy 31, continúan filtrando: PINCHAR AQUÍ

WikiLeaks Reveals U.S. Twisted Ethiopia's Arm to Invade Somalia

by Rob Prince

Global Research, December 26, 2010
blackagendareport.com - 2010-12-21

U.S. officials were lying when they claimed to have attempted to restrain Ethiopia from invading neighboring Somalia in late 2006. Newly unveiled documents show that “the Bush Administration pushed Ethiopia to invade Somalia with an eye on crushing the Union of Islamic Courts,” which had established relative peace in much of the country. The U.S. also tried to assemble a “coalition of the willing” to overthrow Robert Mugabe’s government in Zimbabwe.

By mid 2007, the 50,000 Ethiopian troops that invaded Somalia in late 2006 found themselves increasingly bogged down, facing much fiercer resistance than they had bargained for as Somalis of all stripes temporarily put aside their differences to stand together against the outside invader.

As the military incursion turned increasingly sour, then US Under Secretary of State for Africa, Jendayi Frazer, who taught at the University of Denver's Korbel School of International Studies in the 1990s, insisted that, prior to the invasion, the United States had counseled caution and that Washington had warned Ethiopia not to use military force against Somalia. Frazer was a close collaborator with former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, for whom there also is a strong University of Denver connection. Frazer certainly tried to distance the United States from responsibility for the Ethiopian invasion in a number of interviews she gave to the media at the time.

But one of the released WikiLeaks cables, suggests a different picture, one that implicates Frazer in pressing Ethiopia's President Meles Zenawi to invade its neighbor. The content of the cable is being widely discussed in the African media. It exposes a secret deal cut between the United States and Ethiopia to invade Somalia.

If accurate -- and there is no reason to believe the contrary -- the cable suggests that Ethiopia had no intention of invading Somalia in 2006 but was encouraged/pressured to do so by the United States which pushed Ethiopia behind the scenes. Already bogged down in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan at the time, the Bush Administration pushed Ethiopia to invade Somalia with an eye on crushing the Union of Islamic Courts, which was gaining strength in Somalia at the time.

At the time of the invasion there was little doubt that the Ethiopian military incursion was "made in Washington." Like so many other WikiLeaks cables, this one merely puts a dot on the "i" or crosses the "t" on what was generally known, although it does give specific information about Jendayi Frazer's deep involvement in the affair.

According to the cable, as the main U.S. State Department representative in Africa, Frazer played a key role, spearheading what amounted to a U.S.-led proxy war in conjunction with the Pentagon. At the same time that she was pushing the Ethiopians to attack, Frazer was laying the groundwork both for the attack in the U.S. media and for a cover-up, by claiming that although the United States did not support Ethiopian military action, she could understand "the Somali threat" and why Ethiopia might find it necessary to go to war.

Frazer spread rumors of a possible jihadist takeover in Somalia that would threaten Ethiopian security. Turns out that media performance was little more than a smokescreen. The U.S. military had been preparing Ethiopia for the invasion, providing military aid and training Ethiopian troops. Then on December 4, 2006, CENTCOM Commander, General John Abizaid was in Addis Ababa on what was described as "a courtesy call." Instead, the plans for the invasion were finalized.

At the time of the Somali invasion, Zenawi found himself in trouble. He was facing growing criticism for the wave of repression he had unleashed against domestic Ethiopian critics of his rule that had included mass arrests, the massacres of hundreds of protesters and the jailing of virtually all the country's opposition leaders. By the spring of 2006 there was a bill before the U.S. Congress to cut off aid to Zenawi unless Ethiopia's human rights record improved. (His human rights record, by the way, has not improved since. Given how the United States and NATO view Ethiopia's strategic role in the "war on terrorism" and the scramble for African mineral and energy resources, Western support for Zenawi has only increased in recent years).

In 2006, dependent on U.S. support to maintain power in face of a shrinking political base at home -- a situation many U.S. allies in the Third World find themselves -- and against his better judgement, Zenawi apparently caved to Frazer's pressure. Nor was this the first time that Frazer had tried to instigate a U.S. proxy war in Africa. Earlier as U.S. ambassador to South Africa, she had tried to put together a "coalition of the willing" to overthrow Mugabe's regime in Zimbabwe, an initiative that did not sit so well with South Africa's post-apartheid government and went nowhere.

The 2006 war in Somalia did not go well either for the United States or Ethiopia. Recently a State Department spokesperson, Donald Yamamoto, admitted that the whole idea was "a big mistake," obliquely admitting U.S. responsibility for the invasion. It resulted in 20,000 deaths and according to some reports, left up to 2 million Somalis homeless. The 50,000 Ethiopian invasion force, which had expected a cake walk, instead ran into a buzz saw of Somali resistance, got bogged down and soon withdrew with its tail between its legs. The political result of the invasion was predictable: the generally more moderate Union of Islamic Courts was weakened, but it was soon replaced in Somalia by far more radical and militant Islamic groups with a more openly anti-American agenda.

As the situation deteriorated, in an attempt to cover both the U.S. and her own role, Frazer then turned on Zenawi, trying to distance herself from fiasco using an old and tried diplomatic trick: outright lying. Now that the invasion had turned sour, she changed her tune, arguing in the media, that both she and the State Department had tried to hold back the Ethiopians, discouraging them from invading rather than pushing them to attack. The WikiLeaks cable tells quite a different story. In 2009, the Ethiopian forces withdrew, leaving Somalia in a bigger mess and more unstable than when their troops went in three years prior. Seems to be a pattern here?

Rob Prince is the publisher of the Colorado Progressive Jewish News

Global Research Articles by Rob Prince

http://www.globalresearch.ca/

Anna Ardin, integrismo cristiano, terrorismo y Posada Carriles un "cocktel mezclado, no agitado" (J.B. 007)

Algún lector dirá que, éste blog no es lugar apropiado para hablar de "asuntos de faldas". Se equivoca el que piense así.
Las mujeres siempre han sido las mejores agentes de inteligencia, prueba de ello es la preferencia de mujeres para operaciones especiales del estado de Israel. Algunas muy buenas, otras NO tanto... en el "duelo directo con mujeres de otros servicios de inteligencia".

Las mujeres de la CIA son bastante débiles, no son capaces de "no amar", el fracaso las ha acompañado a muchas de ellas por éste motivo, todo lo contrario que las israelíes y otras.

Terrorismo y servicios de inteligencia son completamente incompatibles cuando NO hay profesionales.
Anna Ardin es Ana Bernardino, eso para empezar...la cubana afincada en Suecia, no es muy inteligente, a las primeras de cambio ha quedado al descubierto que, es mas tonta de lo que parece. Mejor calladita, que hablar y confirmarlo.

Hay trabajos que deben ser ejecutados por auténticos profesionales, las chapuzas son propias de ineptos como el Coronel Tejero o ésta aprendiz de espía.

Como me consta que en España tienes fuertes vinculos con personajes muy conocidos "El clan de Miami", pues me dirijo directamente a tí y en castellano. Seguro que te pasaran mi comentario éstos agitadores o sus socios del integrismo cristiano español.

Esta es la captura de pantalla de ésta integrista cristiana que NO HA PODIDO BORRAR.
¿En que quedamos, guapa? Aquí(foto), preguntas el día 14 de agosto "¿Alguien puede conseguirme un par de entradas para la fiesta del cangrejo?... Julian quiere ir a la fiesta esta noche o mañana..."

El día 15 de agosto, vuelves a tweets....ahora dices "02:00...al aire libre...cerca de la congelación...con las mejores personas y más inteligentes del mundo, es increíble".

Como ves, aunque lo borraste, el cache de internett se quedó. Eres realmente mala aspirante a agente de inteligencia y mentirosa. Solo he necesitado un par de horas para demostrarte que solo engañas a los de tu calaña, suspenso en inteligencia.

Por otro lado...tampoco te va a servir de nada las fotos, mensajes y videos que presuntamente has borrado de tu telefono movil, como veo que eres muy ignorante, te recuerdo que se pueden recuperar perfectamente y la gente que rodea a Julian....haran todo lo imaginable e inimaginable por ecuperar en un PC "tus borrados".

Esta imitadora de "La Garbo" parece ser que no conoce el código Penal sueco, te refresco la memoria, guapa: Capítulo 15, 7 § A y 6 §.

Menuda panda de carriles torcidos....directos y en caída libre al precipicio.

CONTINUARÁ...Guapa.

Making a Mockery of the Real Crime of Rape. Assange Beseiged

By ISRAEL SHAMIR and PAUL BENNETT

The plot thickens as our favorite hero of the Matrix; our own “Captain Neo” Julian Assange, faces danger yet again. When we last parted company with the legendary founder of WikiLeaks, he was breathing a sigh of relief after dodging spurious double-rape charges. The complaints were dropped, and our hero was free to roam the globe once again. But soap opera plots are repetitive; the story was quickly recycled and now our brave captain is again under threat of being castrated on Stockholm’s Stora Torget, or whatever the latest craven penalty is for molesting sacred Nordic virgins in a land where Vikings once ruled.

In other words, the farcical rape charges have once again been leveled against the Pentagon’s Public Enemy Number One. Julian Assange now stands accused of: (1) not calling a young woman the day after he had enjoyed a night with her, (2) asking her to pay for his bus ticket, (3) having unsafe sex, and (4) participating in two brief affairs in the course of one week. These four minor charges, worthy of Leopold Bloom’s mock trial in the Nightown chapter in Ulysses, have been shaken and fermented until they were able to cook up a half-baked rape case! Step down Iran; Sweden takes the cake! While Iran is notorious for unyielding conservative sentences against adulterers, Sweden shows us what the liberal side of the coin looks like as she invents criminal charges for failing to telephone and for careless use of preservatives in consensual acts of affection. Worse, they are purposely conflating consensual sex with rape for political purposes. In this, Sweden makes a mockery of the very real crime of violent rape.

The Swedes have a practical reason behind their deceptively slapstick police-work. The WikiLeaks founder, pursued by malevolent forces around the world, sought momentary relief beneath Sweden’s reputation as a bastion of free speech. But the moment Julian sought the protection of Swedish media law, the CIA immediately threatened to discontinue intelligence sharing with SEPO, the Swedish Secret Service. That got the present right-wing government out of its chair, as it does everything it can to bury the Prime Minister Olof Palme’s legacy of careful neutrality. The suspicion of whether the rape farce is an orchestrated campaign, might be illuminated by these facts: (1) Sweden sent troops to Afghanistan, (2) Assange’s WikiLeaks published the Afghan War Diary which exposed this cruel and needless neo-colonial campaign. Furthermore, the expected release of new secret materials by WikiLeaks might just influence the general elections on September 19. Perhaps that explains the sudden police raid on a WikiLeaks server.

An American Tea Party website the RightwingNews.com suggested that “a CIA agent with a sniper rifle rattle a bullet around [Assange’s] skull the next time he appears in public as a warning”. Rest assured that the CIA is wiser than the Tea Party. They at least have learned the lesson of Che Guevara. Nowadays they ruin a rebel’s reputation instead of wasting a bullet. They won’t raise Assange up to become a martyr, they simply use his own erstwhile allies to reduce him to a laughing stock. They stain him with opprobrium. It is much more certain and final than the marksman’s shot. History is witness to their growing efficiency in using this tactic. In the 70’s, they could only bring themselves to say that Philip Agee was a womanizer and a drunkard. Nowadays they do not stint at charges of pedophilia, for example to humiliate Scott Ritter for failing to go along with George W Bush’s charade of Iraqi WMD. As you might expect, the rape campaign against Assange might be just an initial volley. Perhaps they will decide he is a pedophile too. The unspoken threat is enough to send some faint-hearted supporters of WikiLeaks scurrying for cover.

The bullet can always come later, once the victim has been successfully isolated by the smear campaign. The Gospels tell us that hardly anyone followed Jesus to Golgotha, though just a week earlier the people of Jerusalem hailed Him with hosannas. A Jewish anti-Gospel explains that this was the result of a successful smear campaign managed by Judas, a surprisingly modernist reading for an early medieval story.

For a smear that really sticks, you need to get it from an ex-apostle. An accusation by a Caiaphas does not impress. If you are targeting a leftist, hire leftists. For example, Trotskyites were willing and useful tools against the Communists. Pseudo Anti-Zionists are currently being used to hamstring a genuine Pro-Palestinian movement. Who are the Judases of this campaign against our Julian?

• An anonymous group claiming to be “Wikileaks insiders” uploaded a new site full of “revelations” about Assange’s past and present, claiming he lives in luxury in South Africa on donated funds – though he appears almost daily in Swedish media and police reports.

• Another ex-apostle is the Icelander politician Birgitta Jonsdottir, who is misrepresented as a “Wikileaks spokesperson”. She called on Assange “to step down” and leave Wikileaks to drift without his guidance – as if WikiLeaks is somehow separate from Assange.

• The pseudo-progressive organization Reporters Sans Frontièresattacked Assange for endangering the lives of innocent American secret agents in Afghanistan. Despite its ‘leftist’ terminology, RSF is a private organization drawing funds from US government sources aiming to destabilize Cuba. It is connected to Cuban émigrés in Miami.

• Anna Ardin (the official complainant) is often described by the media as a “leftist”. She has ties to the US-financed anti-Castro and anti-communist groups. She published her anti-Castro diatribes (see hereand here) in the Swedish-language publication Revista de Asignaturas Cubanas put out by Misceláneas de Cuba. From Oslo, Professor Michael Seltzer points out that this periodical is the product of a well-financed anti-Castro organization in Sweden. He further notes that the group is connected with Union Liberal Cubana led by Carlos Alberto Montaner whose CIA ties were exposed here. Note that Ardin was deported from Cuba for subversive activities. In Cuba she interacted with the feminist anti-Castro group Las damas de blanco (the Ladies in White). This group receives US government funds and the convicted anti-communist terrorist Luis Posada Carriles is a friend and supporter. Wikipedia quotes Hebe de Bonafini, president of the Argentine Madres de Plaza de Mayo as saying that “the so-called Ladies in White defend the terrorism of the United States.”

However we do not have to accept the single-bullet theory. Life is more complicated than that. In addition to her anti-Castro, pro-CIA streak, Anna Ardin apparently indulges in her favorite sport of male-bashing. A Swedish forum reports that she is an expert on sexual harassment and the male “master suppression techniques”. Once, as she was lecturing, a male student in the audience looked at his notes instead of staring at her. Anna Ardin reported him for sexual harassment because he discriminated against her for being a woman and because she claimed he made use of the male “master suppression technique” in trying to make her feel invisible. As soon as the student learned about her complaint, he contacted her to apologize and explain himself. Anna Ardin’s response was to once again report him for sexual harassment, again because he was using the “master suppression technique”, this time to belittle her feelings.

Ardin is apparently involved with a “Christian” Social-Democrat group. The Swedish church has a precious few male priests: what was once the struggle for female equality has ended up with men being effectively removed from service. Nowadays very few Swedish male-female couples marry in the church, or get married at all; most Swedish gay couples, however, are proud to become “man and wife” in the church. This is all good news for wealthy Swedes: deserted churches sell their properties (once enjoyed by the community) to be fenced off by the nouveau riche created by the latest privatization wave. So much for Swedish social democracy!

The second accuser, Sofia Wilen, 26, is Anna’ friend. Here is a video of an Assange press conference where one can see the girls together. Those present at the conference marveled at her groupie-like behavior. Though rock stars are used to girls dying to have sex with them, it is much less common in the harsh field of political journalism. Sofia worked hard to bed Assange, according to her own confession; she was also the first to complain to police. She is little known and her motives are vague. Why might a young woman (who shares her life with American artist Seth Benson) pursue such a sordid political adventure?

The brilliant Israeli writer Gilad Atzmon describes, in his funny novel My One and Only Love, how the secret services employ young ladies for honey-traps. Is this the case here? Perhaps it is nothing more than a case of gold digging. New legislation, in Sweden and all over Europe, has made men extremely vulnerable to extortion scams of this sort. A young Swedish woman, 26 (her name withheld) succeeded in winning over a million dollars during the course of one vacation in Greece, as reported by the Daily Telegraph. She complained of being raped. Four men were arrested, their names disclosed, and their jobs jeopardized. She went back home a millionaire, her sacred identity safely preserved. Her success begs imitation: according to an EU report, Sweden has twenty times more rape complaints than were generated by the hot-blooded Italians. Most are dismissed right away, and justly so.

Rape is a horrible crime, and it should not be stretched to encompass minor misdemeanors and moral failings (like the failure to give an encouraging phone call the next day). Tellingly, when the complainant’s advocate was asked why the young women were unsure whether they were raped, he replied: “They are not lawyers”. Rape (like murder) is a crime that one needs no lawyers to understand. Rape is a capital crime: if the rape charges are proved false, then certainly the complainant should be charged with criminal defamation.

As for Julian Assange, we need him. We need our captain Neo, whether chaste or womanizer, in order to uncover the secret doings of our governments behind the Matrix. For our own sakes, we must all do our part to protect him from castrating feminists and secret services alike.

http://www.counterpunch.org/shamir09142010.html

Open letter: To Julia Gillard, re Julian Assange

The authors write: We wrote the letter below because we believe that Julian Assange is entitled to all the protections enshrined in the rule of law – and that the Australian Government has an obligation to ensure he receives them.

The signatures here have been collected in the course of a day-and-a-half, primarily from people in publishing, law and politics. The signatories hold divergent views about WikiLeaks and its operations. But they are united in a determination to see Mr Assange treated fairly.

We know that many others would have liked to sign. But given the urgency of the situation, we though it expedient to publish now rather than collect more names.

If, however, you agree with the sentiments expressed, we encourage you to leave your name in the comments section.

Dear Prime Minister,

We note with concern the increasingly violent rhetoric directed towards Julian Assange of WikiLeaks.

“We should treat Mr Assange the same way as other high-value terrorist targets: Kill him,” writes conservative columnist Jeffrey T Kuhner in the Washington Times.

William Kristol, former chief of staff to vice president Dan Quayle, asks, “Why can’t we use our various assets to harass, snatch or neutralize Julian Assange and his collaborators, wherever they are?”

“Why isn’t Julian Assange dead?” writes the prominent US pundit Jonah Goldberg.

“The CIA should have already killed Julian Assange,” says John Hawkins on the Right Wing News site.

Sarah Palin, a likely presidential candidate, compares Assange to an Al Qaeda leader; Rick Santorum, former Pennsylvania senator and potential presidential contender, accuses Assange of “terrorism”.

And so on and so forth.

Such calls cannot be dismissed as bluster. Over the last decade, we have seen the normalisation of extrajudicial measures once unthinkable, from ‘extraordinary rendition’ (kidnapping) to ‘enhanced interrogation’ (torture).

In that context, we now have grave concerns for Mr Assange’s wellbeing.

Irrespective of the political controversies surrounding WikiLeaks, Mr Assange remains entitled to conduct his affairs in safety, and to receive procedural fairness in any legal proceedings against him.

As is well known, Mr Assange is an Australian citizen.

We therefore call upon you to condemn, on behalf of the Australian Government, calls for physical harm to be inflicted upon Mr Assange, and to state publicly that you will ensure Mr Assange receives the rights and protections to which he is entitled, irrespective of whether the unlawful threats against him come from individuals or states.

We urge you to confirm publicly Australia’s commitment to freedom of political communication; to refrain from cancelling Mr Assange's passport, in the absence of clear proof that such a step is warranted; to provide assistance and advocacy to Mr Assange; and do everything in your power to ensure that any legal proceedings taken against him comply fully with the principles of law and procedural fairness.

A statement by you to this effect should not be controversial – it is a simple commitment to democratic principles and the rule of law.

We believe this case represents something of a watershed, with implications that extend beyond Mr Assange and WikiLeaks. In many parts of the globe, death threats routinely silence those who would publish or disseminate controversial material. If these incitements to violence against Mr Assange, a recipient of Amnesty International’s Media Award, are allowed to stand, a disturbing new precedent will have been established in the English-speaking world.

In this crucial time, a strong statement by you and your Government can make an important difference.

We look forward to your response.

Dr Jeff Sparrow, author and editor
Lizzie O’Shea, Social Justice Lawyer, Maurice Blackburn
Professor Noam Chomsky, writer and academic
Antony Loewenstein, journalist and author
Mungo MacCallum, journalist and writer
Professor Peter Singer, author and academic
Adam Bandt, MP
Senator Bob Brown
Senator Scott Ludlam
Julian Burnside QC, barrister
Jeff Lawrence, Secretary, Australian Council of Trade Unions
Professor Raimond Gaita, author and academic
Rob Stary, lawyer
Lieutenant Colonel (ret) Lance Collins, Australian Intelligence Corps, writer
The Hon Alastair Nicholson AO RFD QC
Brian Walters SC, barrister
Professor Larissa Behrendt, academic
Emeritus Professor Stuart Rees, academic, Sydney Peace Foundation
Mary Kostakidis, Chair, Sydney Peace Foundation
Professor Wendy Bacon, journalist
Christos Tsiolkas, author
James Bradley, author and journalist
Julian Morrow, comedian and television producer
Louise Swinn, publisher
Helen Garner, novelist
Professor Dennis Altman, writer and academic
Dr Leslie Cannold, author, ethicist, commentator
John Birmingham, writer
Guy Rundle, writer
Alex Miller, writer
Sophie Cunningham, editor and author
Castan Centre for Human Rights Law
Professor Judith Brett, author and academic
Stephen Keim SC, President of Australian Lawyers for Human Rights
Phil Lynch, Executive Director, Human Rights Law Resource Centre
Sylvia Hale, MLC
Sophie Black, editor
David Ritter, lawyer and historian
Dr Scott Burchill, writer and academic
Dr Mark Davis, author and academic
Henry Rosenbloom, publisher
Ben Naparstek, editor
Chris Feik, editor
Louise Swinn, publisher
Stephen Warne, barrister
Dr John Dwyer QC
Hilary McPhee, writer, publisher
Joan Dwyer OAM
Greg Barns, barrister
James Button, journalist
Owen Richardson, critic
Michelle Griffin, editor
John Timlin, literary Agent & producer
Ann Cunningham, lawyer and publisher
Alison Croggon, author, critic
Daniel Keene, playwright
Dr Nick Shimmin, editor/writer
Bill O'Shea, lawyer, former President, Law Institute of Victoria
Dianne Otto, Professor of Law, Melbourne Law School
Professor Frank Hutchinson,Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies (CPACS), University of Sydney
Anthony Georgeff, editor
Max Gillies, actor
Shane Maloney, writer
Louis Armand, author and publisher
Jenna Price, academic and journalist
Tanja Kovac, National Cooordinator EMILY's List Australia
Dr Russell Grigg, academic
Dr Justin Clemens, writer and academic
Susan Morairty, Lawyer
David Hirsch, Barrister
Cr Anne O’Shea
Kathryn Crosby, Candidates Online
Dr Robert Sparrow, academic
Jennifer Mills, author
Foong Ling Kong, editor
Tim Norton, Online Campaigns Co-ordinator, Oxfam Australia
Elisabeth Wynhausen, writer
Ben Slade, Lawyer
Nikki Anderson, publisher
Dan Cass
Professor Diane Bell, author and academic
Dr Philipa Rothfield, academic
Gary Cazalet, academic
Dr David Coady, academic
Dr Matthew Sharpe, writer and academic
Dr Tamas Pataki, writer and academic
Miska Mandic
Associate Professor Jake Lynch, academic
Professor Simon During, academic
Michael Brull, writer
Dr Geoff Boucher, academic
Jacinda Woodhead, writer and editor
Dr Rjurik Davidson, writer and editor
Mic Looby, writer
Jane Gleeson-White, writer and editor
Alex Skutenko, editor
Associate Professor John Collins, academic
Professor Philip Pettit, academic
Dr Christopher Scanlon, writer and academic
Dr Lawrie Zion, journalist
Johannes Jakob, editor
Sunili Govinnage, lawyer
Michael Bates, lawyer
Bridget Maidment, editor
Bryce Ives, theatre director
Sarah Darmody, writer
Jill Sparrow, writer
Lyn Bender, psychologist
Meredith Rose, editor
Dr Ellie Rennie, President, Engage Media
Ryan Paine, editor
Simon Cooper, editor
Chris Haan, lawyer
Carmela Baranowska, journalist.
Clinton Ellicott, publisher
Dr Charles Richardson, writer and academic
Phillip Frazer, publisher
Geoff Lemon, journalist
Jaya Savige, poet and editor
Johannes Jakob, editor
Kate Bree Geyer; journalist
Chay-Ya Clancy, performer
Lisa Greenaway, editor, writer
Chris Kennett - screenwriter, journalist
Kasey Edwards, author
Dr. Janine Little, academic
Dr Andrew Milner, writer and academic
Patricia Cornelius, writer
Elisa Berg, publisher
Lily Keil, editor
Jenny Sinclair
Roselina Rose
Stephen Luntz
PM Newton
Bryan Cooke
Kristen Obaid
Ryan Haldane-Underwood
Patrick Gardner
Robert Sinnerbrink
Kathryn Millist
Anne Coombs
Karen Pickering
Sarah Mizrahi
Suzanne Ingleton
Jessica Crouch
Michael Ingleton
Matt Griffin
Jane Allen
Tom Curtis
John Connell
David Garland
Stuart Hall
Meredith Tucker-Evans
Phil Perkins
Alexandra Adsett
Tom Doig, editor
Beth Jackson
Peter Mattessi
Robert Sinnerbrink
Greg Black
Paul Ashton
Sigi Jottkandt
Kym Connell, lawyer
Silma Ihram
Nicole Papaleo, lawyer
Melissa Forbes
Matthew Ryan
Ben Gook
Daniel East
Bridget Ikin
Lisa O'Connell
Melissa Cranenburgh
John Bryson
Michael Farrell
Melissa Reeves
Dr Emma Cox
Michael Green
Margherita Tracanelli
David Carlin, writer
Bridget McDonnell
Geoff Page, writer
Rebecca Interdonato
Roxane Ludbrook-Ingleton
Stefan Caramia
Ash Plummer

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/41914.html

US behind Ethiopia invasion in Somalia - Wiki leaks dispatch

Mogadishu:( Sh. M. Network) A WikiLeaks’ leaked diplomatic cables exposed Ethiopia and the US government secret agreement to invade Somalia.

However, the report indicated that Ethiopia had no intention to the invasion and said the US was behind the plot and was sponsored by the United States government.

Already tied up wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. had no position to openly launch large-scale attack against Somalia and had to sponsor a country like Ethiopia.

Ethiopian troops invaded Somalian territory on July 20, 2006 aimed to squash an Islamist group, Union of Islamic Courts (UIC). Ethiopia maintained it was providing military assistance to the weak transitional government. Ethiopia then argued that the islamists extremists were threat to regional peace and stability.

U.S. head for African affairs Jendayi Frazer was said the spearhead of the proxy war along allies in the State Department and the Pentagon.

There was growing concern in the White House and the Pentagon that Somalia’s Islamists might ally themselves with Al Qaeda and turn to international terrorism.

Reports say an estimated 20,000 Somalis were killed and over 2 million were made homeless as a result of the US backed war in Somalia.

The leaked diplomatic dispatch has also reported on talks between Prime Minister Meles Zenawi and US under Secretary for Democracy and Global Affairs Maria Otero on issues of Democracy, civil rights, election, climate change among others.

Meles said his country’s inability to develop a strong democracy was not due to insufficient understanding of democratic principles, but rather because Ethiopians had not internalized those principles.

Referencing his own struggle against the Derg regime, Meles said he and his compatriots received no foreign funding, but were willing to sacrifice and die for their cause, and Ethiopians today must take ownership of their democratic development, be willing to sacrifice for it, and defend their own rights.

Despite pushes from under Secretary Maria Otero and Assistant Secretary Carson to hasten steps to liberalize the telecommunications and banking industries of the country, the Ethiopian premier however made no Promises on this regard instead said he would be happy to discuss the issue in the future joking that Americans’ concept of time was much faster than Ethiopians’.

As reported in WikiLeaks’ the Ethiopian leader was also urged to back Copenhagen climate accord.

'Otero urged Meles to sign the Copenhagen accord on climate change and explained that it is a point of departure for further discussion and movement forward on the topic.’’ She noted that while the agreement has its limitations, it has the international community moving in the right direction.

However, he expressed his disappointment that despite President Obama’s personal assurance to him that finances committed in Copenhagen would be made available, he had received word from contacts at the UN that the U.S. was not supportive of Ethiopia’s proposal for a panel to monitor financial pledges regarding climate change. Ms. Gavin assured the Prime Minister that she would look into his concerns.

Aqriso oo la soco Shabelle.net Saacad Walba si aad u hesho wararkii ugu dambeeyay ee Soomaaliya.

http://www.shabelle.net/article.php?id=838

WikiLeaks: More Israeli game theory warfare?

By Jeff Gates Online Journal Contributing Writer Dec 3, 2010, 00:26

“The United States is the real victim of WikiLeaks. It’s an action aimed at discrediting them.” --Franco Frattini, Foreign Minister of Italy

The impact of the WikiLeaks release of diplomatic cables fits the behavior profile of those well versed in game theory warfare.

