WikiLeaks: What, Really, Is the Problem?

Some commentators, bloggers and other writers, were quick to jump to the conclusion that the avalanche of documents being released by WikiLeaks is part and parcel of an Israeli/Mossad deception strategy. One implication being that WikiLeaks’ founder, Julian Assange is, knowingly or not, manipulated by Zionism.

On the basis of the first two or three days of the Wikileaked revelations as reported by the mainstream media, in America especially, there most definitely was a case for saying that the agenda best served by the leaked diplomatic cables was that of the Zionist state of Israel, its lobby in America and its many stooges in Congress. The essence of the case was in the message that Iran is the biggest single threat to the peace of the region and the world not only because the Israelis say so but also because Arab leaders agree with them.

In my last post I quoted Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Carter’s National Security Advisor, as saying he thought it was possible that Wikileaks was being fed and manipulated by intelligence services. And I stated my own belief of the moment that the question of whether or not this is so was worthy of investigation.

But as the flow of leaked cables increases, and with time for reflection, I no longer believe that such an investigation is necessary.

The problem is not the manipulation of WikiLeaks by any foreign intelligence service but, in effect, the manipulation by key players in the mainstream media, in America especially, of the material WikiLeaks is providing.

And here’s just one example to make the point.

When it learned from Wikileaked diplomatic cables that Arab leaders were at one with Israeli leaders in wanting the U.S. to attack Iran, journalism with integrity would have asked something like the following question. “Is Iran really the threat to the region and the world it is alleged to be by Israeli and Arab leaders?”

If that question had been asked, the honest answer would have been “No, of course it isn’t!”

As I and others have pointed out a number of times, even a nuclear-armed Iran would not pose a threat to Israel’s existence or that of the states of the impotent and repressive Arab regimes which are more or less content to do the bidding of America-and-Zionism. To really believe otherwise (as opposed to not really believing but saying so for propaganda purposes) is to assume that a nuclear-armed Iran would at some point launch a first strike. That would never happen because Iran would be inviting its own complete destruction.

If Iran does end up with a nuclear bomb or several, it will be for the purpose of deterrence only. (As I said in my last post, if I was an Iranian, even one who hated the regime of the mullahs, I would feel more secure in the face of Israeli and American threats if my country did possess a nuclear bomb for deterrence).

Though much of it was confirmatory for informed journalists and politicians, the Wikileaked information is new but the real problem is not. It is (generally speaking) the mainstream media’s lack of integrity, in America especially; a lack of integrity which, in its reporting of the conflict in and over Palestine that became Israel, manifests itself in one of two ways – in some cases by knowingly peddling Zionist propaganda, in other cases by self-censoring the truth about Israel’s crimes out of fear of offending Zionism too much or at all.

In my view Assange has damaged his own cause by releasing details of facilities around the world which U.S. authorities regard as being vital to America’s national security. By doing so he has given his enemies in governments everywhere what they did not previously have – a fig leaf of justification for their efforts to silence him.

If they succeed, the threat to what passes for democracy in the Western world, in America especially, will be even greater than it currently is.

Alan Hart has been engaged with events in the Middle East and globally as a researcher, author, and a correspondent for ITN and the BBC. Read other articles by Alan, or visit Alan's website.

3 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. MichaelKenny said on December 7th, 2010 at 8:32am #

    Manipulation is indeed the world. I think Wikileaks caught the Israelis red-handed in the process of fabricating false intelligence precisely with a view to justifying an attack on Iran. Since the thing has gone off at half cock, Israel’s supporters in the media and eleswhere are trying to make the best of a bad situation by claiming that the intelligence is true and cherrypicking quotes from it. I don’t think, though, that Assange has done himself any damage. He has now become a “cause célèbre” and whatever is done to him will have to be done in the full glare of publicity. Every time he appears in court, he will remind people of the leaked documents. As a means of hushing things up, charging him with rape was about as ham-fisted as it gets! Thanks to Mary’s post, I see he has surrendered himself in London and will no doubt be extradited to Sweden. He’s a lot safer in Sweden than in the UK (Blair’s awful extradition treaty with the US!). I would guess that, so far, at least, Assange has got exactly what he wanted.

  2. bozh said on December 7th, 2010 at 11:09am #

    i do not see major difference between ‘jewish’ or jordanian supremacists. both deceive, oppress, exploit own people or use them as meat for their wars.

    the observation is valid for all societies which tout their languages, culture, lore, ‘values’, cults, etc., as the best in the world.

    and they are now uniting with greater alacrity than ever before. obviously, they expect ever greater clamor for more equality.
    supremacist sees that both the progress and regress is peaking or may have already peaked; both must be reduced.
    but plutocratic wealth and power must stat the same or even augment.

    actually, it is myth that there was progress and regress. it is better to say progress-regress always existed and always will.
    caveat about “always will”? as long as there is supremacism, it will always be there.
    thus, we shld be concerned about regressprogress staying at zero. american dream shld be viewed as american dreamnightmare. one cannot exist w.o. the other. tnx

    ok, this time i took more than ten words to say ‘everything’. my silly small brain just took over . if it wasn’t for my small head calling me for love making i’d
    be going on and on even tho i do not get paid per word– senseful or not! tnx for ur fascist ear.

  3. hayate said on December 7th, 2010 at 11:39am #

    Hart appears to be losing the plot here:

    “When it learned from Wikileaked diplomatic cables that Arab leaders were at one with Israeli leaders in wanting the U.S. to attack Iran, journalism with integrity would have asked something like the following question. “Is Iran really the threat to the region and the world it is alleged to be by Israeli and Arab leaders?”

    No, the question that should have been asked was are what the Jewish run, zionist corporate media saying about the content of the released material accurate, or is what they say more of their typical zionist propaganda? Taking what the zionist media says as factual and then trying to counter it with impotent platitudes like: “Is Iran really the threat to the region and the world it is alleged to be by Israeli and Arab leaders?” does nothing but play into ziofascist hands and gives them total control over the debate. What you do is point out they are lying and then kick them in the teeth.

    And Hart definitely lost the plot here:

    “In my view Assange has damaged his own cause by releasing details of facilities around the world which U.S. authorities regard as being vital to America’s national security. By doing so he has given his enemies in governments everywhere what they did not previously have – a fig leaf of justification for their efforts to silence him.”

    In other words, don’t do anything the americans don’t want you to and you’ll be fine. Ineffective, useless, just another decoration, but you’ll be fine. And everything will continue as before without any public knowledge of it or desire to interfere.

    After a previous article by Petersen about Hart and him seeming to go soft, I posted a comment essentially giving Hart a benefit of the doubt. I was definitely in error about that.