The Sad Truth About WikiLeaks

Readers of this blog may remember I turned against WikiLeaks as soon as I heard Julian Assange was refusing to even look for documents indicating pre-knowledge of 9/11. This certainly wasn’t because such documents don’t exist. In fact, many intelligence agencies sent warnings a major operation against the US was unfolding right before 9/11–just as some politicos may have been warned not to board airplanes that week. So why doesn’t WikiLeaks even want to look under those rocks? Fortunately, Daniel Estulin, who wrote the blockbuster book on Bilderberg, now has a book out titled, Deconstructing WikiLeaks. It’s a fast read and covers more than just the origins of WikiLeaks.

I was happy to see Estulin looked into Daniel Ellsberg as a prelude to  investigating Assange. See, I always thought Ellsberg was a spy and not a true anti-war activist. Real whistleblowers get ignored, while fake whistleblowers end up on the cover of Time magazine. Ellsberg was an assistant to Henry Kissinger, and associate of Edward Lansdale, two of the most obvious Octopus players who have been orchestrating events behind the scenes for the oligarchy. He was a lifelong CIA operative who supposedly had a sudden change of heart and turned against the war and began leaking Rand Corporation studies and reports, a data dump that became known as “The Pentagon Papers” even though these papers had little to do with the Pentagon, and a lot to do with whitewashing the failure of the CIA to provide proper intel about the war and leading the country into a disaster. My theory is the CIA began fomenting many operations against President Richard Nixon shortly after he returned from a surprise visit to China. There’s even a rumor Nixon returned some of the stolen gold from WWII without CIA approval in order to buy his detente move. Turning America against the war could have been part of a CIA master plan to remove Nixon.

Supposedly, Ellsberg transformed into an ardent anti-war activist partially through a chance encounter with Noam Chomsky, another possible Octopus operative who serves as a lightning rod for the left wing. I never trusted Chomsky after I heard his ridiculous views on the Kennedy assassination. I can’t believe educated people insist we don’t know the truth: the CIA fomented the deed with assistance provided by the Texas oil cabal (Hunts and Murchison) and the Chicago Outfit. These facts are known thanks to the Sicilian men-of-honor who spoke out (Roselli, Giancana) and the Cubans who worked for JM/Wave, the CIA’s largest base outside Langley. Few from inside the government have talked, and most of those that have or tried, ended up dead pretty quick.

In 1996, an architect named John Young created a free website for whistleblowers to release secret documents. The site is still around and has over 70,000 documents downloaded. The site is called “Cryptome” and I urge you to check it out. Ten years later, Assange announces his operation and even contacts Young to get him involved in the project. Two things bothered Young immediately: 1) Assange announced he needed to raise $5 million, an outrageous amount of money, way more than necessary to actually set-up and maintain the site, and 2) Assange was taking money from two well-known CIA fronts, Freedom House and the National Endowment for Democracy. Another thing that tipped Young off was Assange’s relentless rhetoric. Eventually, Young wrote a scathing critique of WikiLeaks claiming it was really a money making scam, which it is.

Another suspicious thing about both operations is the way Ellsberg and Assange usually ignore the 800 pound gorilla called illegal drugs, which have played such a vital role in our wars for the last sixty years. Since the illegal drug industry produces between a half a trillion to a trillion dollars per year in tax-free profits, these operations are vital to the stability of our banking system, which uses money-laundered cash from drugs to stay afloat. Yet you seldom find Ellsberg and Assange talking much about opium, even though capturing that monopoly was one of the primary reasons we went to war in both Vietnam and Afghanistan.

So if you’re still one of those people who believe Julian Assange is a “good guy,” please take a look at this just released expose. It might just open your mind to what’s really going on.

23 Replies to “The Sad Truth About WikiLeaks”

  1. “Yet you won’t find anything in the Pentagon Papers or WikiLeaks about opium, even though capturing that monopoly was one of the primary reasons we went to war in both Vietnam and Afghanistan.”

    Wikileaks cablegate search reveals 901 cables discussing opium

    Afghan war logs – 7 logs discussing drugs

    believe me, if people hold the evidence and have the balls to leak it, Wikileaks will publish it

    1. If any whistleblowers want to release documents, I strongly urge them to avoid WikiLeaks and post their documents at Cryptome. Read the book by Estulin, then tell me Assagne doesn’t secretly work for the CIA. The spooks are always trying to stay one step ahead of the population at large.

  2. Opium Stocks Remain High

    ¶5. (C/REL ISAF) Costa said that Afghanistan has 12,400 tons of opium stocks because it produces more than the world consumes. Costa believes the insurgency is withholding these stocks from the market and treating them like “savings accounts.” He said the stocks pose a serious threat as it could be used to finance the insurgency. Costa encouraged intelligence organizations to keep focus on the storage and movement of Afghanistan’s opium stocks.

  3. In the north, Costa said there was evidence within the last 12 to 18 months of new narcotics networks by the insurgency. Costa also mentioned that Afghanistan had a political drug cartel, but did not go into details……….Oh and by the way, I love you Steve, but 9-11 was an act of terrorism meant to be the spark of a global Islamic revolution, much as we are seeing unfold today. Sometimes a duck is just a duck.