When Israeli mathematician Robert J. Aumann received the 2005 Nobel Prize in economic science for his work on game theory, he conceded, “the entire school of thought that we have developed here in Israel” has turned “Israel into the leading authority in this field.”

The candor of this Israeli-American offered a rare insight into an enclave long known for waging war from the shadows. Israel’s most notable success to date was “fixing” the intelligence that induced the U.S. to invade Iraq in pursuit of a geopolitical agenda long sought by Tel Aviv

When waging intelligence wars, timing is often the critical factor for game theory war planners. The outcome of the WikiLeaks release suggests a psy-ops directed at the U.S.

Why now? Tel Aviv was feeling pressure to end its six-decade occupation of Palestine. With this release, its foot-dragging on the peace process was displaced with talk of an attack on Iran.

While the U.S. bore the brunt of the damage, the target was global public opinion. To maintain the plausibility of The Clash of Civilizations, a focus must be maintained on Iran as a credible Evil Doer.

With fast-emerging transparency, Israel and pro-Israelis have been identified as the source of the intelligence that took coalition forces to war in Iraq. Thus, the need to shift attention off Tel Aviv.

WikiLeaks may yet succeed in that mission.

Foreseeable futures

Game theory war planning aims to create outcomes that are predictable -- within an acceptable range of probabilities. That’s why Israeli war planners focus on gaining traction for a plausible narrative and then advancing that storyline step by gradual step.

For the Zionist state to succeed with its expansionist agenda, Iran must remain at center stage as an essential villain in a geopolitical morality play pitting the West against Islamofascists.

To displace facts with false beliefs -- as with belief in the intelligence that induced the invasion of Iraq -- momentum must be maintained for the storyline. Lose the plot (The Clash) and peace might break out. And those deceived may identify the deceiver.

Thus the timing of this latest WikiLeaks release. Its goal: to have us believe that it is not Tel Aviv but Washington that is the forefront of geopolitical duplicity and a source of Evil Doing.

Intelligence wars rely on mathematical models to anticipate the response of those targeted. With game theory algorithms, reactions become foreseeable -- within an acceptable range of probabilities.

Control enough of the variables and outcomes become a mathematical inevitability.

The WikiLeaks’ motive

Was the reaction to this latest WikiLeaks foreseeable? With exquisite timing, the U.S. was discredited with an array of revelations that called into question U.S. motives and put in jeopardy U.S. relations worldwide.

As the Italian Foreign Minister summarized: “The news released by WikiLeaks will change diplomatic relations between countries.”

The hard-earned trust of the Pakistanis disappeared overnight. Attempts to engage Iran were set back. The overall effect advanced The Clashstoryline. If Washington could so badly misread North Korean intentions, then why is the U.S. to be trusted when it comes to a nuclear Iran?

This Wiki-catalyzed storyline pushed Israel off the front page in favor of Iran.

Even U.S. detainees at Guantanamo are again at issue, reigniting that shameful spectacle as a provocation for extremism and terror. U.S. diplomats will now be suspected of spying and lying. What nation can now trust Americans to maintain confidences?

In short, the risks increased for everyone.

Except Israel.

Should Israel launch an attack on Iran, Tel Aviv can cite WikiLeaks as its rationale. Though an attack would be calamitous from a human, economic and financial perspective, even that foreseeable outcome would be dwarfed by the enduring hatred that would ensue.

That too is foreseeable -- from a game theory perspective of those marketing The Clash.

The effect of the U.S. invasion of Iraq was predictable. King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia foresaw it, noting simply that the U.S. invasion would “give Iraq to Iran as a gift on a golden platter.”

With the elimination of Sunni leader Saddam Hussein, the numerically dominant Shiites of Iraq were drawn into the political orbit of the Shiite-dominant Iran.

Game theorists focus their manipulation of affairs on their control of key variables. Then events take on a life all their own. The impact of this discrediting release was wide-ranging and fully foreseeable.

A Mossad case officer explained Israel’s success at waging war by way of deception: “Once the orchestra starts to play, we just hum along.”

These, after all, are the leading authorities in the field.

Jeff Gates is author of “Guilt By Association -- How Deception and Self-Deceit Took America to War.” See www.criminalstate.com.

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_6654.shtml

WikiLeaks y el fin de la “diplomacia” estadounidense

Este articulo puede escucharlo en la red de emisoras en español de Democracy Now!(Democracia Ya!)

Publicado el 2 de diciembre de 2010

Por Amy Goodman

Una vez más WikiLeaks ha publicado una enorme cantidad de documentos. Esta vez, se trata de cables diplomáticos del Departamento de Estado estadounidense. El sitio web de revelación de datos secretos anunció que publicará gradualmente más de doscientos cincuenta mil documentos durante los próximos meses. De esta manera, los documentos podrán ser analizados y recibir la atención que merecen. Los cables son comunicaciones internas escritas entre embajadas de Estados Unidos de todo el mundo y también con el Departamento de Estado. WikiLeaks habla de la filtración como “el mayor conjunto de documentos confidenciales que jamás se hayan dado a conocer, que proporcionan una visión sin precedentes de las actividades en el exterior del gobierno estadounidense.”

Los críticos sostienen, al igual que lo hicieron cuando se filtraron documentos secretos referidos a Irak y Afganistán, que habrá víctimas fatales como resultado de estas filtraciones. Sin embargo, se podría, en realidad, salvar vidas, dado que la forma en que Estados Unidos hace diplomacia se encuentra más expuesta que nunca – así como la aparente facilidad con la cual el gobierno de Estados Unidos cumple (o no) con el dicho del periodista pionero I.F. Stone: “Los gobiernos mienten.”

Observemos el caso de Khaled El-Masri. El-Masri fue secuestrado en Macedonia en el marco del llamado "programa de rendición extraordinaria" de la CIA, por medio del cual el gobierno de Estados Unidos secuestra personas en cualquier parte del mundo y las entrega secretamente a un tercer país, adonde puedan ser objeto de torturas. Khaled El-Masri cuenta lo que le sucedió: “Me llevaron a una habitación, estaba esposado y me habían vendado los ojos. Cuando la puerta se cerró, recibí golpes por todas partes. Entonces fui humillado. Pude oír que me tomaban fotos durante el proceso, mientras estaba completamente desnudo. Luego me ataron las manos por detrás de la espalda, me pusieron cadenas en los tobillos y una bolsa en la cabeza. Luego fui introducido brutalmente en un avión y en el aeropuerto me tiraron al piso. Cuando desperté, estaba en Afganistán. Me sacaron brutalmente del avión y me pusieron en el cofre de un automóvil.”

Khaled El-Masri estuvo prisionero y fue torturado en una cárcel secreta en Afganistán durante meses hasta que la CIA lo dejó abandonado en una carretera desierta de Albania. Esto sucedió a pesar de que la CIA sabía desde hacía tiempo que había secuestrado al hombre equivocado. El-Masri, ciudadano alemán, intentó que se hiciera justicia en los tribunales alemanes y todo indicaba que trece agentes de la CIA enfrentarían cargos. En ese momento intervino la embajada de Estados Unidos en Berlín y realizó, según uno de los cables, la siguiente amenaza: “la emisión de órdenes de captura internacional tendría un impacto negativo en las relaciones bilaterales.” Nunca se presentaron cargos en Alemania, lo que sugiere que la amenaza diplomática funcionó. Aún así, los trece agentes enfrentan todavía cargos en España, donde los fiscales gozan de un poco más de libertad con respecto a las presiones políticas.

O al menos eso creíamos. De hecho, España también se destaca en los documentos filtrados. Entre los cables, hay uno de fecha 14 de mayo de 2007 escrito por Eduardo Aguirre, un banquero cubano-estadounidense conservador nombrado embajador en España por George W. Bush. En el cable, Aguirre escribió: “Para nosotros, tendrá consecuencias importantes que se continúe planteando el caso Couso, por el que tres soldados estadounidenses enfrentan cargos en relación a la muerte del camarógrafo español José Couso, ocurrida durante la batalla por Bagdad en 2003.”

Couso era un joven camarógrafo de la cadena española de televisión Telecinco que estaba filmando desde el balcón del Hotel Palestina en Bagdad el 8 de abril de 2003, cuando un tanque del ejército estadounidense disparó sobre el hotel, en el que se alojaban principalmente periodistas, causando la muerte a Couso y a un camarógrafo de la agencia de noticias Reuters. El Embajador Aguirre intentaba invalidar el juicio iniciado por la familia Couso en España.

El hermano de José Couso, Javier Couso, inició el proceso judicial por su hermano José junto a su madre. Aunque un tribunal español ha reabierto la causa recientemente, Javier Couso reaccionó ante el cable filtrado en estos días por WikiLeaks y dijo: “Nosotros estamos en primer lugar indignados y horrorizados; horrorizados porque no podemos creer que el gobierno de mi país y la fiscalía actúen conspirando con un gobierno extranjero para impedir la investigación de lo que le pasó a un ciudadano español; e indignados porque nos han mentido continuamente, nos hemos reunido con todas esas personas del gobierno y de la fiscalía y ellos decían que no iban a obstaculizar el caso.”

Además, el embajador estadounidense presionó al gobierno español para que desistiera de realizar un juicio, que sentaría precedente, contra el ex Secretario de Defensa Donald Rumsfeld y otros funcionarios del gobierno de Bush. En el mismo memorando Aguirre escribe: “El Vice Ministro de Justicia dijo también que el gobierno español se opone firmemente a la acusación presentada contra el ex Ministro Rumsfeld y tratará de que sea desestimada. El juez que entiende en la causa nos ha dicho que ha iniciado ya los procedimientos para desestimar el caso.”

Estas revelaciones han convulsionado al gobierno de España, ya que los cables muestran claramente los intentos de Estados Unidos por incidir en el sistema de justicia de ese país.

Hace varios años, el Embajador Aguirre declaró al periódico español El País: “Soy el plomero de George Bush, voy a resolver todos los problemas que George ponga en mis manos.”

En otra serie de cables, el Departamento de Estado de Estados Unidos ordena a su personal de las Naciones Unidas y del resto del mundo que espíen a funcionarios gubernamentales, e increíblemente, también da instrucciones de que recaven información biométrica de los diplomáticos. El cable dice textualmente: “Los datos deben incluir direcciones de correo electrónico, números de teléfono y fax, huellas digitales, imágenes faciales, escaneo de iris y de ADN.”

WikiLeaks sigue asociada a un grupo de medios de comunicación de todo el mundo: el periódico inglés The Guardian, El País, de España, el New York Times, la revista alemana Der Spiegel y el periódico francés Le Monde. David Leigh, editor de investigaciones del periódico The Guardian me dijo: “Esta serie de revelaciones no ha terminado aún. Desde el periódico The Guardian y otras cadenas de noticias del mundo iremos haciendo revelaciones, a partir de ahora y día a día, posiblemente durante toda la semana próxima y quizás más. Por lo cual, todavía no hemos visto nada.” Queda más de un cuarto de millón de cables que no han sido dados a conocer públicamente aún.

Hace cuarenta años, Noam Chomsky, reconocido analista político y lingüista, profesor del Instituto Tecnológico de Massachusetts, ayudó a Daniel Ellsberg, el primer informante de Estados Unidos, a revelar los Documentos del Pentágono. Le pregunté a Chomsky acerca de los cables recientemente publicados por WikiLeaks y respondió: “La principal importancia de los cables que han sido publicados hasta ahora radica en lo que nos dicen sobre el liderazgo occidental. Lo que revelan es un profundo odio a la democracia.”

————————–

Denis Moynihan colaboró en la producción periodística de esta columna.

© 2010 Amy Goodman

Texto en inglés traducido por Fernanda Gerpe y Democracy Now! en español, spanish@democracynow.org

Amy Goodman es la conductora de Democracy Now!, un noticiero internacional que se emite diariamente en más de 550 emisoras de radio y televisión en inglés y en más de 250 en español. Es co-autora del libro "Los que luchan contra el sistema: Héroes ordinarios en tiempos extraordinarios en Estados Unidos", editado por Le Monde Diplomatique Cono Sur.

http://www.democracynow.org/es/blog/2010/12/2/wikileaks_y_el_fin_de_la_diplomacia_estadounidense

Chomsky: Lo publicado por wikileaks ponen en evidencia “un profundo odio a la democracia por parte de nuestros líderes políticos”

Una entrevista en exclusiva (http://www.democracynow.org..noam_chomsky_wikileaks_cables_reveal.. )emitida para todo el país, hablamos con el disidente político y lingüista de fama mundial Noam Chomsky sobre la publicación de más de 250.000 cables secretos del Departamento de Estado de Estados Unidos, por parte de WikiLeaks.

En 1971, Chomsky ayudó al informante del gobierno Daniel Ellsberg a publicar los Documentos del Pentágono, un informe interno secreto de Estados Unidos sobre la Guerra de Vietnam. Cuando comenta una de las revelaciones acerca de que varios líderes árabes presionan a Estados Unidos para que ataque Irán, Chomsky dice: “las últimas encuestas muestran que la opinión de los árabes es que la mayor amenaza en la región es Israel, con un 80 por ciento de los encuestados y en segundo lugar está Estados Unidos, con un 77 por ciento. Irán aparece como una amenaza para el 10 por ciento”, explica. “Puede que esto no aparezca en los periódicos, pero sin duda es algo que los gobiernos israelí y estadounidense y sus embajadores saben. Lo que esto revela es el profundo odio a la democracia por parte de nuestros líderes políticos".

Las últimas revelaciones del sitio WikiLeaks han puesto a la comunidad internacional, a la diplomacia, al gobierno de los Estados Unidos y al periodismo mismo en un estado de debate, alerta y consternación. Aun es imposible predecir cuáles serán los efectos de las acciones actuales (pasadas y futuras) de la enigmática organización, liderada por el enigmático ¿periodista? ¿provocador? ¿activista? ¿hacker? australiano Julian Assange. A un lado del espectro de opinión se ubican los esperanzados que marcan estas acciones como un paso hacia la transparencia en las maniobras y acciones de los gobiernos del planeta. En el otro extremo se ubican los que acusan a Assange de ser casi un cómplice del terrorismo internacional; alguien que, lejos de estar cumpliendo un ideal periodístico, esta poniendo en riesgo las vidas de personas.

Entre ambas visiones se abre un debate gigantesco para el que Ñ Digital convoca a intelectuales y pensadores de distintos rubros. Este es el turno de Noam Chomsky, el lingüista más importante del siglo XX y uno de los críticos más prolíficos y feroces del gobierno de su propio país, los Estados Unidos. Desde su despacho en el Massachusetts Institute of Technology, en Cambridge, Massachusetts, contundente Chomsky ofreció algunas de sus impresiones iniciales sobre este tema que ocupa las tapas de todos los diarios del mundo en estos días.

