Posted by: quiscus | December 6, 2010

December 6, 2010

1.  “Defend WikiLeaks – Boycott Amazon

The online behemoth is an extension of the state


Amazon’s action was a great victory for the blue-state fascists: let nothing “injurious” ever be posted by Amazon Web Services, or, indeed, by any other web host! This principle is being formalized and put into practice by Sen. Lieberman and his allies in the Senate with the introduction of legislation that would outlaw sites like WikiLeaks by amending the Woodrow Wilson-era “Espionage Act” – a statute originally used to jail antiwar activists and close down the anti-interventionist media during that other great war to “make the world safe for democracy.”

In seems fairly clear that Amazon is endorsing the War Party’s hate campaign against WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange and yet some libertarians are busily inventing all kinds of complicated rationales for granting this particular outfit some kind of moral immunity: they’re a private company, they were threatened by Senator Joe Lieberman and the hint of government action (in spite of Amazon’s explicit statements to the contrary), they have cool stuff for sale at cheap prices, etc. ad nauseam.

The answer of every freedom-loving American to these attacks must be: To hell with Amazon and to hell with the government. You’re either for liberty, or you’re against it: there is no middle ground.

The controversy over WikiLeaks is a defining issue, one that separates the liberty-lovers from the lickspittles.

Which one are you?”

2.  No, the US is the biggest funder of terrorism:

Clinton: Saudis World’s Largest Terror Funders

3.  “Why prosecuting WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange won’t be easy

There is no general law making disclosure of classified information a crime.

What law did Assange violate? It will surprise many that there is no statute making it illegal to reveal classified information. There are statutes that criminalize the disclosure of very specific types of classified information, such as the identity of a covert operative (think Valerie Plame) or “codes, ciphers or cryptographic systems.” But there is no catch-all law that simply says, “Thou shalt not disclose classified information.”

Indeed, when Congress tried to enact such a statute, President Bill Clinton sensibly vetoed it. His reason: The government suffers from such an overclassification problem – some intelligence agencies classify even newspaper articles – that a law of this sort would end up criminalizing the disclosure of innocuous information. And even that vetoed statute would have applied only to government officials, not to private individuals or journalists.

Instead, prosecutors in the Assange case, like the prosecutors in the AIPAC case I handled, would resort to the Espionage Act of 1917, an archaic, World War I-era statute that prohibits “willfully” disclosing “information relating to the national defense.” According to Judge T.S. Ellis in the AIPAC case, this means that the prosecution must prove, among other things, that a defendant knew that the information he was disclosing was potentially damaging to national security and that he was violating the law.

Here, Assange can make the department’s case especially difficult. Well before publishing the cables, he wrote a letter to the U.S. government, delivered to our ambassador in London, inviting suggestions for redactions. The State Department refused. Assange then wrote another letter to State, reiterating that “WikiLeaks has absolutely no desire to put individual persons at significant risk of harm, nor do we wish to harm the national security of the United States.”

In that second letter, Assange stated that the department’s refusal to discuss redactions “leads me to conclude that the supposed risks are entirely fanciful.” He then indicated that WikiLeaks was undertaking redactions on its own.”

4.  “No, The Big Banks Have Not “Paid Back” Government Bailouts and Subsidies

The big banks claim that they have paid back all of the bailout money they received, and that the taxpayers have actually made money on the bailouts.

However, as Barry Ritholtz notes:

Pro Publica has been maintaining a list of bailout recipients, updating the amount lent versus what was repaid.

So far, 938 Recipients have had $607,822,512,238 dollars committed to them, with $553,918,968,267 disbursed. Of that $554b disbursed, less than half — $220,782,546,084 — has been returned.

Whenever you hear pronunciations of how much money the TARP is making, check back and look at this list. It shows the TARP is deeply underwater.”

5.  “Kosovo: Towards the Formation of “Greater Albania”?

The CIA Map has already Annexed Southern Serbia to Kosovo, Creating Greater Kosovo — Serbia No Longer Shares Border with Macedonia

After running my recent blog — “Ominous Signs in Kosovo: Architect of 1999 Staged Atrocity Finally Admits ‘I Support Greater Albania’ — I heard from reader/source “Serbstvo.” He had an adjustment for my statement that “William Walker is an insider. He knows what the elite decision-makers are up to. This is all but an official confirmation that the U.S. does indeed plan to support the full Albanian agenda to continue redrawing Balkan borders.”

And that’s the point: What Americans still don’t realize is that the Balkans is relevant to them not just for the precedents it sets, not just for the ill winds that blow there first, not just for the negative elements that find their way from there to here, but because the Balkans has always been the “Great Powers’” experimenting grounds for the rest of the world. As everything that has been done to the people of the Balkans continues being done to us, it will not just be a matter of precedent or cause-and-effect, but a direct and purposeful export job; that’s the purpose the Balkans region has served for the totalitarian ‘democracy’ we are all in for.”

6.  “Wiki-Leaks and plausible lies – Where have all the critical thinkers gone?

Critical Vs ‘Black and White’ Thinking

The Wiki-leaks documents that provide evidence for what is already understood should be accepted, the documents that echo what we already know to be US and Israeli propaganda should be understood as just that – US and Israeli propaganda. Is that so hard?

Why are many alternative news writers who railed against similar lies and disinformation when it came from US and Israeli ‘Intel reports’ now accepting, or ignoring, the same propaganda simply because it comes via Wiki-leaks? Do the Wiki-leaks documents have to be all good or are all bad? Is such black and white thinking ever a good way to discern truth from lies in a world where almost everything has some element of spin? Are we so desperate for a truth-telling hero – like the practiced liar described by Anna Salter above – that we have lost our ability to critically think? What happened to our ability to understand and identify the nuances and subtitles of big government propaganda?

The broad view of Wiki-leaks and its documents, so far, paints a picture of a concerted effort to supplant the alternative, anti-war media with an illusion of truth. As the Western mainstream media continues to reach new heights of mendacity and obfuscation of the truth, an increasing number of ordinary people have been turning to alternative news sites for a more accurate perspective of what is happening on our planet. This has posed a clear threat to those whose positions of influence and power depend on a misinformed population.

The solution to this problem would be the appearance on the scene of an organization that goes one better than the anti-war, alternative media and produces ‘smoking gun’, officially documented evidence of government lies and deception. Such evidence would, after all, come from the horse’s mouth, a veritable admission of guilt from the wrong-doers themselves rather than accusations from third-party alternative news web sites. Re-read Anna Salter’s description of the pedophile she was interviewing above to get a real picture of the pathology at work here. The deception, of course, lies not in the release of official documents, but in the use of those documents, which in themselves do not constitute high crimes, as a cover to promote the same big government lies. I submit that, based on the clear evidence, Wiki-leaks is just such an organization and is designed to fulfill just such a role: the dissemination of Plausible Lies.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: