WikiLeaks and The Sound of Silence

The scope and scale of WikiLeaks is a marvel to behold. Some praise it as the ultimate form of democracy. Others as the epitome of the most sacred of liberty’s principles: the right to know.

Yet the real story here is not what’s revealed but what’s withheld. The marvel is not what we now know but what is already known that is left unsaid. And what’s given an interpretive spin by those newspapers granted priority access.

The facts suggest that WikiLeaks is less about the right to know than the right to deceive.

Take, for example, the release of diplomatic cables on the August 2008 war between Georgia and Russia and the interpretative gloss given by The New York Times.

Ashkenazi General David Kezerashvili returned to Georgia from Tel Aviv to lead an assault on separatists in South Ossetia with the support of Israeli arms and Israeli training. That crisis reignited Cold War tensions between the U.S. and Russia.

Then as now, it appeared there was a possibility of resolving Israel’s six-decade occupation of Palestine. At that time, The Quartet was coordinating the peace-making efforts of Russia and the U.S. along with the European Union and the United Nations.

Tel Aviv was not pleased.

Then as now, efforts to broker a peace were thwarted by creating a crisis within a coalition of those willing to invest their geopolitical capital to end a conflict that has long served its Zionist purpose as a source of other conflicts.

The resulting rift between the U.S. and Russia ensured some well-timed entropy and reduced the possibility of ending a decades-long occupation. Then as now, that occupation must end to bring peace to the region.

The Sound of Silence

Without that broader context, it’s not possible to isolate the motivation for that well-timed war. Yet the cables released by WikiLeaks say nothing about that. Nor does The New York Times.

Nor do the cables mention Tel Aviv’s interest in a pipeline across Georgia meant to move Caspian oil through Turkey and on to Eurasia, using Israel as a fee-collecting intermediary.

As with so much that is left “un-leaked,” the silence is telling.

What is leaked is accurately reported: “Official Georgian versions of events were passed to Washington largely unchallenged.” Yet The Times says nothing about the undisclosed bias motivating that behavior. That silence is deceptive.

Instead Times reporter, C.J. Chivers, notes only that the bombardments by Georgia of South Ossetia “plunged Georgia into war, pitting the West against Russia in a standoff over both Russian military actions and the behavior of a small nation that the United States had helped arm and train.”

Now as then, there’s no mention in the paper of record of the role played by an Ashkenazi general, the Israeli training of Georgian troops or the arms and equipment that Israel provided.

Tel Aviv must be pleased.

The Greatest Threat to Peace

The Times notes “the reliance on one-sided information” as Georgian President Saakashvili told the U.S. Ambassador “the Russians are out to take over Georgia and install a new regime.”

After the Russian Army dealt the Israeli-trained Georgians a quick defeat, President George W. Bush, as the U.S. economy was sliding into a recession, announced a $1 billion aid package to help Georgia rebuild. Rest assured those funds were borrowed.

In the netherworld where Colonial Zionists excel in catalyzing well-timed crises and generating interest-bearing debt, WikiLeaks has already achieved iconic status. Much as The Quartet faded into memory, the peace talks that showed promise just last week have been displaced by talk of yet another crisis — with Iran.

For those skilled at gaining traction for a storyline and then advancing a narrative, WikiLeaks is akin to a script doctor. With The Clash of Civilizations losing traction, this latest crisis helped put it back on track.

Only time will tell if this traction suffices to take the “coalition of the willing” from Iraq and Afghanistan into Iran. Occasionally those played for the fool turn their attention to the deceiver. An October 2003 poll of 7,500 respondents in the European Union found that Israel was considered the greatest threat to world peace.

The U.S. military is not without considerable knowledge confirming the common source of the fixed intelligence that induced America to invade Iraq.

With the Israel lobby seeking to induce the U.S. into Iran, events may take an unprecedented turn. A coalition of the willing might well be persuaded to secure Palestine along its 1967 borders with troops deployed to protect Jerusalem as a site of significance to three major faith traditions.

Should the U.S. Commander-in-Chief decide to earn his Nobel peace prize, he may order U.S. troops to secure the only known nuclear arsenal in the Middle East.

Tel Aviv will not be pleased.

Jeff Gates is author of Guilt By Association, Democracy at Risk, and The Ownership Solution. Read other articles by Jeff, or visit Jeff's website.

17 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. MichaelKenny said on December 4th, 2010 at 7:38am #

    This is Mr Gates’ second attempt to hype Wikileaks into a “victory” for Israel! And there’s no talk of any “crisis” with Iran in European media. That Israel always manufactures a pretext to torpedo peace talks is hardly news. It is precisely because the world has spotted that that Israel is in such deep trouble. The presence of Israeli extremists in Georgia was well known in Europe at the time of the Ossetia war and was probably the reason for European reluctance to allow NATO to get involved or to let Georgia into NATO. Thus, every time the Israel Lobby uses its media clout to bamboozle Americans, it shoots itself in the foot in Europe because European leaders see both the reality and the American cover-up. Thus, trying to hype Wikileaks into a pretext to get European countries, at least, to make war on Iran is totally unreal. As, indeed, is the idea of European troops “securing Palestine”, another long-standing Israeli pipedream.

  2. bozh said on December 4th, 2010 at 8:24am #

    if it is true that israelis were involved in war against s. ossetia, then it supports my guess that israel is being used by nato or nato-u.s.
    cia must have know about it also. thus, u.s also. cld this be likened onto bay of pigs invasion by fascist cubans?

    but why so little force was used against ossetia-russia and against cuba? tnx

  3. Deadbeat said on December 4th, 2010 at 12:50pm #

    Israel is not being “used” by NATO or the U.S. Israel is perusing its own policies and agenda but has a NETWORK with the DIASPORA that protect it.

  4. bozh said on December 4th, 2010 at 2:28pm #

    israel is econo-diplo-militarily a thousand times weaker than just u.s. so, go figure who controls whom.
    i’d rather be friend of u.s than of israel. i also suggest that ‘jews’ in america are as american as palin or gingrich.
    so, conclude whatever ur heart desires! tnx

  5. shabnam said on December 4th, 2010 at 2:29pm #

    {Yet the real story here is not what’s revealed but what’s withheld. The marvel is not what we now know but what is already known that is left unsaid.}

    Good Mr. Gates. I agree with your assessment.
    Many people taking the ‘leaked’ documents seriously including Philip Weiss who writes:

    {I love the rage against Julian Assange. It shows how effective the Wikileaks drop has been. Schumer: “This man has put his own ego above the safety of millions of innocents… He should be extradited, tried for espionage, and given the most severe penalty possible.”
    Liberal Jamie Rubin formerly of the State Department was as angry as Schumer on Chris Matthews the other night, and Matthews seems to want Assange arrested. I’m told Richard Cohen was completely dismissive today.}

    I don’t know why is Weiss misleading the public, because I watch Jamie Rubin on Charlie show and he during the entire program focused on ‘nuclear Iran’ and used the same line as the Arab tyrants used according to ‘leaked’ documents by Wikileaks: ATTACK IRAN NOW, OR LIVE WITH NUCLEAR IRAN.
    Jamie Rubin was not angry, in fact, was pleased with the ‘leaked’ cables since he interpreted as documents establish this fact that WHAT US SAYS IN PRIVATE, IS THE SAME AS IN PUBLIC, to belittle the Arab puppets who say one thing in private and another thing in public, not to anger the Arab population. And on the other hand, using the Arab puppets’ words in the ‘leaked’ information to justify Israel push for war against Iran.
    He was pleased with the ‘leaked’ cables to show that Israel’s ‘fear’ from the IMAGINARY Iranian bomb is shared with Arab puppets in the region.

    The Judeofascists know that majority of people hold the Jewish lobby and Israel responsible for Iraq war. This time they are trying to bring other stooges into the picture so the closet Zionists can claim Israel is not ‘alone’, instead of using imaginary Oil Companies to justify their claim.
    Goldberg has already started to use the ‘leaked’ documents to attack the “lobby’s role in encouraging a war with Iran.”
    Stephen Walt writes:

    { Goldberg is also wrong when he says the latest WikiLeaks revelations discredit our arguments about the lobby’s role in encouraging a war with Iran. We argued that if the United States were foolish enough to start a war against Iran, it would be largely due to the influence of Israel and especially the lobby. Both Israel and its hard line supporters here in the United States have been relentless in their efforts to push the United States to confront Iran, and to keep the military option at the ready. There is nothing in WikiLeaks that changes that assessment.}
    He continues:

    {Yes, there has also been pressure from some Arab leaders, such as the king of Saudi Arabia, to use force against Iran. There are also prominent voices in the Arab world warning that this step would be disastrous. But the key point is that these Arab leaders have much less influence on the United States than Israel does.}

    The judeofascists and their supporters cannot fool anyone except themselves if they think through organized PROPAGANDA can hide their evil intend and empire.
    Thank you Mr. Gates.

  6. Deadbeat said on December 4th, 2010 at 3:41pm #

    israel is econo-diplo-militarily a thousand times weaker than just u.s. so, go figure who controls whom.

    That’s the Chomskyite canard. U.S. policy operates on money and power and the pro-Israel diaspora has a disproportion of both. The Chomskyite ruse gives the impression that the amount of power and influence correlates to the size of population. They do not.

  7. Deadbeat said on December 4th, 2010 at 4:08pm #

    The other assumption you are making bozh is that the policy is “U.S.” policy. You’ll have to define just what is “U.S.” policy. The pseudo-Left’s (Chomskyites) were telling us that it was “War for Oil” yet we know that the War on Iraq and eventually Iran will further Zionist goals. Clearly the War on Iraq has weaken the “U.S.” interests as Latin America further slips away.

    This isn’t about “Israel”. That is only the nation-state manifestation of Zionism. It is Zionism as a GLOBAL movement not isolated and limited to Israel but the idea of Israel that provides cohesion for the diaspora.

    You ought to know this bozh. I believe you do live in Canada which has now become a major beachhead for confronting Zionism.

  8. bozh said on December 4th, 2010 at 4:25pm #

    how many hard rock mines does israel have? none, i think. thus, to obtain, say, tanks, it must buy them or get the metals from smwhere. it has no oil, either. but it get’s it.
    ok, diaspora helps israelis financially. but why wld u.k, u.s, france allow $ bns of their money to be spent on arms for a tiny country and then go and bail out banks, being short of money?

    by now israel bought or had received probably about 200-300bns in aid and armaments. in do not know any country who’d give away that kind of money even if ‘jews’ wrested control of its governance.
    if that wld be the case, blood wld flow! no land wld tolerate any small group of people to take over the land.

    the problem appears to be that most americans are defending america; while using ‘jews’ as scapegoat!
    one can be sure of that because all this ‘jew’ blamers haven’t even established a political party in order to be able to inform the pop that the ‘jews’ have taken over u.s.
    i wld be standing on street corner and shouting that!
    i can also point out demonization i go thru when i point out what i have just written.
    as for chomsky, i disagree with him quite strongly on most issues. tnx

  9. shabnam said on December 4th, 2010 at 4:26pm #

    The zionists in Canada have already started to turn Canada into an ‘Evil empire’ in the near future after US demise.


  10. bozh said on December 4th, 2010 at 4:38pm #

    deadbeat, nato-us-israel or nato, u.s, and israel have egzact same foreign policy.
    the problem arises when people call theft of land [with murder in mind], zionism or imperialism.
    and in case of u.s, and israel, not only egzactly same foreign policy, but also domestic: striving for permamenence of a classful society in its ideal state; i.e., total mastership of supremacists over lower classes.
    marx, lenin may have expected smthing like that. tnx

  11. liz burbank said on December 4th, 2010 at 5:30pm #

    The ‘marvel to behold’ is an incestuous ‘left community’ busting its butt to sever US to make #1 bad guy ‘israel’ – an indispensable u.s. proxy which plays fall-guy as well as attack-dog for US whose global domination agenda synchs with ‘eretz israel’.
    Deadbeat liberal-imperialist-zionists aside, get real: the US IS ZIONIST. Modern history proves zionism & imperialism are inseparable. Trying to
    make ‘israel’ #1 Palestinian & world enemy serve the US — without which the state terrorist partner/surrogate could not exist.
    Fortunately uch propaganda does not fool most of the world which knows its main enemy because reality trumps neoliberal left rhetoric.
    liz burbank

  12. Deadbeat said on December 4th, 2010 at 9:22pm #

    bozh writes …

    in case of u.s, and israel, not only egzactly same foreign policy, but also domestic: striving for permamenence of a classful society in its ideal state; i.e., total mastership of supremacists over lower classes.

    That would seem to be the case and while Zionism and Capitalism have areas of overlap Zionism operates on different set of criteria than Capitalism. I don’t recall Marx or Lenin addressing Zionism. If you have some links that would help.

    What makes Zionism different than Capitalism is that it a fundamentally racist ideology and uses identity to blur class. So that ALL Jews essentially have something to “gain”. Think of White Supremacy bozh and you’ll get the idea.

    The U.S. was successful in Capitalism because they were able to convince citizens that they too had something to gain. But that before the 1970’s when U.S. Capitalists decided to decouple raising incomes from productivity.

    Also bozh Zionism’s influence of the U.S. political economy is a rather recent development help along by denials and excuses, especially by the pseudo-Left, not too much different from some of the arguments you are making herein.

  13. Deadbeat said on December 4th, 2010 at 9:25pm #

    Thanks Shabnam. That is exactly the link I had in mind when I brought up Canada.

    Here’s the embedded link …

    Fault Lines – Canada-Israel: The other special relationship

  14. liz burbank said on December 4th, 2010 at 11:08pm #

    capitalism: it’s the political-economic system stupid
    zionism: an imperialist [e.g. capitalism gone global] project

  15. hayate said on December 4th, 2010 at 11:32pm #

    When I see something written as “it’s the “x”, stupid” or “hello, what of “x” doncha unnerstand”, I just assume it’s a zionist Jewish hasbarat writing those annoying cliches.

  16. mary said on December 5th, 2010 at 2:11am #

    Off topic, but as this concerns the Canadian press and a Canadian mining company, Blackfire Explorations, and because you have been discussing Canada, I thought I would sneak it in.

    The Edmonton Journal have refused to publish an obituary to a mining activist. This is the exchange with them.


    A previous one with the Calgary Herald is here.


  17. mary said on December 5th, 2010 at 2:18am #

    I found this discussion on the death of the activist. .