¿Considera que lo que esta haciendo WikiLeaks es una forma legítima y ética del periodismo? ¿Y cuáles serán las consecuencias de estas revelaciones al corto y largo plazo?

Vale la pena recordar que el secretismo de los gobiernos se trata, sustancialmente, de la defensa del gobierno contra su propia población. Y en una sociedad democrática la población tendría que saber qué está haciendo su gobierno para poder monitorearlo y —de hecho— determinar qué hace el gobierno. Ahora, hay excepciones con las cuales todos están de acuerdo, pero en general el caso es así. Yo no he leído todos los cables, por supuesto, pero de lo que he visto me parece que ilustra la significancia de este punto: hay cosas en los cables que los gobiernos no quisieran que su propia población supiera.

Creo que es una forma legítima del periodismo, pero creo que se tomarán medidas severas para bloquearlo.

¿Lo sorprende el trabajo que esta haciendo WikiLeaks?

No es completamente nuevo. Ha habido muchas filtraciones antes —los Papeles del Pentágono, por ejemplo, en la cual yo participé, fue muy importante y más sustancial que este último. No me sorprende. Creo que mientras la accesibilidad a la información aumente con las modalidades electrónicas habrá más casos similares a este.

Qué WikiLeaks eligiera a medios tradicionales para editar y emitir las filtraciones en un primer instante, ¿es contradictorio con su postura filosófica de apertura?

Creo que no. Supongo que lo podrían haber subido directamente a Internet. Pero de esa manera circularía solamente dentro de la cultura de Internet y no entre un público general.

¿Cómo están manejando la información los medios estadounidenses?

Antes que nada tenemos que tener en cuenta que desde el principio hay un mecanismo de filtros muy severo. Entonces, los cables diplomáticos mismos proveen al gobierno lo que los diplomáticos quieren que sepan y lo que asumen que el gobierno mismo quiere oír. Entonces ya de entrada están muy editados, desde el principio.

Por ejemplo, uno de los cables más incendiarios salidos hasta ahora: el rey Saudita llamando por el bombardeo de Irán. Bueno. Eso fue seleccionado. No sabemos el contexto. Solo tenemos las frases que eligieron los diplomáticos.

Después hay una forma de censura mucho más severa que son los títulos de los diarios que dicen que los estados árabes están aterrorizados por Irán y que quieren que los Estados Unidos hagan algo al respeto. Bueno, hay un hecho muy significante escondido en esta cuestión: hay encuestas de opinión del occidente árabe. La más reciente fue publicado por el Brookings Institute el mes pasado —una encuesta muy cuidadosa— que mostró que en el mundo árabe el 10 por ciento de la población ve a Irán como una amenaza, mientras que un 80 por ciento ve a los Estados Unidos e Israel como una amenaza. Esto no se revela acá [en estas noticias]. Antes que nada, a los diplomáticos no les importa, no les importa la gente, solo les importan los dictadores. Al Departamento de Estado tampoco le importa, por las mismas razones, y aparentemente a los medios tampoco les importa: porque esto es información pública… Y todo esto refleja un profundo desprecio por la democracia. Y no solo en el gobierno, también en la cultura intelectual y de los medios. Esto es otro tipo de selección; selección severa. Y si miras a los otros documentos publicados ves muchos casos similares.

¿Estos cables demuestran que la administración de Obama es, en muchas formas, una continuación de la de Bush?

Sí, pero eso ya lo sabíamos.

¿Tiene algún mensaje esperanzador de cara al futuro?

Bueno, mi último libro publicado se llamó Esperanzas y perspectivas que salió primero en castellano, porque su origen fue en charlas que di en Sudamérica… La parte de esperanza es mayormente sobre Sudamérica. Creo que han estado pasando cosas de gran esperanza allí en la última década. No podemos predecir la historia humana. Pero si miras hacía atrás puedes encontrar un momento cuando parecía imposible que se abandonará la esclavitud, o que se permitiría derechos a las mujeres… Las cosas cambian. Pero cambian si la gente las cambia. No cambian solas y no cambian gracias a los líderes políticos.

Noam Chomsky sobre la DN! sobre el WikiLeaks Cables 3.1



Noam Chomsky on DN! about the WikiLeaks Cables 2/3



Noam Chomsky on DN! about the WikiLeaks Cables 3/3



http://www.democracynow.org/tags/wikileaks_collateral_murder_video

Pentagon Whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg on Wikileaks Iraq War Docs (Part 1 of 2)

youtube.

Pentagon Whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg on Wikileaks Iraq War Docs (Part 2 of 2)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dJ0AUs09jM

DemocracyNow.org
In an exclusive interview, Democracy Now! speaks with Pentagon whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg about the WikiLeaks release of 400,000 U.S. intelligence reports on the Iraq War.

Ellsberg became them most famous government whistleblower in the United States after leaking the classified history of the Vietnam War in 1971. He joined WikiLeaks for the press conference announcing the release of the Iraq War logs.

For Democracy Now!'s complete coverage of all of WikiLeaks document releases, the transcript or podcast, visit http://www.democracynow.org/2010/10/2...

Consider supporting independent media by making a donation to Democracy Now! athttp://www.democracynow.org/donate.

http://www.democracynow.org/

WikiLeaks Reveals Unknown Friendly Fire Incident! Americans Killed Canadians!

http://www.youtube.com/watch
http://www.youtube.com/

CIA, Mossad and Soros behind Wikileaks

Suspicions abound that Wikileaks is part of U.S. cyber-warfare operations
WMR has learned from Asian intelligence sources that there is a strong belief in some Asian countries, particularly China and Thailand, that the website Wikileaks, which purports to publish classified and sensitive documents while guaranteeing anonymity to the providers, is linked to U.S. cyber-warfare and computer espionage operations, as well as to Mossad’s own cyber-warfare activities.

Wikileaks claims to have decrypted video footage of a U.S. Predator air strike on civilians in Afghanistan and that covert U.S. State Department agents followed Wikileaks’s editor from Iceland to Norway in a surveillance operation conducted jointly by the United States and Iceland. Iceland’s financially-strapped government recently announced a policy of becoming a haven for websites that fear political oppression and censorship in their home countries. However, in the case of Wikileaks, countries like China and Thailand are suspicious of the websites’ actual “ownership.”

Wikileaks says it intends to show its video at an April 5 press conference at the National Press Club in Washington, DC but that its presenters may be detained or arrested before that time. WMR’s sources believe the Wikileaks “militancy” in the face of supposed surveillance appears fake.

Our Asian intelligence sources report the following: “Wikileaks is running a disinformation campaign, crying persecution by U.S. intelligence- when it is U.S. intelligence itself. Its [Wikileaks'] activities in Iceland are totally suspect.” Wikileaks claims it is the victim of a new COINTELPRO [Counter Intelligence Program] operation directed by the Pentagon and various U.S. intelligence agencies. WMR’s sources believe that it is Wikileaks that is part and parcel of a cyber-COINTELPRO campaign, such as that proposed by President Obama’s “information czar,” Dr. Cass Sunstein.

In January 2007, John Young, who runs cryptome.org, a site that publishes a wealth of sensitive and classified information, left Wikileaks, claiming the operation was a CIA front. Young also published some 150 email messages sent by Wikileaks activists on cryptome. They include a disparaging comment about this editor by Wikileaks co-founder Dr. Julian Assange of Australia. Assange lists as one of his professions “hacker.” His German co-founder of Wikileaks uses a pseudonym, “Daniel Schmitt.”

Wikileaks claims it is “a multi-jurisdictional organization to protect internal dissidents, whistleblowers, journalists and bloggers who face legal or other threats related to publishing” [whose] primary interest is in exposing oppressive regimes in Asia, the former Soviet bloc, Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East, but we are of assistance to people of all nations who wish to reveal unethical behavior in their governments and corporations. We aim for maximum political impact. We have received over 1.2 million documents so far from dissident communities and anonymous sources.”
In China, Wikileaks is suspected of having Mossad connections. It is pointed out that its first “leak” was from an Al Shabbab “insider” in Somalia. Al Shabbab is the Muslim insurgent group that the neocons have linked to “Al Qaeda.”

Asian intelligence sources also point out that Assange’s “PhD” is from Moffett University, an on-line diploma mill and that while he is said to hail from Nairobi, Kenya, he actually in from Australia where his exploits have included computer hacking and software piracy.

WMR has confirmed Young’s contention that Wikileaks is a CIA front operation. Wikileaks is intimately involved in a $20 million CIA operation that U.S.-based Chinese dissidents that hack into computers in China. Some of the Chinese hackers route special hacking program through Chinese computers that then target U.S. government and military computer systems. After this hacking is accomplished, the U.S. government announces through friendly media outlets that U.S. computers have been subjected to a Chinese cyber-attack. The “threat” increases an already-bloated cyber-defense and offense budget and plays into the fears of the American public and businesses that heavily rely on information technology.

It is also pointed out that on Wikileaks advisory board is Ben Laurie, a one-time programmer and Internet security expert for Google, which recently signed a cooperative agreement with the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) and has been charged by China with being part of a U.S. cyber-espionage campaign against China. Other Wikileaks advisory members are leading Chinese dissidents, including Wan Dan, who won the 1998 National Endowment for Democracy (NED) Democracy Award; Wang Youcai, founder of the Chinese Democracy Party; Xiao Qiang, the director of the China Internet Project at the University of California at Berkeley, member of the advisory board of the International Campaign for Tibet, and commentator on the George Soros-affiliated Radio Free Asia; and Tibetan exile and activist Tashi Namgyal Khamsitsang.

Our sources in Asia believe that Wikileaks ran afoul of their CIA paymasters after it was discovered that some of Wikileaks’s “take” was being diverted to Mossad instead of to their benefactors at Langley. After a CIA cur-off in funding, “Daniel Schmitt” took over and moved the Wikileaks operation to Belgium and Sweden with hopes of making a more secure base in Iceland.

There are strong suspicions that Wikileaks is yet another Soros-funded “false flag” operation on the left side of the political spectrum. WMR has learned that after former Senator Norm Coleman (R-MN) decided to oppose Soros’s choice of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan’s deputy Mark Malloch Brown as President of the World Bank, succedding the disgraced Paul Wolfowitz, Soros put the Wikileaks operation into high gear. “Daniel Schmitt” hacked into Coleman’s supporters list, stealing credit card info, addresses, and publishing the “take” on Wikileaks. Democrat Al Franken, who was strongly backed by Soros, defeated Coleman in a legally-contested and very close election.

It is also believed by informed sources that Soros is behind the operation to move Wikileaks to Iceland. By becoming a power in Iceland, Soros can prevent Icelanders from paying back the British and Dutch investors in Icelandic online Ponzi scheme banking and continue his all-out war against British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who has, in turn, targeted Soros for betting against pound sterling.

Iceland is classic prey for Soros. The Icelandic krona has been decimated as a currency and has no where to go but up in value, especially if the British pound and the euro depreciate. Soros is currently talking down the euro, planning its fall and shorting it, just like he did versus the pound in London in the 1980s. After the UK’s and Europe’s currencies are devalued, Soros will buy every euro note in sight, thus making trillions.

Soros and his Wikileaks friends have in Iceland a practically unregulated banking system desperate for an influx of capital — money that will come from the exiled Russian tycoons in Israel, London and the United States. Israeli investors like Bank Leumi, and awash in siphoned-off Bernard Madoff cash, will do their bit for this smash-and-grab operation by Soros’s Quantum-linked hedge funds.

With Wikileaks firmly ensconced in Iceland, the “brave” and much-heralded information leakers will run an international blackmail operation against Soros’s foes and launch computer break-ins against Soros’s business rivals and non-Quantum banks. Wikileaks will be used as the info-hitmen against President Obama’s and Rahm Emanuel’s enemies in the 2012 re-election campaign.

From Iceland, Soros will be well-positioned to gain control over the massive mineral resources under the melting ice sheet of Greenland. Under the ice are the only major rare-earth deposits outside of China and with such minerals at his disposal, Soros can control the world’s electronics industries. This past week’s volcanic activity in Iceland could, however, disrupt or destroy Soros’s plans to establish and control a North American-European gateway in Iceland.

The following are some of the emails Young revealed in his exposure of Wikileaks’s CIA connections (as well as to the Russian “phishing” Mafia, an operation run by Russian-Israeli Jews using Israel as a base) [Note: in the second email, "JYA" is a reference to John Young Associates]:

To: John Young
From: Wikileaks
Subject: martha stuart pgp
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 12:20:25 -0500
—–BEGIN PGP MESSAGE—–
Version: None
J. We are going to fuck them all. Chinese mostly, but not entirely a feint. Invention
abounds. Lies, twists and distorts everywhere needed for protection. Hackers monitor
chinese and other intel as they burrow into their targets, when they pull, so do we.
Inxhaustible supply of material. Near 100,000 documents/emails a day. We’re going to crack the world open and let it flower into something new. If fleecing the CIA will assist us, then fleece we will. We have pullbacks from NED, CFR, Freedomhouse and other CIA teats. We have all of pre 2005 afghanistan. Almost all of india fed. Half
a dozen foreign ministries. Dozens of political parties and consulates, worldbank,
apec, UN sections, trade groups, tibet and fulan dafa associations and… russian
phishing mafia who pull data everywhere. We’re drowing. We don’t even know a tenth
of what we have or who it belongs to. We stopped storing it at 1Tb.
——————————————-
From: Julian Assange
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 13:40:14 +0000
To: funtimesahead[a t]lists.riseup.net
Subject: [WL] cryptome disclosure
[This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-i-k-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g.
Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to 'WL'.
This list is housed at riseup.net, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer
and plenty of backbone.]
No idea what JYA was saying!
It’s clear to me however, that he was not trying to protect people’s
identities with his xxxxx’ing, but rather trying to increase the
sexiness of the document. Perhaps he feels WL is a threat to the
central status mechanism in his life? I think he just likes the
controversy.
He may have done us a great favor. There’s a lot of movement in that
document. It’s a little anarchist, but I think it generally reads
well and sounds like people doing something they care about.
Btw, I suggest we be careful with Wayne Madsen too. He seems to be
another case of someone who was fantastic a few years ago, but
recently has started to see conspiracies everywhere. Both cases
possibly age related.
I am not spending any more thought on it. Next week is going to be
busy. The weeks earlier stories will be already done and that’ll set
the agenda for the rest of the week, not jya’s attention seeker.
I’m willing to handle calls for .au, although my background may make
S a better bet.
————————–
By: W. Madsen
Short URL: http://www.daily.pk/?p=19280

http://www.daily.pk/cia-mossad-and-soros-behind-wikileaks-19280/