Strange encounter during one of my testy exchanges with Glenn today. It had to do with WikiLeaks, a topic I wrote about on Monday.
I had responded to muddy thinking's question about a video WikiLeaks has of a massacre in Afghanistan. I pointed out essentially that this was a video that Julian Assange claimed in April would be released "soon," but it has never been released. And I proposed a number of questions I thought journalists should ask Julian about WikiLeaks and the various materials they say they have.
Strangely enough, Glenn responded to my post to muddy thinking, and he did so in the spirit of the testiness we had had with one another since yesterday, but with what I thought was an odd twist. Comme ça:
Che Pasa[Quoting me to muddy thinking:]
He kept claiming WikiLeaks was going to release the video of the Afghan murders "soon." They never did.
Julian needs to be asked what's the hold up.
They haven't yet, but will - there are issues with encryption and verification that take time.It is interesting that so much of our propaganda media has been so eager to put out just about any story Julian wants to tell.
What's "interesting" about it? Are you one of those people who think WikiLeaks is some sort of government-run operation - like they were eager to have that Apache attack seen by the world?Besides, wasn't Julian in hiding somewhere in Australia because the Pentagon and the drones were after him? His passport seized?
His passport has been returned. And it's not Julian who claimed the Pentagon was after him - that was reported by a former NYT reporter who now writes for The Daily Beast, and it was Daniel Ellsberg who speculated that he feared for Julian's safety - but they all probably are controlled by the Pentagon, too.Curious to say the least.
The slothful, dishonest way of spreading innuendo: ominously pronounce things "interesting" and "curious" without ever actually saying anything.
Now wait, I thought. "Are you one of those people who think WikiLeaks is some sort of government-run operation...?"
Hold on. Glenn does not read my blog posts here; so far as I can tell, he has not been here any time in the past year. And apart from some casual references, I have not mentioned WikiLeaks at Glenn's Place. He would not have seen my post on the topic yesterday.
Nor was there anything in my questions about WikiLeaks today that indicated I wondered if it was a black op -- something I have in fact wondered since the first time they made a media splash, but I have only mentioned it here. And it's something any skeptic should wonder.
I've never seen any evidence that it is, and I certainly have no knowledge that it is. There are just too many "curious" things going on -- from the wall to wall coverage in the propaganda media and the endless loop showing the extermination of the Iraqis in the April "Collateral Murder" tape to the increasingly ludicrous cat and mouse routine Julian revels in to the curious cases of the leaker and the hacker that turned him in. And all those hundreds of thousands of diplomatic cables.
Anyone should be skeptical of this continuing drama, but I don't know what's really going on. Nor, at the time I wrote did I have any idea that there was a whole "WikiLeaks is Black Ops" conspiracy theory subculture. I had no idea that was the case when Glenn responded the way he did.
I didn't even look into it until after I'd let the question settle: "Are you one of those...?"
Oh, there's a lot of skepticism and elaborations on theories of conspiracy about WikiLeaks out there that I had no idea existed.
I'm just now starting to sort through it. And the first source cited is Wayne Madsen Report, a site I do not link and I do not read. I have probably only seen it a couple of times, and the only thing I can recall about it was that it seemed to be a black op itself! Hm. Spy v Spy indeed!
So they are claiming WikiLeaks is CIA? That's rich.
I will have to investigate further and report back. This is fascinating.
Haven't really found much that is useful, but a good deal of speculation is out there, and it seems to center around the notion that Julian, an "ex-hacker", is using WikiLeaks as a way to, let's face it, make money. He would collect "secret" information from anonymous individuals in the field and then sell it to eagerly awaiting news organizations.
Only they weren't so eager, apparently. So, runs the speculation, he was "flipped." Rather than make him into an Enemy of the State, the spooks turned him into a useful ally. The figure of $2 million came up in one speculative missive. Problem is, he's still trying to raise money. But that's all part of Spookery 101, so we'll let that go.
Australia, according to one account, is full to bursting with CIA, and it is widely believed there and elsewhere that Julian -- who is WikiLeaks, there is no one else in point of fact -- is a spook.
Manning seems to be regarded as an impressionable and not very stable young man who was befriended (on the internet?) by Julian; supposedly, there is an extensive email archive between them, but much of it has been scrubbed. Lamo, another ex hacker who turned Manning in to the FBI, is also rather unstable, was arrested for computer hacking, and according to the McClatchy report, he was flipped and is now essentialy a useful tool in Cyberwars. How he related to Julian is not entirely clear, although Lamo and Manning have an extensive online archive with one another, like Manning and Julian are said to have.
However all of these speculative threads sort out, the theory I kind of like is that WikiLeaks is -- or was -- a "honeypot." I say "was" because there are hints out there that for all intents and purposes, with the arrest of Manning, WikiLeaks started evaporating. Thus Julian's apparent indisposition and disappearance.
It's all speculation and yarn-spinning, though. Nothing may be as it seems, and the stories being spun are mostly almost certainly figments. There are wheels within wheels in the spook business, so I wouldn't put anything past anyone in this whole affair.
I highly suspect that the truth, whatever it is, will never be known by the public.
I haven't linked to any of the information I found. Just Google "WikiLeaks Black Op" and see what pops up. I'm sure there is plenty more.