SOME COMMENTS ON THE WIKILEAKS PUBLICATION ON IRAQ
We’ve asked our respondents to consider that some gossip has been raised about the WikiLeaks planning to open some files about Russia.
Alan Hart, the British author and researcher, who had been highly and internally involved in Middle East politics for many years:
— The Wikileaks on Iraq are the raw material of true and honest history — i. e. not the usual first draft of untrue and dishonest history as written by the winners or in the case of Iraq those who hoped, naively, that they would be the winners. The conclusion invited is that America and its British allies were complicit in war crimes. So what’s new?
Debbie Menon, an independent writer based in Dubai, whose main focus are the US- Mid- East Conflicts (provides Mycatbirdseat.com site):
— Actually I am not up to speed with the Wikileaks story, I am swamped with work, I have been able to skim through the pro and anti — Wikileaks commentaries. I think it should be ignored rather than given too much attention.
Gordon Duff, the Veteranstoday.com columnist:
— When I write "Wikileaks is Israel" this is not conjecture. When "Wikileaks" are reported in a narrow manner, it isn’t because of manipulation by the press, its because the leaks themselves are narrow. In fact, Wikileak material is always carefully selected and edited for a purpose and the newspaper reporting is staged, not to exploit specific excerpts but rather to highlight the "meat" of what Wikileaks puts inside what we call "chickenfeed." (an intelligence term for useless information) Wikileaks with their masses of data, carefully and systematically sifted before release to protect Israel, the drug barons they launder money for and to maximize the impact of raw conjecture found among millions of pages of material they accessed using PROMIS software...
To get the material used, Wikileaks has to have the full cooperation of dozens of high level personnel at the Department of Defense. As the leadership there, other than Secretary Gates, are mostly Israeli citizens, it isn’t hard to see their methodologies. Anyone taking this material seriously must reassess their other beliefs as well.
Eugene Ivanov, an American journalist, publishing in Russia Beyond the Headlines and providing TheIvanovReport’s blog:
— I don’t pay much attention to WikiLeaks: what they publish is interesting but only for the experts who "collect" facts. In general, what they say — has been known for years. Didn’t you know before that the American soldiers in Iraq were killing innocent civilians? That’s it... However, if WikiLeaks publishes something about Russia, I may have some comments...
Oleg Valezky, the former Russian and Yugoslavian officer, present independent writer and military researcher:
— I think this is a kind of subversion. Somebody seeks for the US army weakening and destabilization in Iraq, and makes that rather successfully. Just look at the consequences of media-covering. It has been followed by tensions between Sunni and Shiite political parties so the Iraqi president Maliki now hardly can form the government what was demanded by Americans. The chances of "Al-Qaeda" are raising and so the dependence of Iraqi Shiites upon Iran. I think that the West is a multipolar structure and this story shows us the operation of some Western power-centers against other ones. You can see the American Army like a big corporation and with undergoing destabilization in Iraq it fells in uncomfortable situation. Cities were passed under the control of local police which is almost the Shiites one. And the Sunni’s army "The Sons of Iraq" has been refused by Shiites to be incorporated in new Iraqi army and police forces while Sunnis themselves refused to join the national government. So the American military in the country become terribly dependant upon Shiites. In such situation probable Israeli air-strikes on Iran would destabilize Iraqi Shiites and problems for the US military will follow — they may become hostages on their own bases.
Alexey "Sciff", one of the foreign press Russian observers (Inoforum.ru):
— As for me I’d better think that Wikileaks is a kind of PsyOp instrument using by somebody from the Western elite. I am personally against such publishing like a phenomena — that is not proper to make closed information public. At least when we are talking about the information which may hurt people working for state. And also I think that WikiLeaks is like to be the source for propaganda more than for what they "officially" aim. Look: they have pushed some really nothing new information and now, using the image of "truth seekers", are going to blacken those whom they don’t like. I’m saying "they" meaning "their masters". They (or Assange personally) have masters, that is out of doubt for me. Making hot from bullshit Wikileaks seems to be going to push forward some private interests against the nations.
George Salzman, an independent American author and thinker, who lives in Oaxaca, Mexico:
— I think the most important fact to emphasize is that Wikileaks is breaking the secrecy that almost all governments and ruling-class organizations want to maintain. The person in the world who most deserves a "Peace Prize" is of course Julian Assange. But the Norwegian Parliament will choose Noble Committee members who will never recognize that fact. They will look for another Kissinger or Obama.
Iceland has moved to protect Wikileaks. In Sweden the small Piratpartiet had hoped to get 4% of the votes for the Parliament on 19 September 2010. According to Rick Falkvinge of the Pirat-party, that would have given the Pirat-party 14 deputies. I think they failed to elect anyone. Poor economic conditions led to a victory for right-wing forces. My information is from the Mexican weekly, El Processo, which is on line at http://proceso.com.mx/rv/modHome/detalleExclusiva/82990, and from a Google search for the election results.
I think there is a great deal of popular sympathy for Assange’s work, especially among younger people. They do not have much political power. But I believe that is gradually changing.
It’s not a surprise that the U. S. military has been barbaric, but I think most Americans are not much interested. Probably, I guess, Russian military has also acted terribly, and most Russians are not very concerned.
Israel Shamir, the independent writer from Israel, former Soviet dissident:
— I think Julian Assange is a kind of Captain Nemo. We probably should invite him in Russia. There is a huge amount of people at the West who don’t like the imperial American regime and the total hegemony of financials and Pentagon. We have to connect them with Russian people and if Assange visits Russia it would be one of the first steps.
Alexandre Latsa, the independent French journalist and observer (http://alexandrelatsa.blogspot.com):
— Wikileaks seems to gradually reveal its true nature and its real targets. First of all find a quasi-humanitarian justification to the extension of the global conflict in Central Asia, through its neighbor Pakistan. This i think mainly to hide the military and political failure of the ongoing operation.
In fact, the confidential documents published do not present so much interest. The Reseau Voltaire for example, already published in 2005 a series of articles entitled «January in Iraq» to show that for those who know how to search on the net, it was «possible» to already find almost everything, whether the number of civilians killed (of course undervalued), the existence of burs (not surprising) or the role of Pakistan. Worst, the soldier Manning who provided some confidential documents to Wikileaks, now sits in prison, and did not even have any reference to its support site on the Wikileaks main page.
But regardless of all of that, the buzz is there though, but then why? Perhaps, as recently announced by the spokesman Wikileaks Kristinn Hrafnsson in an interview with the Russian newspaper Kommersant, because the year 2011 sees a lot of revelations about Russia and China. Here we are.
Finally everything is very consistent when we know that the site was founded in 2007 by dissidents, whose goal was to give audiences to information-revelations concerning the oppressive regimes in Asia, the former Soviet bloc and the Middle East. A very «Soros-like» Rhetoric, with a vague parfume of CIA.