Quite a few internet articles have popped up, although absolutely nothing in the mainstream media. Here is one from Dandelion Salad:
http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2010/10/25/wikileaks%e2%80%99-julian-assange-accepts-intelligence-experts%e2%80%99-whistleblower-award-on-behalf-of-our-sources/
Which leads me to an interesting observation. The Wikileaks press conference was attended by at least 30 TV crews and hundreds of journalists, from all over the world. But I did not see any other high profile bloggers there. Given that Wikileaks is in itself a prime example of the way that new media can get the truth out as mainstream media can’t, that was peculiar. Did Wikileaks not invite any bloggers?
dreolin – bit touchy aren’t you? Blair has had no trial but you an others are quite happy to call him a war criminal. Yet there appears to be plenty of evidence that Assange has a history of sexual predation. I would be wary of giving him your support if I were you – you have no idea what skeletons may emerge. I’m not a member of AI.
This is from The Independent two days ago:
“According to former supporters, the submission section is down because a number of key personnel have fallen out with Assange over the direction of the website and his behaviour. “Outside of the Iraq and Afghan dossiers, Wikileaks has been incapacitated by internal turmoil and politics,” Smari McCarthy, a former Wikileaks volunteer and freedom of information campaigners from Iceland, told The Independent.
“Key people have become very concerned about the direction of Wikileaks with regard to its strong focus on US military files at the expense of ignoring everything else. There were also serious disagreements over the decision not to redact the names of Afghan civilians; something which I’m pleased to see was not repeated with the Iraq dossiers.”
Don’t know about lack of bloggers but I noticed CNN International covered you presenting the award live. Both the BBC and Sky had dropped the live feed before you appeared (well it may have been on the red button on sky but off the main broadcast).
Yes, the somewhat compromised and sentimental (in defiance of his superiors, the CIA man takes pity on the protagonist and let’s him out!) one with Meryl Streep and various others (confusingly entitled, ‘Rendition’) got high profile publicity and wide cinematic release, while this one did not. Surprise, surprise. I haven;t seen this one, Mark, so it’s good you’ve reminded us all of it’s existence.
Another good film on the subject – though more related to the Daniel Pearl situation – is Jamil Dehlavi’s ‘Infinite Justice’. It’s much better than the high-prfile one made starring whatsername. Angelina Thumbelina.
dehlavifilms.com/_/Dehlavi_Films_Infinite_Justice.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_Justice_(film)
This is why I keep going back to the issues: a massive war crime, the killings of massive numbers of Iraqi civilians. Multiple atrocities, as in Vietnam, i.e. it NOT about Assange/Wikileaks, it’s about the prosecution of war against civilian women, children and men by the USA and its allies. Mass rape by US soldiers. Black sites and systemic torture by the CIA. Lies by the politicians. Millions died. Millions. That is what it is about. That is the crime right before our faces. Eddie, welcome back.
“it[‘s] NOT about Assange/Wikileaks, it’s about the prosecution of war against civilian women, children and men by the USA and its allies.”
But it is about Assange/Wikileaks, or at least about the manipulation of news.
You can’t commit mass murder without a bit of news management.
So, if Assange were a personally heinous person, that would mean that the mass murder of Iraqis didn’t count? Eh?
This is what Eddie is insinuating; he’s been a (I think, Blairite) pro-war blogger on this site since long before you first posted here, Alfred (as far as I am aware).
You see, to focus on an individual (think Tommy Sheridan) or one media organisation as conduit is to fall into a trap. Of course, there was and is massive propaganda/ disinformation around the whole thing; you would argue that Assange/ Wikileaks is part of that. I do not know whether or not they are. I do know what the USA et al did in Iraq and on what scale they did it.
Suhayl “Eddie, welcome back” – I was never here. And don’t wish to be. More to life etc etc.
Who was that then?
Certainly not ‘over-doing ‘somebody’ – I look forward to your posts.
“So, if Assange were a personally heinous person, that would mean that the mass murder of Iraqis didn’t count?”
If most people are gulled by pro-war propaganda and news management, it will be as if “the mass murder of Iraqis didn’t count.”
Yes, I agree with that, Alfred. Echoes of the pathetic Colin Powell perjuring himself on TV.
So who is this new ‘eddie’, then? And who is that anonymous blogger? Is it some other ‘eddie’; they seem to share similar views and a similar style too. That ‘eddie’, the previous one, back in July 2009 posted that he’d once been a member of Amnesty International and I see that ‘AI’ has been mentioned in one of the entity with the name ‘eddie’, above. Could that be, ‘Artificial Intelligence’? (!) Enlighten us, not-eddie! Brighten up our evening! Sad, I know.
“there appears to be plenty of evidence that Assange has a history of sexual predation.”
–eddie
There’s feck-all evidence that I’ve seen, or that you’ve produced! And unless you were an eye witness to sexual predation or rape, you have no right to go around talking about it as if he had been convicted.
“I’m not a member of AI.”
Then you’re not the Eddie who told me he was, over a year ago on this blog. (Right?)
“Outside of the Iraq and Afghan dossiers, Wikileaks has been incapacitated by internal turmoil and politics,” Smari McCarthy, a former Wikileaks volunteer …”
Which doesn’t lessen the number of deaths or amputees or orphans, or the violent turmoil in Iraq. About which you seem blithely unconcerned in your rush to condemn Assange. Internal turmoil and politics in Wikileaks are of little interest to me.
****
I’m still sitting on the fence about Assange (and bothered by the Iraq Body Count ‘alliance’). But I’ve just read this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange
which filled in some gaps in my knowledge about his earlier life. IMO, his background seems to make him an unlikely candidate for “turning” by the CIA or some other agency. I feel he has a streak of something in him – perhaps ego, perhaps determination – which someone in his position would undoubtedly need, given that (if he’s genuine) he’s taking on the whole bloody (and I use that word advisedly) apparatus of the “superpower”. If he’s mildly eccentric in that fashion, so what.
I saw half the interview live on Democracy Now today, and watched him carefully. If he’s dissembling, he’s very good at it. Or maybe he’s a great poker player.
“I was never here. And don’t wish to be. More to life etc etc.”
Posted by: at October 26, 2010 9:12 PM
For someone who was never here, you’re very au fait with what’s going on – including a visit from an “eddie”.
G’night all, I’ve said more than enough for one day.
Thanks for the link ‘crab’ –
Yes Sibel Edmonds is a remarkable women, on a par with Ruth and Dreolin here, with qualities similar to Annie Machon – courageous, brave, intelligent and with an astute insight that has lead to the discovery and exposure illicit activities with more than a helping from Israel’s incessant meddling in intelligence affairs, as documented in ‘Une Femme a Abattre’ in 2006.
The daughter of a doctor, twice gagged by the Bush Dept. of Justice’s invocation of the so-called “State Secrets Privilege,” Sibel finally exposed, in her remarkable allegations, blackmail, bribery, espionage, infiltration, and criminal conspiracy by current and former members of the U.S. Congress, high-ranking State and Defense Department officials. Finally made public in an ‘under oath’ deposition, the transcript of which is available on-line.
Robin Cook told me the operative behind the 7/7 London Bombings was Haroon Rashid Aswat, a British Intelligence Asset.
In a similar way Sibel knew that Zacarias Moussaoui was known to the FBI and if the interrogation of the hijackers’ paymaster, Ramzi Binalshibh had been made public, according to the 9/11 Commission, the plot to crash planes into the Twin Towers would have ‘gone to ground’ and many lives saved.
Such is the catastrophic failure of security classifications in these circumstances. Too much is kept secret and that process cost the British tax-payer close to £1 billion in staff, administration and security equipment.
National security must, of course, be enhanced in times of war, hence the Security Chief’s ‘war on terror’ which is fed with regular doses of terror – like the ‘Mumbai style’ attacks that ‘Internet intercepts’ suggest are in preparation for Europe. This has been a catalyst for more powerful police armament and ‘SAS training’ for special arms officers who already possess suicide bomber ‘head-shot’ training.
But let me be clear, manipulation of known terrorists activity to further geo-political aims is TREASON and treason in times of war is punishable by death.
Encouraged by Mark (thanks for his too) here’s another and final post for today.
The Royal Marines who are based in Lympstone rehearse for the war on terrrr.
Totally ridiculous and even some of the locals are sniggering.
17 mins in on the iPlayer
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00vjvhk/Spotlight_26_10_2010/
Glad to see you back blogging.
Ah, Jaded, hello. Good to hear from you. How are you, these transmutational, somewhat chimaerical days?
“I was never here. And don’t wish to be.”
Kilroy speaks?
You know craig I would expect at least a couple of links on you homepage, namely
links to the inquiries around the war and the 7/7 bombings..
regards
When the coalition came in the Joint Committee on Human Rights, to which Craig gave his evidence on torture, was disbanded.
The other night Gareth Peirce (author of a new book – Dispatches from the Dark Side) criticized the fact that the new inquiry into security matters is being held in secret.
Does anyone know what is the current Government’s stand on torture and if somebody has any evidence, to whom and where do they take it?
Iraq war a monumental error, strategic failure, moral catastrophe
Posted by Ellie on October 27, 2010, 3:17 am
Guardian editorial
The final reasons for going to war are being swept away:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/oct/24/editorial-iraq-atrocities-torture
‘There was no single reason why Britain and the US went to war in Iraq. The motives that inspired George W Bush and Tony Blair have been variously dissected, analysed and psychoanalysed. It is too early for history to have formed a settled view on the war, but the case that it was a monumental error gets ever more compelling.
… The terrible truth about British and American involvement in Iraq seems increasingly to be that it was not just a strategic failure, it was, for the occupying powers, a moral catastrophe.’
Chomsky (outlookindia.com/article.aspx?267553):
‘…you don’t say or even think that the invasion of Iraq is a criminal aggression of the kind for which people were hanged in Nuremberg, what you say was a strategic blunder was precisely what the Communist party said in the 1980s. They were under coercion. In the West, it is not coercion, it is just voluntary submission to an intellectual culture which remains overwhelmingly within narrow limits that restrict analysis, reporting, and condemnation of government action.’
a~
“The single question”
Posted by The Editors on October 27, 2010, 8:51 am, in reply to “Iraq war a monumental error, strategic failure, moral catastrophe”
Guardian editorial, twisting history:
“‘There was no single reason why Britain and the US went to war in Iraq.”
When British and American forces invaded Iraq, the declared aim was to disarm an alleged “serious and current threat” to the West from Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. This was the supposed “single question” posed by President Bush, Secretary of State Colin Powell and others, as Noam Chomsky often reminds us in his books, articles and talks. Perhaps nobody in the Guardian’s editorial offices is familiar with his work.
aa
Last night David Halpin was on a NY radio station with Tom Kiely for an hour (discounting the awful ads and intro musak) speaking on his fight for an inquest for Dr Kelly. MP3 6Mb
http://www.gcnlive.com/programs/innReport/archives.php October 26 2010
So Craig Murray is finally asking questions re-WikiLeaks!
Are they the right questions?
Maybe they were put off inviting bloggers to the awards by Andrew Marr’s reported comments re-how rancid they (bloggers) were in appearance with their cauliflower ears/noses etc. Although obviously the phrase “pot” and “kettle” comes to mind when one considers the physiognomy of the said Marr’s boat-race!
The question re-physical attractiveness of bloggers will no doubt occupy the BBC radio and TV debate programmes for some time to come……….
Maybe we could have a thread on this question and all send in our pics to try and disprove the Marr theory?
Maybe WikiLeaks will soon run a story on Obama White House personnel and their expenditure on cosmetic surgery during this time of austerity!
LMAO!
I was a member of AI, but not now, if that answers your question. I was never here, in the sense that I didn’t want to be here – I have a business to run – but kept being drawn back. It was like the 19th century freak show or Bedlam, you know you shouldn’t look but you can’t help it. Each of you regulars has his or part to play in the enterprise. The Bearded Lady, the old man muttering rubbish to himself, the pedant with pencils in his pocket lined up in descending order, the writer, like Micawber, with delusions of huge sales about to turn up, the pompous ass who knows everything about nothing, and so on. Each man plays his part.
Returning to Assange, I predict that he will get his comeuppance soon. Search the internet. There is plenty of history available that shows how he treats women.
Eddie, Stalin did kill 4 million of his own people, but he also had a nice moustache, so what do you reckon we should remember him for?
Julians relationship with women, good forbid if he would be homosexual, does in no way negate the facts and figures his organisation exposed.
Unless you are an apologist for the establishment that has landed us with this aimless, self perpetuating war on terror, you must see that it was right to expose these attrocities and our guilt in it.
Thats your choice to make.
It is clear that the establishment is wobblin’, fact is they cannot be assured of secrecy anymore and they do not like it, hence the focus on Julians personality, just as with Craig.
It will not work anymore, people will eventually find out. Julian is not even remotely as bad as they might want him to be.
Must not stop you from working, paying taxes is just about all we are required to do for this ‘rackett’.
Typically “somebody” omitted to mention that the main thrust of the convincing argument made by Gordon Duff re-WikiLeaks is that it is AN ISRAELI/MOSSAD PSY-OP.
Duff argues that much of the “leak” material sets out to falsely incriminate Iran for smuggling weapons into Iraq. He argues that Iraq is awash with weapons and there would be no need whatever to bring them in from Iran.
He also maintains that what the “leaks” don’t tell us re-
# the extant pre-war documents on the US military’s plans to fabricate evidence on WMD which were orchestrated by Israel’s friends inside the Pentagon
# the extent of Israel’s penetration of the DOD
# Mossad-PKK collusion in Erbil,Mosul and Turkey
# the post-war dispersal of Saddam’s conventional weapon stockpile
# blackmarket dealing and drug-running in Afghanistan;corruption and easily verifiable massive theft of oil in Iraq via the Kirkuk/Ceyhan pipeline.
# post-war US reorganization of the Baathists
# current inordinately high levels radiation in Fallujah
# Mossad-RAW aid to Afghan Taliban
is far more telling than what they actually do tell us about.
Aside from implicating Iran Duff notes how previous WikiLeaks have falsely smeared Pakistan for supplying the Taliban when in fact much of the aid to the group comes courtesy of the Mossad and RAW.
Thus Israel’s enemies are tarnished by WikiLeaks but her co-opted friends escape unscathed.
Evidently such is the limited state of awareness and PC mind-set hereabouts any reference to the aggressive geo-strategic agenda of Israel and its Mossad intelligence apparatus is taboo.
Why is Duff’s view termed “dissenting”?
when it is perfectly in line with that of most other competent intelligence commentators? Perhaps “somebody” felt he was being really naughty visiting vetstoday in the first place! Um….
By the way it’s a wonder Ubersturmfuhrer Murray hasn’t censored “somebody’s” vetstoday link given that Gordon Duff has run several articles questioning….sorry,I mean “denying” the Holocaust….Um…
There’s a piece up there now as we speak by Joe Cortina re-Auschwitz and Dachau. I won’t supply the link because the Ubersturmfuhrer will use it as an excuse to censor out my comments above.
Not that any of you guys would want to read naughty “denier” stuff anyway!
Heaven forfend!
Steelback, Tell us more about Mossads undermining of Turkey, something we do not already know.
Its not news that Iran has supported the Shia’s in Iran, what would you do when you are surrounded by resource lusting madmen whop spend some 400 million /annum to undermine your country and station nuclear weapons at your borders?
Fact is the Obersturmbandfuehrer just does not censore idiotic comments anymore, he realised that people frequenting his blog are perfectly able to distinguish between genuine comments and a wind up.
That said have a great day with your booty boys.
Ok I know it should be on a separate thread, but ya know what?
YOu should ask youself the question Craig
http://www.prisonplanet.com/physicist-steven-jones-911-explosive-evidence-experts-speak-out.html
“ingo”
What an insightful on-topic comment.
Like much of what passes as commentary here it’s barely intelligible. Paragraph two re-Iran simply doesn’t make sense and the stuff re-“booty boys” that’s the usual Zionist smear tactic to pretend that anyone who fingers Israel must be a Nazi.
The PC-left-gatekeepers here lap that stuff up as you shills have obviously worked out. Still the more acute thinkers here-and there are a few believe it or not-will have noticed that you are self-evidently a disinformationist whose business is Truth Suppression.
Now you guys spend so much time here that we’ve grown quite well accustomed to your wiles.
Check out dcdave’s 17 Techniques of Truth Suppression:
8# dismiss the charges as old news.
Yes,we noticed that the charge that Israel is using the PKK to undermine Turkey and Iraq is only one of the many others which you patently FAIL to address.
5# call truthseekers mean names-although I’m not sure “booty-boy” is quite mean enough! It could also be read as a Freudian slip in reference to your own sexual fantasies.
Didn’t Max Moseley fantasize re-“booty boys” or was that Oswald?
What a pity Craig doesn’t censor airheads like you. Like several of the other commenters here you’re all about WMD=weapons of MASS DISTRACTION.
The topic is WikiLeaks and the evidence is that it’s a MOSSAD FRONT.
When you’ve grown up a bit maybe you’ll come back and deal with the point.
Till then we both know you’re not at the races,pal!
P.S. Being paid well by Sunstein and the Mossad are you?
Get back to Tel Aviv or is it that cathouse in St Louis?
Bet Wayne Rooney’s on more money than you and he’s more intellectually capable than you as well.
LMAO!
“The topic is WikiLeaks and the evidence is that it’s a MOSSAD FRONT”.
Could you remind us what that evidence is?
Rooney is on shitloads than I have ever been on and he is welcome to it.
You accusing me, a German, of being a zionist troll, after infesting this blog with your mindless rubbish.
You and your ilk haven’t got a clue what happens/ed in Germany, not now and definately not then. You just carry on wearing your shiny boots, something you have in common with the IDF, they like em’ so much they wear them all the time, bit like those posers in the EDL and BNP.
Hmm come to think of it, you might just be the rightwing arm of those you pretend to be against, Mossad is good at pretence and smear. Shan’t talk to you two little Englanders anymore.