Well, another day and another set of Wikileaks. Is it me or do you sense that the BBC delights in trawling through these illegal leaks that are now quite obviously aimed at embarrassing and undermining the United States? I suppose there is a natural resonance between Assange’s visceral hatred of the United States and the BBC’s default position of liking anything that seeks to undermine the USA? Tough call for the State Broacaster – Obama or Assange. I think the latter wins?
WICKEDLEAKS…
Bookmark the permalink.
I also sense that nobody is terribly interested. Amongst the general public anyway. Foreign governments are no doubt a different matter.
Apparently Wikileaks, INBBC, etc, have taken upon themselves to decide, AND TO DECIDE ON OUR BEHALF (!), what is in the security interests of the West, and to rationalise security concerns arising from publication maybe sometime later.
Just as INBBC, with its daily Islamophilic propaganda, which describes Al Qaeda as merely ‘Sunni militants’, so INBBC is not to be trusted with casual remarks like this:
“What the [Wikileaks] list might do is to prompt potential attackers to look at a broader range of targets, especially given that the US authorities classify them as being so important.
“It is not perhaps a major security breach, but many governments may see it as an unhelpful development, our correspondent says.
It inevitably prompts the question as to exactly what positive benefit Wikileaks was intending in releasing this document.”
Apparently, the main author of the INBBC piece is J. Marcus, until recently at least, World Service Defence Correspondent, and responsible for a radio series, ‘Age of Empire’ which, of course, questions the role of ‘American imperialism’, but Islamic imperialism is omitted.
The INBBC article ends its untrustworthy pontification by, of course, giving the last unreassuring words to Wikileaks.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11923766
Alternative, non-INBBC world:
“These leaks spell doom for web freedom”
By William Rees-Mogg
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1335699/WikiLeaks-cables-These-leaks-spell-doom-web-freedom.html#ixzz17KaxLqDK
The thing is, the BBC is still protecting their beloved Obamessiah over these stolen communications. If this had happened under George Bush, the Beeboids would be bleating about cowboy diplomacy, hating on Rumsfeld for continuing to insult the doyens of “Old Europe”, and talking about the call for bombing Iran from all those Arab countries was due to Bush and Cheney and the Israel Lobby evoking unwarranted hatred of Iran from her Arab neighbors.
But since we’re in the Obamessianic Age, all the diplo-insults are shrugged off as business as usual, nothing surprising at all, of course Berlusconi is an idiot and everyone wants to bomb Iran, etc.
The BBC hasn’t gotten around to reporting that there are calls in some quarters for Hillary to resign over this, or that this has actually had enough of an effect for her to state that she’s leaving public office for good once her stint as Sec. of State is over.
Most amusing to me is how the stolen communications reveal just how right Bush was and how wrong the BBC has been about nearly every international issue of the last few years. Saudi Arabia actually is the top funder of Mohammedan terrorism, Iran really is a problem, Russia really is a mafia state run by Putin.
Worst of all for the BBC: nobody seems to be calling Israel a pariah state or complaining about the all-powerful Israel Lobby. Not a kosher sausage about it. What’s up with that, BBC?
Because the Beeboids agree with Assange’s goals of stopping two wars, and realize this doesn’t do too much public damage to the President (what damage it’s going to do behind closed doors, I have no idea, and neither do they), they get to play the intrepid journalist anlge, fighting for truth and justice with this story, without fear of reprisal.
They have a visceral feeling of support for Assange, and act accordingly. They can do with the knowledge that it won’t really harm The Obamessiah. If Hillary ends up being collateral damage, no big deal, she lost face with the BBC when she played the race card on Him during the election. Win-win.
Beeboids not happy about all these arrest warrants coming for Agnus Innocentus Assange. BBC News Channel producers now trying to push the line that the stolen documents don’t tell us anything we didn’t already know, anyone could read this stuff elsewhere only it hasn’t got “‘Secret’ written on it”. Also, the line is that nobody is in danger because of it because Al Qaeda is “unlikely” to “go down that list” of names and installations and try to do any damage to these newly revealed targets. A pretty weak attempt to play it all down.
And they still seem to believe that the rape allegations from Sweden are trumped up as part of a way to get at Darling Julian, as the Beeboid in the anchor chair just asked a talking head if he thought anyone should even bother pursuing the rape charges. He didn’t like the “yes” answer, and quickly moved away from that topic.
Note to BBC: Regardless of the ultimate importance or unimportance of the stolen documents, Assange has openly stated his goal to do damage to US foreign policy. That’s an attack on the US, is illegal. He obviously gave hacking assistance to the lowly private who supposedly handed him (“unbidden”, according to Assange’s lawyer) the proverbial brown envelope. Providing instructions to commit a crime is a federal offense, as is aiding and abetting of any kind, regardless of how much you admire him for striking a blow against the most powerful country in the world.
All this journalist/publisher/transparency crap is a smoke screen to hide this fact.
Apparently WikiHacks handing over the latest round of documents to five media organizations who coordinated with each other over the timing of publication:
Respected media outlets collaborate with WikiLeaks
“They are releasing the documents we selected,” Le Monde’s managing editor, Sylvie Kauffmann, said in an interview at the newspaper’s Paris headquarters.
WikiLeaks turned over all of the classified U.S. State Department cables it obtained to Le Monde, El Pais in Spain, The Guardian in Britain and Der Spiegel in Germany. The Guardian shared the material with The New York Times, and the five news organizations have been working together to plan the timing of their reports.
They also have been advising WikiLeaks on which documents to release publicly and what redactions to make to those documents, Kauffmann and others involved in the arrangement said.
“The cables we have release correspond to stories released by our main stream media partners and ourselves. They have been redacted by the journalists working on the stories, as these people must know the material well in order to write about it,” WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said in a question-and-answer session on The Guardian’s website Friday. “The redactions are then reviewed by at least one other journalist or editor, and we review samples supplied by the other organisations to make sure the process is working.”
Come on, defenders of the indefensible, tell me that the BBC had no idea about what their mates at the Guardian were up to. This should be a huge story, yet the BBC has sat on it. Again.
The BBC’s championing of Julian Assange continues. Frank Gardner just now described him as working for “truth” and a heroic figure, a “Scarlet Pimpernel to the US”.
And then he confirmed my accusation above that the Beeboids think the Swedish rape charges are trumped up by suggesting just that. Naturally he covered his ass in traditional Beeboid fashion by couching it in, “some say….”
Sickening, BBC.
So now the BBC thinks it is in Caped Crusader mode, fearlessly fighting for truth and justice. As long as it doesn’t mean truth and justice over Climate Change, The EU, Islamist Suprematism or any any other of the BBC’s huge herd of sacred cows.
In truth, its just Dave Spart with a posh accent, locked in perpetual student union bar politics. As long WikiLeaks embarasses their usual cast of pantomime villains, expect to hear it long and loud. FFS this is our State Broadcaster, not Rag Week.
You wonder how long it will be before a leaked cable from some diplomatic intern will surface declaring their opinion “its all Thatcher’s fault”