News & Analysis
New Revelations Show WikiLeaks Psyops
In a shocking revelation contained in the latest Wikileaks document dump, previously secret information indicates that Al Qaeda now has the nuclear bomb and intends to use it. The documents, which were fed to Wikileaks from anonymous whistle-blowers and passed along to The Daily Telegraph.for publication, show that a leading atomic regulator privately warned that the world stands on the brink of a nuclear 9/11. Al Qaeda, which has sourced nuclear material and recruited rogue scientists to build so-called 'dirty bombs,' is on the brink of not only producing but deploying atomic weapons in order to advance the goals of Muslim extremists against the West. Further, various Jihadi groups are also close to producing biological and chemical weapons that could kill thousands in terrorist attacks. – Examiner
Dominant Social Theme: Assange is a blond stranger come to save the world.
Free-Market Analysis: Months ago, long before others began arguing the case, the Daily Bell made the groundbreaking argument that WikiLeaks and Julian Assange in particular were a kind of psyops. Recent revelations have only helped confirm our view. In this article, we will offer a retrospective using the above article as a jumping off point for our opinion.
Assange apparently only took over WikiLeaks about four years ago. Assange and WikiLeaks seem to have been selected as a composite vehicle that would provide maximum credibility; he has been positioned and promoted in a classic psyops pattern. Assange, in trouble as a youth, is likely a creation of Western intelligence agencies, at least in his current incarnation. He is a cynical regurgitation of various dominant and sub dominant social themes.
Nothing that WikiLeaks has released thus far has proven especially inimical to Western interests; that is not to the interests of the Western power elite that seeks ever-closer worldwide governance. The leaks are mostly innocuous and seem to reaffirm the positives of Western and American diplomacy (as they are calculatedly presented to the outside world). Even the most recent leaks regarding US complicity in the Egyptian unrest seems to place the US on the side of the angels, trying to expand democracy in an authoritarian environment.
As far as dirty bombs go, we’ve written in the past that building and exploding such devices is not a simple process. Even a “small” dirty bomb is a fairly large project and “nuclear suitcases” turn out be very large, clumsy and weighty devices as well. Thus, Assange's revelations, stripped of context, do nothing but reinforce fear of Muslim extremism, which is a valuable elite promotion, allowing for further authoritarian measures directed at Western middle classes. Of course we are not alone in our cynicism. Infowars carried a piece on this latest “news” recently, excerpted as follows:
The corporate media today is chock full of stories about the latest round of supposed diplomatic documents purloined by a low level Army intelligence analyst. According to the documents, the CIA asset al-Qaeda has managed to acquire “workable and efficient” biological and chemical weapons and the West stands on the brink of a “nuclear 9/11.” It is said the documents detail a 2009 NATO meeting where security chiefs briefed member states that al-CIA-duh was readying “dirty radioactive IEDs” to be used against British troops in Afghanistan.
Dirty bombs were debunked years ago and it is surprising the folks behind the fake diplomatic cables are attempting to pawn this fantasy off on us again as they did in 2002 when former Chicago gangbanger Jose Padilla was arrested and paraded in the corporate media as the face of al-Qaeda in America.
Once again, Pakistan figures prominently in this scary fairy tale. “Senior British defense officials have raised ‘deep concerns’ that a rogue scientist in the Pakistani nuclear program ‘could gradually smuggle enough material out to make a weapon,” according to a document detailing official talks in London in February 2009,” the Daily Telegraph reported yesterday. Left out of the equation is the fact Pakistan would not have nuclear weapons if not for the United States.
One need only examine the WikiLeaks narrative to see that it has not generally been especially damaging to the West. Assange continually speaks of releasing additional documents, but the actual release of these documents is sporadic at best. The latest data dump, such at is, merely reconfirms the Western mainstream narrative regarding Al Qaeda and its evil intentions, even though there is little evidence that Al Qaeda – whatever it may be – is able to mount substantive attacks against the US.
Then there is Assange’s personal situation. He has just been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, has received a million-dollar book contract and there is a major Hollywood movie in the works. He is swarmed by the media at his every appearance and his utterances are treated as major news. What exactly has he done to deserve such attention? In our view, he is a manufactured entity, a physical manifestation of a sub dominant social theme.
There are other individuals and websites that do much of what Assange does with less fanfare and more effectiveness. Only Assange seems to attract the attention due to a major celebrity. The media build-up is no coincidence. It is a startling sight, one that reveals how efficiently such public personas can be created. Future generations, reading the history books will not be aware of the context, and thus will take the Assange meme at face value. Apparently it has been ever thus (or certainly for at least the past century).
And yet the flaws in the narrative are palpable. Assange received some 2,000 names of tax evaders recently, but what the news stories did not mention was that the leaker had previously leaked names and had been incarcerated for it. The leaking and the leaker were treated as a new phenomenon, adding weight to the story. But it is possible that even the names had been disseminated previously. This makes the entire episode into a kind of public relations stunt, which is certainly contrary to the perspective that WikiLeaks projects of a serious endeavor. The complicity of the mainstream news media is both startling and disturbing.
WikiLeaks is NOT a serious endeavor in our view. Assange is a six-foot-four-inch, blond front man for an endeavor that has not seemingly released a single "leak" of substance that has not previously been known or that does not reinforce larger elite narratives. Even the terrible video of Afghan helicopter shootings of civilians and reporters was essentially public record. And Assange's insistence on working with such news disseminators as the New York Times and the UK Guardian has unfortunately added much-needed "alternative news" credibility to these endeavors.
Just today a new leak has appeared. WikiLeaks has leaked a US cable regarding a "US and China military-standoff over space missiles." According to a UK Telegraph report, "The United States threatened to take military action against China during a secret star wars arms race." This too is entirely in keeping with a meme that reinforces the seriousness and expertise of the US's military-industrial complex.
Yet the idea that the US and China are engaged in a high-stakes outer-space "Cold War" is probably an exaggeration on several levels. At the very least it gives additional heft and weight to the US military-industrial complex at a time when budget cuts are threatening to rationalize some of the more expensive "white elephant" endeavors.
WikiLeaks is very obviously not what it seems. One compares Assange's growing public presence favorably to Bill Clinton's and others. The methodologies are the same. The power elite provides various credibility-building favors: prizes, books, movies. Can it all be a coincidence? Over and over, these favors are doled out to a chosen few as credibility builders. After a while it becomes nearly ludicrous. One can perceive the utility of an individual to the elite based on his or her Nobel nominations, especially in the political sphere.
The power elite, having finally absorbed the message that the Internet is palpably powerful phenomenon has apparently decided to create an entity that can redirect the truth-telling of the Internet into supporting its messaging. By building up Assange, the elite profits from his credibility and co-ops that of the Internet itself. Assange is thus, potentially, a very important person in the scheme of things.
Conclusion: Assange is situated at the center of important elite memes: the Internet itself; transparency as a way of making global government more tolerable and even appealing; and the "outsider" as a force for good, remaking centralized authority into an intimate and responsive endeavor. Assange, despite his libertarian musings, seems not to want to reduce the size of government so much as to make it more efficient and viable. The more this narrative unfolds, the more confident we are of this analysis. Our wish, of course (in this case) is to be proven wrong.
Latest Daily Bell Articles
Feedback
 |
Posted by Lukester on 02/09/11 04:18 AM
He is widely recognized as the "dean of energy analysts".
Put your pride and hostility aside, and just take ten minutes to research this man's impeccable reputation and then grasp what he is advising you is coming in just the next 5-10 years.
If your own research checks out, and you recognize this man is as credible and **sober minded** as they get in this sector, then issue a public retraction on your forums, on the question of peak oil.
Admit that a few people of unquestionable seniority **and professional objectivity** in the industry are telling you that your own assessment that this was all a "meme" for manipulation by the elite, has been flat wrong.
The most admirable forum editors will come right out and retract positions which they subsequently find disproved. Do you?
Charles maxwell quote " understand who this man is in the petroleum industry, and why you should put aside your editorial libertarian pride, and choose instead to listen carefully to his analysis of this juncture in petroleum.
Charles maxwell wrote (i believe this was back in 2007 or 2008)
Over the next 25 years, a new world energy economy will arrive in three waves. We are near the top of the first and smallest one, a warning wave. A second more powerful wave likely will hit in the 2009-2010 period when the non-opec world may reach its all-time highest output of crude oil, subsequently declining to become ever more dependent on opec for incremental barrels of production. The final wave should break around 2020, or earlier, as even opec's vast reserves are tapped at a maximum rate of production. After that, oil volume should head down and keep falling, never to revive.
[..]
We are running out of the ability to produce 2% more barrels each year to meet world demand that increases about 2% annually. The potential loss of the incremental barrels of output in the non-opec world as early as 2009-2010 would put the availability of additional barrels -- and power over the price at which the world's consumers might purchase them -- in the hands of five opec nations: saudi arabia, iraq, kuwait, the united arab emirates and iran. (under some circumstances, venezuela might be an additional member of the club.)
Depending on their perception of their own political and economic strength, these countries might decide to lift crude prices much faster than the rate of dollar inflation, thus initiating economic and social changes in energy use on a global basis.
For the period 1987 to 2003, the historical range of oil prices was approximately $10 to $40 per barrel, with an average of $20. For 2004 to 2010, the price range could be $30 to $60, with an average of $40. For 2011 to 2020, the range could be $50 to $100, with an average price of $70 per barrel.
Evidently even charles maxwell did not grasp the price trajectory just 3-4 years ago. By 2015 more recent estimates from the likes of groppe and maxwell, are for $250-$350 a barrel oil.
Where will all your "elite sponsored scarcity meme" assertions wind up then?
Do you call this communication a "diatribe"? Or is that merely what you are concerned to paint it as, while not allowing your readers to examine it's merits for themselves?
I am citing stupid or implausible sources, according to you? Why don't you post this comment for your community to absorb, where they can get curious about the thesis, and maybe read around a bit more than they have on this theme? Do you suggest that would be deleterious to your community? How patronizing of your readers is that?
See what i mean, about a hothouse environment? When someone posts compelling links to proof some of your ideas are at real risk of winding up flat wrong, you gesticulate, display indignation, call it a "harangue" " but what is occurring substantively, is that you consistently decline to publish the links.
That is just crude, doctrinaire editorial summary punditry at work.
|
Posted by Lukester on 02/09/11 01:40 AM
1. You misrepresent our position which is that if by some peak oil is attained (unlikely) the market itself with provide alternatives without the central planning of which you are so fond.
Reply: It's Economics vs Thermodynamics. Thermodynamics wins.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Two more left.
|
Posted by Lukester on 02/09/11 01:32 AM
First, I have no obsessive interest to bombard any website with 200 emails in 3 days, let alone even 30 emails in such a period of time.
Second, I don't frequent blogs or forums at all. I work a full time job (North American sales manager for a German engineering company) and also am completing a second university degree.
Imagine if I really had the level of specious obsession to post two hundred comments to your community in three days.
Please do not engage in character smearing with no basis in fact. It should be beneath you to engage in such rhetorical admonitions, no?
Reply from The Daily Bell
We kept the feedbacks in an electronic file folder as pdfs, sorry. We have almost all of them, in all their juvenile repetition, name-calling, etc.
To be precise it was more like 150 emails from August 21 to August 30, 2010. About 15 a day, with the bulk of them arriving toward the beginning of that time period - the 21st and 22, nearly 100. More on Sept 21 and an additional 7-8 on Jan 3.
|
Posted by Lukester on 02/09/11 01:15 AM
Nor frankly do I find the topic of Wikileaks truth or veracity of much interest compared to a few other very large (much, much larger) themes which IMO this editorial oversight has consistently glided past previously.
Sadad Al Husseini is worth a lot more attention than Julian Assange, and what Mr. Husseini has been publishing articles on for the past five years is a very large story indeed with massive implications not only for us all, but for the very elites you examine so minutely.
Daily Bell IMO is captive to it's own sociopolitical constructs.
What the Husseini's out there are pointing out in a long string of compelling articles, throws a big spanner in the works for some of your most cherised theses " the sign of a truly eclectic community is that the editors don't shrink from tackling topics and sources who pose very loarge implications contrary to some of your most favored views.
Here is a fascinating tell-tale for you " proferred by a reader to this community (only occasionally, these days) who tries to steer clear of intellectual hubris whenever possible (hint, if you can't spot Mr. Hubris in the crowded cocktail party salon, you are it yourselves).
I have **never** met a libertarian who believed that there was the remotest possibility that any of our critical resources could be finite. How fascinating to discover such a uniformity of thought!
The very idea seems to be percieved as a toxin, or anti-matter to their most cherished core beliefs.
It's as drearily predictable a statistic as the way in which Republicans can be counted on to despise birth control, and the way Democrats (hard to tell them all apart in many respects, once they are elected) can be counted on to goose the public spending in a recession.
What's the point? This will come as a shock to the towering self-regard and complacency of some of your libertarian orthodox gathered here.
You lot (orthodox libertarians who see every issue as a candidate to shoehorn into their formula) are ***every bit as predictable** as these shopworn US political parties, and I dare say innumerable political parties within Europe.
When it comes to macro themes which you choose to ally yourselves with, or to denounce " you routinely and regularly conflate a few very large global issues with great predictability. You cannot separate the massive intractable issues such as demographics and geological depletion / production rates from your sociopolitical meme-spotting " leading to a notable case of myopia on these few issues.
I'm respectful in disagreement with others " unless and until I discover myself to be routinely gagged when trying to post intelligent links for further reading on the topics. Then the presumed "dialogue" merely becomes stale and useless to pursue.
Reply from The Daily Bell
1. You misrepresent our position which is that if by some peak oil is attained (unlikely) the market itself with provide alternatives without the central planning of which you are so fond.
2. You are not respectful in any sense, as you maintain, and once bombarded us with 200 emails in a three-day period.
3. Your allotment is for 2-3 more feedbacks. Then you are shut off for the day.
|
Posted by Lukester on 02/09/11 12:45 AM
Before swatting it aside, notice the identity of the party who **sent these emails** (the US consul general in Riyadh " and the source of the opinions, Sadad al-Husseini, former head of exploration at Saudi-Aramco.
I have not the shadow of a doubt, that 99% of the romping "individual freedoms" meme-infatuated readers in this web forum will swat aside the possibility that any smallest part of Mr. Husseini's admonition has a grain of truth to it.
You people will be like the forlorn caboose on the train of public awareness " clicking aimlessly over the brow of the hill, while the locomotive (public growing awareness of massive the scope of this issue) is far down into the next valley and approaching the rendezvous.
Here is yet another of what you all will doubtless term "conspiracies of misinformation" " which you will all glom onto with ideologically inspired animosity " to chew on, like a school of angry, ineffectual goldfish:
The cables, released by WikiLeaks, urge Washington to take seriously a warning from a senior Saudi government oil executive that the kingdom's crude oil reserves may have been overstated by as much as 300bn barrels ' nearly 40%."
Could the OPEC cartel's capacity for virtually unlimited supply expansion to keep up with demand have been nothing but a bluff? That is the case according to Sadad al-Husseini, a geologist and former head of exploration at the Saudi oil monopoly Aramco, who met with the US consul general in Riyadh in November 2007 and "told the US diplomat that Aramco's 12.5m barrel-a-day capacity needed to keep a lid on prices could not be reached."
And yes, that conspiracy concept of peak oil is specifically referenced: "According to the cables, which date between 2007-09, Husseini said Saudi Arabia might reach an output of 12m barrels a day in 10 years but before then ' possibly as early as 2012 ' global oil production would have hit its highest point.
This crunch point is known as "peak oil"." And it gets worse: "Husseini said that at that point Aramco would not be able to stop the rise of global oil prices because the Saudi energy industry had overstated its recoverable reserves to spur foreign investment. He argued that Aramco had badly underestimated the time needed to bring new oil on tap."
Look for Saudi Arabia to go into full damage control mode, alleging that these cables reference nothing but lies. In the meantime, look for China to continue quietly stockpiling the one asset which as was just pointed out is the key one to hold, for both bulls and bears, according to Marc Faber.
Zerohedge article found in the link below (look up Sadad Al Husseini " anyone engaging in limp armwaves that this man's advice is misinformation merely shows themself up as an "specious armchair pundit" of the very first order.
Click to view link
And a final comment " Daily Bell interviews resources specialists like Rick Rule, who knows full well that we are heading into a massive natural resources squeeze in the second decade of this century. In other words, he is fully cognizant of the fact that production growth in petroleum topped out in 2005 and has flatlined ever since, while global drilling rig counts have soared.
The conundrum is that the Daily Bell interviews such observers, evidences respect for their views, but then relapses into mere jeering when this issue is raised by readers here. There is a coercive quality to your jeering " you seek to intimidate and silence those who post links to thought provoking articles on such massive questions, because the idea of resource scarcity throws such a bad spanner into the works of your "global elites orchestrating the scarcity meme".
I have never come across such a community " all adhering to a single narrow, strained read of the entire world, where even massive geological events are shoehorned grotesquely into "misinformation" to all get crammed into your thesis of a single elite exquisitely orchestrating all of these large threads unfolding in history. It is of a narrowness and obsessiveness which is positively startling to the first time visitor to your community.
Your readers really, really, really need to read more broadly, delve into opinions and explanations of some of the themes you so cavalierly reject (and suppress!).
The history on this one theme will utterly engulf you all, within the next 3-4 short years. What on earth will you be claiming then? Meanwhile, you swat aside, or delete posts with links to the likes of Mr. Husseini as though you were titans and he were a clown. The former head of exploration of Saudi Aramco " is a clown presumably, to the Daily Bell's (presumably) omniscient readers, eh? The intellectual hubris around here is stifling.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Thanks for broaching the point. Julian Assange is evidently and obviously a psyops of some sort. Almost everything coming out of WikiLeaks these days reinforces the fear-based memes of the power elite. It is such an obvious Western intel operation at this point that one wonders why they even bother. He is being debunked all over the Internet.
We await, therefore, the day he is nominated for the Nobel Prize - oops that already happened, along with a book deal and a major movie in the works. Just like Tony Blair. Just like Bill Clinton. You do "their" bidding and you get the star treatment. Say, you may be losing out, Lukester!
|
Posted by Stefan on 02/07/11 01:08 PM
 |
Posted by AmanfromMars on 02/06/11 01:52 AM
Let there be Light to see through, and into the Darkness of Ignorance, the Harbourer of Arrogance and Blunt Tool for Fool Destruction .... Click to view link
And who would try to successfully argue against the veracity of ...."Back on topic though, propaganda works. Analyzing feedback to advertising and news data (which by the way are pretty much the same thing now-a-days, at least in the three countries mentioned), will give any social engineering PhD a clear, statistical data-set to feed into a Scenario Analysis exercise (long on-going, now fully distributed worldwide, especially Club Of Rome, 1972 ish onwards, when the model was fully computerized)." ...... whenever the current real and present danger, and slowly dawning global elite realisation is, that Really SMART Programming by Invisible Anonymous InterIndependent Non-State Actors are Future Virtual Leadership Vessels ....... with Crack XSSXXXX Coders in Control of Promotions and Red Lighted and Flagged and Carded Projects in Live Operational Virtual Environments.
|
Posted by AmanfromMars on 02/06/11 12:01 AM
Quite so, DB. And whether it be many or just a few others here who would understand what he probably is, a few smart questions [prime and probing and not fully answered] will always deliver certainty.
Popularly is Assange something of an anti-Establishment, underground folk hero, changing the world and sticking it to the Man on the journey ..... the deliverer/Messenger of dirty little secrets which are masking the Truth in order to cause the Chaos which allows Darkness its Reigns ..... and there are those who have even suggested, and would even still be suggesting his suitability for a global peace honour in a Nobel Prize award*, and DB dismiss the likelihood of one of their interviews with the man because they think they understand what he probably is?
Ok. That is clear enough. Thanks.
* Somewhat tarnished in reputation of late, I'm sure many will opine, with its recent awards to ....... well, I do struggle to not view them as relative political non-entities, scripted into the Great Game for padding and clutter, a sort of electronic/electrostatic chaff in OSINT and SIGINT channels for metadata analysis diversion from Truly Temporal Matters in the Total Information Awareness Plane with ITs Virgin Fields of Great Game Plays.
And QuITe Perfect Matters one can easily imagine as being well suited to, and ported for Zurich Gnome types, DB, into such Elfish Shenanigans and Ab Fab Deeds.
|
Posted by Anadianant on 02/05/11 10:44 PM
Probably a better name yet is Wikidribble. Such a classic psy-op. For eyes that see, it was a "set-up" from word go. If I may...
Click to view link
|
Posted by AmanfromMars on 02/05/11 09:57 AM
Why don't you ask him, DB? A refusal by him to answer questions for/from a more discerning audience would probably indicate to all here that he is indeed a fraud, fearful of his words/metadata being analysed. He would know the power of that simple exercise. Or he should if he is in the psyops business, for without it are you easily tumbled/crashed and burned.
And should he be the real McCoy and readily accept your invitation, will his ego surely enjoy the outing as much as his conscience would the airing and sharing to readers here.
Surely Assange is all about alternative news and views, which cannot be dismissed as fiction by main stream media for they paint a more real and believable and acceptable picture, even if what is being painted is totally unacceptable to the programmed masses. That is the Great Game being played, is it not? Uncovering the real acceptable truth in the midst of all the main stream media lies and fabrications?
Words control Worlds .... and that makes the sharing of them quite important, and why some folk go into dumb mode whenever their shenanigans have been rumbled.
Reply from The Daily Bell
With all due respect, we don't need to ask him to understand what he probably is. But your points are reasonable and well taken.
|
Posted by Satis on 02/04/11 03:28 PM
Even if is not done by them, most of the internal communications is ofter "Propaganda" for the institution's employees (most do not understand the full consequences of what their governments are doing). Furthermore, most of the material that get to most people is via media outlets that probably are somewhat or totally infiltrated by the intelligence services/elites' employees. So, if Assange is for real, he may need some help with what he is doing.
Question: Can TDB interview him and ask the "right" questions?
Reply from The Daily Bell
Don't think Assange is doing alternative news interviews ...
|
Posted by CLaudia C on 02/04/11 06:56 AM
|
Posted by Eric on 02/04/11 06:07 AM
The froth over Wikileaks reminds me of The Rocky Horror Picture Show. A dark house full of nutty trans-galactic transsexuals building up a mindless blond adonis to entice a naive all american virgin into unspeakable depravity. It is only entertainment.
Meanwhile the screams of feigned horror by the lame stream media keeps us from noticing the putrid stench of decay emanating from the smoldering craters that are the leftovers from the implosion of western economies by financial weapons of mass destruction. Followed by a few words from our corporate sponsors on what to buy on credit ...
|
Posted by Jackpile on 02/04/11 04:30 AM
|
Posted by AmanfromMars on 02/04/11 03:12 AM
"Either the elite are having to move too fast, or they still don't understand the depths of those who better see the big picture, or Assange is more or less what he portrays himself to be...but with not as much content as the hype justifies. This third possibility makes little sense." .... Posted by Bionic Mosquito on 2/3/2011 10:12:08 AM
Bionic Mosquito, Hi, [and I must admit that I did think of writing Bionic Mossad, but decided not to for any number of reasons which are hardly important in the big scheme of things] that third possibility could be seriously enhanced if those in the second probability were to provide new content for justifiable hyping.
And thanks DB for that robust and perfectly accurate and immaculately timed, "DB Mission Statement" .... Posted between 4:35:41 PM and 4:52:45 PM on 2/3/2011. I was starting to doubt your free market credentials /independent gene and questioning whether you had any teeth and a bark. It is good to see that you have a crushing bite and ferocious roar whenever needed and/or under fire.
"Why can't we be perpetually astonished?" .... Reply from the Daily Bell
I'm with you 100% on that, DB. Knowing what I might is it something which is quite natural and constantly guaranteed to be reinforced by future events being presently programmed into the System.
PS Regarding the "DB Mission Statement", whenever it is as it is and as is said and agreed, is Future Control a very sophisticated RapidEProgram with Elfish support and ERGnomIQ Controls? ....... Click to view link
Never doubt that a small group of committed citizens can change the world. – Margaret Mead
"You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete" – Buckminster Fuller
For the Singularity, give an Intelligent Being, a Man and a Woman what they Want and Desire, and they can Control with Immaculate Grace, the Power that EMPowers One's Future Needs, with their Seeding and Nurturing of Feeds.
|
Posted by MetaCynic on 02/04/11 12:32 AM
Terrorists needn't make very strenuous efforts to acquire uranium for a dirty bomb. It's all over Iraq and Afghanistan. It has permeated the soil, water and air of those unfortunate places. The terrorists need only scoop up and filter Arab soil to extract plenty of taxpayer financed, made in America uranium for their Muslim bomb. Oh, the cruel irony of it all!
Whether Julian Assange and WikiLeaks are really what he claims them to be or are just clever psyops creations is perhaps immaterial at this point. What is significant now is that they are widely believed to be the real thing. With help from MSM hype, Assange has become something of a global folk hero. Whistleblowing and disseminating insider secrets has become cool, even sexy.
Unfortunately for the elite, unintended consequences are the curse of all state enterprises, and this psyops if that's what it is, would be no exception, even if it succeeds at hoodwinking most of us. Copycat WikiLeaks wannabes will be the unintended consequence of the Assange phenomenon.
The vast and rapidly growing state crimes suffocating civilization, coupled with instant celebrity status for whistleblowers and their enablers will provoke genuine people of conscience into leaking genuine information about the nefarious machinations of the elite and their puppets.
The elite can co-opt one, perhaps two WikiLeaks. How can they deal with a deluge of WikiLeaks wannabes spontaneously springing up human action style on the internet to compete to provide the best anonymity for those whistleblowers with the baddest dirt on our lords?
Not only has the internet empowered tens of millions of minds to deconstruct and derail elite themes as they unfold in real time, it has also empowered people of conscience to strip the elite and their minions naked. There may soon be no place for evil to hide.
Reply from The Daily Bell
"Unfortunately for the elite, unintended consequences are the curse of all state enterprises, and this psyops if that's what it is, would be no exception, even if it succeeds at hoodwinking most of us."
This is a very good point.
|
Posted by Sovereignjim on 02/03/11 10:10 PM
 |
Posted by Zenbillionaire on 02/03/11 07:53 PM
Thank you. I still need to work harder on not using adjectives...
|
Posted by Zenbilionaire on 02/03/11 06:53 PM
"Why can't we be perpetually astonished?"
I think you must be, the consequence of not being perpetually astonished by the world is to be captured by your own weltanschauung and cease to be useful as an investigator. The moment the world stops surprising you is the moment you ceased paying attention to it. I find it an admirable trait in others and a very difficult task for myself.
On the subject of Mr. Assange, the compelling argument for me has been the way his revelations have followed prior scripts that have been discredited and this is an excellent example of such a rehash.
The actual text of these leaked documents doesn't really say that a terrorist organization is actually in possession of a nuclear, chemical or biological weapon, it simply says that some people believe recent intelligence indicating a terrorist group is dangerously (terrifyingly?) *close* to possessing one.
This is the same mantra repeated over and over by the Bush administration during the lead up to the Iraq and Afghan invasions, which came up very short in the discovery of any physical evidence to support the accusations.
Why anyone would think that allegations being made by exactly the same source that provided bogus intel last time should somehow become more credible solely because it was "stolen" and subsequently released by an organization having no public ties to a government gives us all we need to know in establishing intent.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Excellent analysis.
|
Posted by Jsmith on 02/03/11 06:35 PM
By the way, does Mike Hucka hucka Huckabee, and Joe Biden read Daily Bell? Does the dragon lady? In any event, the Wikileaks have been a pleasure for me to watch the embarrassment of our leaders. I'm just a cynic that enjoys them squirming.
On another note relating to suitcase dirty bombs, what would have happened if the German government had sent a note to the United States informing FDR in 1943 that Germany now possessed the bomb? After all, we were working on it. Would negotiations have started? Same with Al Qaida. What if they came out and stated that they had it too, and would love to have some dialog. Of course, all this would be Psyops, and more show, but would we negotiate?
|
|
