Sunday, December 26, 2010

Wikileaks – the Mossad-Connection by John Schou, M.D.


Wikileaks  the Mossad-Connection
by John Schou, M.D.
WikiLeaks ‘Cablegate’ Publication
In April, WikiLeaks released a classified US military video („Collateral Murder') depicting the indiscriminate slaying of over a dozen people in the Iraqi suburb of New Baghdad, including two Reuters news staff [1]. In July WikiLeaks published nearly 90,000 logs from Afghanistan [2]. In October followed 391,832 logs from the Iraq-war [3]. Trust in WikiLeaks (among informed observers) vanished almost overnight in July, both with the inclusion of the long dead Osama Bin Laden in the leaked Afghan logs, and Julian Assange's open disdain for the 9-11 truth movement [4].
On Nov. 29, 2010, WikiLeaks published more than 250,000 cable-texts from US diplomats worldwide; the raw content was delivered to the British Guardian [5], the German Spiegel and the American New York Times. Judged from his reaction the day after, Netanyahu must be a fast reader (or the basis of his conclusiondifferently explained), because he then said that WikiLeaks revelations were good for Israel” [6].The same day, an Analysis in Jerusalem Post was brought under the headline Wikileaks vindicate, don't damage, Israel” [7], or as expressed in Desertpeace from the same day, “not a single criticism of Israel appears anywhere in this latest dump” [8]. Apart from American diplomats, who were exposed when giving their blunt thoughts in writing, the two countries, Iran and Turkey, to which Israel had a particular hostile approach, were also the most frequently cited: “Israel expressed satisfaction after the mass release of US diplomatic cables by WikiLeaks, saying it proved Israel's position on Iran was consistent” [9] (meaning that Iran's alleged nuclear ambitions, which are only „proved' in eternal repetitions and thus stand on the same paper as Saddam's WMD, are again repeated), and Senior Turkish official says Israel behind WikiLeaks release” [10]. The liberal Israeli daily Haaretz exclaimed, Thanks to WikiLeaks, there is now no fear Washington will exert heavy pressure on Israel to freeze settlement construction or to accelerate negotiations on a withdrawal from the territories” [11]. That interpretation really explains the dimension of this coup, which has nourished the papers for weeks to come.

Initially, the volume of cables originating from each American embassy in the World was described. According to that, the embassies in Tel Aviv and Beirut had little to report. This is in contrast to the American engagement in the Middle East but in accordance with the Israeli reaction.
Indeed, in the three weeks that has passed from Cableleaks presentation to the construct of this article, the reaction of the Americans has been bitter, but no doubt has been raised on the authentic degree of its content. With bowed heads, American diplomats excused themselves in different capitals for their undiplomatic comments; simultaneously, imbecile politicians claimed that Julian Assange, the leader of WikiLeaks, had “blood on his hands,” without explaining that and without considering their own „information terror,' has been constructed.
Disturbing is the fact that only a minority of the cables have been published in full very few from Israel. The reaction from the „Jewish Empire' and its American puppet was
also strangely contrary, as mentioned above: Israel showed satisfaction while Washington demonstrated bad consciousness, anger and with a single syllable doubted the correctness of the leaked content.

On this basis, it can be concluded, 1) that Cablegate is authentic but 2) the cables have been extensively selected, pointing at Israeli sources for that part of the job. Considering the origin, besides NSA, only Mossad has the capacity and they have never been afraid to damage USA (e.g., Lavron Affair, USS Liberty, 9/11). Open remains, at what level was carried out and if Assange or Manning (see below) were informed of the selection process.
The Rapist
Julian Assange was wanted by the Americans for  well, they did not know for what, but they knew that he had damaged them, and then suddenly, he was indicted for having committed some form of sexual assault, even towards two women.
Mr. Assange's adventures in Stockholm in the middle of August 2010 is not typical for the primitive act called rape in the rest of the world [12]. In Sweden, the concept is used even when the woman suddenly, in the middle of the act, says no  when the man's hormone levels are at their highest.

Assange was invited to Sweden by Anna Ardin and lived in her apartment for some days. On the 14th, he should have caused the mentioned crime upon his host whereupon nothing happened. He continued to live in her apartment, and she even arranged a feast on 17th, in the aftermath of which it came to another „rape,' where Sofia W.  a woman with whom he shared the bed  was the victim. It seems, however, that the sexual intercourse was in principle with mutual consent, but the real crime was related to the absence, or the rupture of, a condom. Finally, on the 18th, Assange provoked his host's sexual integrity (whatever that implies) and was shown the door. Only two days later, he was recorded by the police for the mentioned „rape.' After interviewing victims and offender, the prosecutor Eva Finné decided that there was no basis for an indictment [13]. Julian Assange then wanted to stay in Sweden and from there lead further progress of Wikileaks [14].

It deserves mention that Assange stayed in Sweden for three weeks, that the indictment was given up and the leading prosecutor, Marianne Ny, allowed him to travel. What made her change her mind is (logically) a matter leading to speculation, disregarding her assurance that it is not political. Sweden, not a member of NATO, is currently much more dependent on the big brother (they are also participating in the Afghanistan war) than the neutral country was known to be previously. When it was known that Assange was living in Great Britain, they demanded his arrest according to an EU-administrative rule.

On Dec. 7, Assange was arrested after turning himself in. What is the purpose of this act? It is almost certain that no prolonged incarceration can result from the alleged rape, but what about the Americans? The Swedish prosecutor published a statement “if the extradition concerns a country outside the European Union the authorities in the executing country (the country that surrendered the person) must consent such extradition. Sweden cannot, without such consent extradite a person, for example to the USA [15], and even the USA denied any interest [16]. Simultaneously, however, they are known to prepare an indictment against the Australian for espionage, perhaps according to a rarely used law from 1917 [17]The Independent claimed that “US authorities have stepped up their efforts to prosecute Julian Assange by offering Bradley
Manning, the American soldier allegedly responsible for leaking of government documents, the possibility of a plea bargain if he names the Wiki-Leaks founder as a fellow conspirator [18]. Probably, it has already decided that the UK has nothing against that the Swedes extradites Assange to USA, who perhaps have constructed an indictment him. We'll see.
Bradley Manning
In June 2010, Bradley Manning, who is alleged to have given the whistleblower website a classified video [see above, collateral murder'], was arrested [19]. Manning, also claimed to have given WikiLeaks 260,000 pages of confidential diplomatic cables and intelligence assessments. Bradley Manning's only hope of easing his ordeal is to give the US authorities what they want: testimony against Assange [20]. After seven months isolation confinement, he may be ripe for that!

The Cyber-War
Independent reported in October, that the heavily encrypted arm of Wikileaks that allows users to safely send information to the organisation has been offline for four weeks, making new submissions impossible [21… “the direction of Wikileaks with regard to its strong focus on US military files at the expense of ignoring everything else. With the beginning of December 2010, Pentagon blocked WikiLeak's homepage [22]. Within a couple of days, however, more than 2,600 addresses served mirrored images.
The battlefield changed. Suddenly, MasterCard, Visa, PayPal and Amazon (and the Swiss bank Postfinance) blocked any donations [23]. This prompted a wave of sympathy which led to blockade of the money-institutes' webpage s. Meanwhile, another bank, Xipwire, attempted to win some customers by facilitating payment to WikiLeaks.

Further Development
On 23rd Assange holds 3,700 more files related to Israel [24], including documents indicating Mossad involvement in the assassination of Hamas operative Mahmoud Al-Mabhouh in Dubai. It was no secret that Mossad committed this crime  after all, they were proud of it - and two days later, the new Mossad-chief confessed his organisations involvement [25]. Also details of cables from Israel's brutal war in 2006 against Lebanon are included in this batch. Details are currently unknown.
Assange explained that only a meagre number of files related to Israel had been published so far, because the newspapers in the West that were given exclusive rights to publish the secret documents were reluctant to publish many sensitive information about Israel [26]. However, former WikiLeaks volunteers who have left the organisation in the last few months claim that Assange had received money from semi-official Israeli sources and promised them, in a “secret, video-recorded agreement,” not to publish any document that may harm Israeli security or diplomatic interests. If true, the whistleblower's end may ironically be caused by his own whistleblowers.


No comments: