The truth about WikiLeaks? [Happy New Year!]

[Obamot]

WikiLeaks, is it manipulation or not?

Question that I ask myself following the link given by Dedelco, which sheds a sharp light on "the underside" of the case. First of all, the introduction is rather encouraging:

We obviously all have to support WikiLeaks and its founder and spokesperson Julian Assange who, in this dirty war waged around the world by states against transparency and frankness, has just been arrested in Great Britain.

But it spoils:

But, in the world of politics, things are unfortunately never as innocent as they seem. According to new revelations, before the last "cable gate" Assange would have reached an agreement with Israel that could explain why, according to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the leaks "were good for Israel. "

Some commentators, particularly in Turkey and Russia, wonder why the hundreds of thousands of confidential documents leaked by the site last month contain nothing that would embarrass the Israeli government, like just about every other state to which the documents refer .

The answer seems to be a secret agreement, made between the "heart and soul" of Wikileaks, as humbly described by Assange himself (1), and Israeli officials, who assured that all of these documents would be "removed Before making the others public.

According to an Arab investigative journalism website (2), Al-Haqiqa (the truth), Assange received money from semi-official Israeli sources, and, during a secret arrangement recorded on video, promised not to publish any document which could harm the security or the diplomatic interests of Israel.

1) www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/09/wikileaks-revolt/
(Unpublished notes on the war in Iraq sparked an internal revolt at Wikileaks)

2) www.syriatruth.info/content/view/977/36/
(According to Daniel Domscheit-Berg, Assange promised the Israelis not to publish their own documents)

3) www.taz.de/1/netz/netzpolitik/artikel/1 ... m-popstar /
(Originally, Wilileaks wanted to make as much information as possible available to the public; it has now become a very powerful censor)

4) www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0, ... 12,00.html
(Former Wikileaks activists launch new disclosure site)

5) www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0, ... 19,00.html
(Wikileaks spokesperson resigns: The only option for me, a calm start)

6) www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/neta ... l-1.327773
(According to Netanyahu, the revelations from Wikileaks were good for Israel ... Iran would threaten the world, as confirmed by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia ... contrary to what the 60 years of propaganda presenting Israel as the claim greatest threat ... Netanyahu added that Israel had taken the lead to limit damage from the leaks ...)

7) www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599, ... -2,00.html

8} www.syriatruth.info/content/view/986/36/


Original: WikiLeaks 'struck a deal with Israel' over diplomatic cables leaks, December 7, 2010.

Translation: Petrus Lombard

Therefore, what should we expect as "revelations" about the main stakeholder: the United States, once we know the close links of this state with Israel?

I post this thread mainly for some who were very skeptical in 2010, concerning the geopolitical issues of certain "cases" like 9/11, just to point out the first paragraph, which is written as a kind of denunciation of a situation "de facto" which everyone would like to get rid of. And obviously the two states cited are only for illustrative purposes.
Curiously, do we not find the same trend in high-end financial speculation ....?

So an ambitious “safeguard” strategy on the part of Julian Assange, “admissible limit to transparency” already reached, or deception? Nothing is simple, but for the moment difficult to exclude any hypothesis.

Happy New Year!

[Christophe]

Ah vast question ... but I wonder if the information of a site like mondialisation.ca should not be taken with as many tweezers as the network voltaire ...

It was wikileak who revealed that an Israeli minister was a rapist (true this time)?

ps: if not, you plan to put [Happy New Year] in all the subjects that you create until January 31?

[Obamot]

Ok, I remove the hooks if you want.

[Christophe]

No, on the contrary, leave them and you will be able to transfer everything when it is over as it will not modify the link of the subject.

[Obamot]

Ah vast question ... but I wonder if the information of a site like mondialisation.ca should not be taken with as many tweezers as the network voltaire ...

Hard, hard to be constantly "objective".

It was Wikileak who revealed that an Israeli minister was a rapist (true this time)?

Like what...

=========================================

Still, that poses real substantive questions [WikiLeaks]! How “transparent” can we be ...?

There can be “conflicts of interest” everywhere.

It's not just in politics!

What about “necessary protectionism”? I mean the protection of "the weakest"?

And above all, to what extent can we "expose ourselves" ... without putting everything we have built in danger.

[Christophe]

It was a question about the minister ...

[Obamot]

Ooops, no: "in general" ! [ok, it's edited, thank you]

[Obamot]

Ten years already I can't resist pushing back this thread of oblivion ...!

And this thanks to the incredible and unexpected decision of the British Justice not to extradite Julian Assange to the USA!

This affair takes on a particular relief during this covid-19 crisis, while some naive people still believe they live in a world of care bears that are very clean, smooth and predictable like a fairy tale ...!

[Obamot]

Well, Assange should go to the USA, but when



We are paying dearly today for everything that has not been legally settled during the WikiLeaks revelations.
A kind of impunity has arisen in the face of large criminal structures which are presented as a “new normal”

[Obamot]

It will have taken time!