    1. We agree it was an act of terrorism, but if you look closely at history, all acts of terrorism that led to war have been false flags. The only question that remains, is who is behind this act? And why weren’t any of the trails into Pakistan and Saudi Arabia ever even investigated? And why did a majority of the Commission conclude afterwards that the Pentagon had lied to them. And why is there so much evidence of forewarnings that were ignored? When we can answer these questions, we will know the truth. Meanwhile, rest assured WikiLeaks is a CIA-controlled op.

  4. As a reader who is interested in this debate, Steven would you respond directly to the links Miles Laughfergass has posted which do refer to drug trafficking taking place, because you did say in your original post that such information was missing from wikileaks. It is easier to form a clear opinion if all the facts are taking into account. Perhaps you should revise your initial blog post?

    1. Ok, so I edited it to reflect some drug info has been released via wikileaks, but that doesn’t negate all the other points. It is naive to believe intel doesn’t create false whistleblowers in order to install them as the gatekeepers. While the 9/11 op continues to unravel, and we know the three buildings could not have come down without explosives, and that some of the planes did some extraordinary flying way beyond the average pilot, yet wikileaks pretends 9/11 is not worth investigating? It can’t get any more suspicious than that. A site for whistle blowers that conducts a jihad on investigating the most important crime of our time?

      1. I must admit, I have not read Deconstructing Wikileaks. I did find some of Estulin’s documentation to be a bit shaky in terms of the average person finding available references to facts, when I read the book about the Bilderberg group. There was an interesting comment about Noam Chomsky collaborating with Kissinger to create the New Left in the US and promote socialism. I did see on wikipedia that under the Institute for Policy Studies where Chomsky is a member, in the criticism section it references a book written by an ex-KGB which states that the ISP is a KGB front. That wasn’t exactly what Estulin had written, so it’s interesting to wonder where these facts match up.

        As for wikileaks, I have had a somewhat strange experience with the website but I’d prefer not to mention it here.

        When you say that wikileaks has chosen not to investigate 9/11, do you mean that they have refused documentation presented by whistle blowers, or that they have not sought out potential holes in the official story?

        I have read some things about 9/11, and some things appear strange about the story, but I don’t believe I’ve encountered conclusive evidence about it yet. I suppose part of the tragedy is that official documents do not become declassified (if at all) until probably decades will have passed.

        Evidence for something like a New World Order seems a little more common, although a lot of it is still circumstantial. I don’t mean that atrocities have not been documented and revealed, because I think there are some pretty clear cut cases like MKULTRA:

        and CIA activities with south american contras:

        It seems like the issues at hand are somewhat obscured, maybe it will be difficult to ever truly get past that because the playing field is so uneven and convoluted by years of officialism and institutionalization of our practices and the advancement of technique.

        I might try to make at least a small argument for wikileaks, in that it does potentially open people’s minds to the hidden practices taking places around the world, and perhaps will lead them to deeper examination and a search to know more.

        Learning and trying to find out what is going on is important, but I’m afraid it might be a task that is endlessly muddled by misinformation and uncertainty. But it is important, definitely, to at least attempt to discern what is truly taking place in the world around us so we can adjust our behaviors and our beliefs accordingly.

        I think a lot of people know intuitively what is good, and in a sense not just for themselves but for all people. They at least probably understand the terms equality and fairness — though, as pointed out through the Socratic dialogues even these can be muddled by hidden values.

        But I think beyond that, the majority of people are just trying to get by and survive, and they don’t really understand or even contemplate how their efforts devoted to the workforce of large corporate interests really plays a huge role in shaping the world. And when they stick rigidly to their roles and ideologies, which can be subtle, like professionalism, and they miss an opportunity to express their humanity through being forced to adhere to the role their position dictates.

        There is a definite political and human issue at play here. I think people need to realize that just by looking away and focusing on something like a television screen or saying they aren’t political does not mean that they aren’t contributing and in force creating the system which we live in and really the system we all have to live in, because the system is just the reality of life and living that you see every waking minute whether you are inside or immediately when you exit your door.

        I will put it this way. People feel the responsibility to survive, so they take their job and the follow the prescriptions of their work, because it’s the policy and it’s what they’re told to do. We have to remember this was the same situation in for example Nazi Germany or Fascist Italy, if you disobeyed the state you were an undesirable. The members of the Stasi got their orders and they were expected to follow them. I’m not saying that everyone is a soldier today, or a cop in riot gear, but they do exist even today. And these are normal people who grew up in average towns in every country. And there are also people who run corporations like McDonalds, and work all along the ranks. It is difficult to see the destruction that results from business, and it’s probably more deeply defended because there are so many jobs on the line, in effect so many lives.

        Maybe a lot of people will not see it the way I do, but I personally feel like the power of corporations is becoming incredibly developed and their influence on the way of life all over the planet has made the world a less peaceful place, and the joys and privileges we experience feel empty and destructive to me. Like going out for a good time to get a bite to eat only to know you are eating something terribly unhealthy that may even cause you to develop cancer, since it seems like just about everything these days is cancer causing.

        I also feel like there are byproducts of this system, like the fact that people are trained for work, rather than educated to develop your individual skills and expression. I think this current system is becoming more and more to the benefit to large corporations that only wish to grow and swallow the population as part of the work force and human resources. It’s becoming where higher education is just a racket, people are barred from the workforce without receiving a degree which sinks them into debt and makes them further dependent on the work that is offered to them.

        I could go on and on, but mainly what I would like to say is that if there are going to be any changes it shouldn’t even be sought for from professional institutions, but from individuals themselves. The same way it did in the renaissance where a revolution in the consciousness of individuals led to a revolutions of the structures created by those people.

        It feels like a sad state for education these days, and this is probably the first thing individuals should take back for themselves.

  5. Hi Steven.

    I know this is a pretty old post but I found your blog through a curious google of the phrase “the disinfo crowd”. In that article you talked about how the disinfo crowd is always claiming everything to be a false flag–a boy-who-cried-wolf scenario of sorts. Many of these trolls purport to subscribe to Alex Jones’ notions of 9/11 and the NWO, but the most blatant ones claim things about holographic planes during 9/11, or reptillian shape-shifters–an attempt to make the truth movement look foolish.

    Alex Jones claims Wikileaks is a CIA operation, and John Young agreed with him in their interview on the matter. I don’t think Young is in on anything–I think he’s a bit bitter that a newer entity has gained the limelight doing what he started a decade ago. Jones’ outlet PrisonPlanet also regularly cites wikileaks documents, which is quite hypocritical if they truly think it’s a sham.

    I believe your sentiments are genuine, but honestly, if you look to the comments sections of various MSM articles smearing assange as well as on every other liberal news site imaginable (dailykos, slashdot) and even conservative ones (DailyPaul). The same disinfo crowd that smeared Wikileaks / Assange is now smearing Greenwald and Snowden and Scahill and even Amy Goodman. What is their usual stated reasoning? That the above don’t publicly acknowledge 9/11 as a false flag. Sound pretty familiar?

    This leaked document really says it all–

    “Efforts by some domestic and foreign personnel and organizations to discredit the Web site include allegations that it wittingly allows the posting of uncorroborated information, serves as an instrument of propaganda, and is a front organization of the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).”

    I’ve done a lot of research on this matter I haven’t shared with a couple journalists if you’d like to see it.. I think it’s pretty telling (and well sourced).

    I look forward to your response.

    1. “I’m constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud.” Julian Assagne.
      This is not the statement of a real, honest researcher, but is something a spook would say to throw people off the track. If Wikileaks was real, getting to the bottom of 9/11 would have been foremost on their agenda.

      1. So? How can you deny the damage his work has done to the US and Israel’s global reputation (deservedly so)? You insist on this because they target incipient matters (like the recently-leaked TPP material), rather than a past event?

        Besides, in your article you argued John Young’s viewpoint that he’s just in it for money–quite a bit different than being a spook. Could you please respond to the rest of what I submitted?

        1. I see very little “damage” and surely you understand how spooks play their games? They always set up a controlled opposition so it doesn’t go too far or get too close to the real truth. Communism, for example, was always stuffed with spooks from day one.

  6. “They always set up a controlled opposition so it doesn’t go too far or get too close to the real truth”

    You realize this makes no sense given every effort by the MSM and paid trolls to keep people from visiting the site? Be it the Snowden leaks or Wikileaks, the most common shill phrase is “this is nothing new”. If wikileaks was meant to be a distraction, no media tried to usher attention towards it–the goal was to get it out of the limelight as soon as possible.

    If wikileaks is a ruse, why did NSA go out of its way to spy on its viewership?

    If this was a planned job, why isn’t Israel pissed off? Cables revealed how Israel planned to keep Gaza in a constant state of near-humanitarian crisis, and how toll keepers were trying to charge trucks bearing food / water thousands of dollars to enter.

    Why did the US government intervene and force Paypal to stop processing their payments if the operation was being run by the US government? Wouldn’t the donations just be free money for the feds, then?

    Why did Wikileaks leak the TPP drafts?

    If it’s a fake org, why did the US Chamber of Commerce hire Hunton Williams on behalf of Bank of America to target Wikileaks and its followers, as well as other activists?

    How can you explain any of the HBGary Federal / Operation Themis scandal, or Aaron Barr’s ruination, if the whole thing was orchestrated?

    I could go on and on. You placed so much attention to detail elsewhere, but your explanations on the matter of wikileaks create more questions than they answer. You sound like you’re starting with the answer and finding things to validate it.

  7. hi, would you say “anonymous” is controlled op to? is there anyone in public that isnt controlled op? that is as popular as assange, snowden etc?

    1. How difficult do you think it is for intel to penetrate any scene? They have unlimited resources, what have you got? I can’t give you a scorecard, but I do think anyone who ends up on the cover of Time magazine is an op. It’s very hard to penetrate any media these days without assistance from somewhere.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.