By charles the moderator
While the identity(ies) of the source(s) of the Climategate files has never been identified, long time readers of WUWT and Climate Audit are quite familiar with the Climategate timeline as it unfolded here, there, and throughout the blogosphere.
We have open sourced the history and it was written up by the players.
We have the original notice of the emails, which went live on 11/19/2009
We have The Mosher Timeline. We have The CTM story. Both of which began on 11/17/2009
Now, basking in the celebrity spotlight from the various leaks of diplomatic communications, Julian Assange and wikileaks has attempted to take credit for things that they had little to do with. In this Video, Mr. Assange takes full credit for the release of “over ten years’ worth of emails.
Wikileaks role in the release of the Climategate files is, to say the least, exaggerated.
Over on Climate Audit, Steve McIntyre recounts:
Assange falsely claimed that the Climategate emails were broken by WikiLeaks. This is obviously untrue as CA readers know. I can date WikiLeaks’ entry by contemporary comments. The first notice of the emails at WikiLeaks was 2009/11/21 at 2.50 AM Eastern (12:50 AM blog time). The emails had been downloaded by many people (including me) from a Russian server on Nov 19 and had been downloaded by WUWT moderators on Nov 17. A contemporary comment in a CA thread says that WikiLeaks was down and refers people to megauploads. WikiLeaks has not even been a major reference for Climategate – that belongs to eastangliaemails.com (originally anelegantchaos.org) which was up on Nov 20 and provided a searchable database.
After an extensive Google search, I can find the first mention of wikileaks involvement on the web about 19 minutes earlier than Steve McIntyre found.
Paul Z. says:November 20, 2009 at 11:39 pm
The emails are on wikileaks.org now:
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_emails,_data,_models,_1996-2009
I think it is safe to assume that since we were all glued to our screens for those couple days that it is unlikely the files were available from wikileaks for over an hour before the comment above was placed.
Mr. Assange’s indiscretion is not going unnoticed though. He has been called on this story by some of the UK press.
Mr Assange has lied about aspects of his work. At a public meeting in London, he falsely claimed that the ‘Climategate’ emails from the University of East Anglia were first published by WikiLeaks. In fact, the emails were published by specialist climate websites in America and Canada – yet Mr Assange spent several minutes lamenting how he had found publishing them morally difficult because they boosted the arguments of global-warming sceptics.
I think Ross McKitrick’s comment on Climate Audit from the earlier link sums up Assange’s performance best:
What a pair of blowhards. They were obviously unnerved by the question. They evidently like leaks that embarrass their political opponents, but in this case they found themselves tagged with a leak that had damaged the side they like; and since it seems to be more about political warfare against governments they dislike than some impartial ideal of transparency and freedom of information, they were stuck scrambling to make up a story about how it really served some nobler purpose. Of course they should simply have said that they weren’t the source of the leak, that it was in full circulation long before anyone looked to them for a copy and they didn’t know much about the details of what followed. But that would have been too humble, especially in front of a room full of simpering hero-worshippers. So they pretended to be insiders and proceeded to deliver a few minutes of sheer drivel.
While I was in the UK last fall, there was brief interest by the UK tabloids in the Russian angle, and an article appeared in the Daily Mail speculating that Russian intelligence officials had hacked the UEA and stolen the emails. But nobody took that line seriously and the story died within 48 hours. If Assange has a shred of evidence to support his lunatic theory he should release it. What’s with these secret communications between him and UK intelligence: out with it, Mr Wikileaks! Bloody poser.
On this issue at least they are nothing but fakes and cretins. Saying that UEA released all the background emails and whatnot to provide the full context is beyond idiocy; and Assange’s discussion of the “trick” is just painful to watch.
Now trying to backtrack wikileaks involvement, we find that:
Way back at 4:09 Pacific Time on the 19th the first mention of wikileaks occurred here on WUWT:
Jagman619 says:November 19, 2009 at 4:08 pm (Edit)
Someone who has the file, please post it to http://wikileaks.org/
Which did not go unnoticed. It is around that time that I submitted the files to wikileaks. Was I the first? I have no way to know. It was a frantic day.
But if Mr. Assange wants to clear the air my IP address is 20880.64.xxx
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
What truly impresses me about Mr Assange is that he struggled for several minutes over the dilemma of whether to publishor not. Obviously a man of great depth (that is sarcasm for those who didn’t spot it).
I listened to him on BBC radio 4 this morning and to his credit, the interviewer (John Humphrys), did not give him an easy ride. I found it uncomfortable listening to Assange wriggling as he avoided direct responses to many of the questions – transcript here for all to judge for themselves.
Correction: transcript here http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9309000/9309320.stm
Apologies, mods, for cock-up.
Peter
In any heated exchange like this, there will be rash and inaccurate statements, so maybe we should be clear about what the issue is :
– Assange trying to take credit for the Climategate emails, when the credit belonged to others.
Other issues, such as Assange’s extreme anti-Americanism, Assange deliberately revealing information that could seriously damage individuals aligned with the West, the Swedish rape charges against Assange (NB. they are as yet only accusations, he is innocent until proved guilty), and whether Assange would have revealed the Climategate emails if he had had the opportunity to be the first to do so, are surely side-issues on this thread. Not completely irrelevant, maybe, but still side-issues.
Zeke the Sneak : “Australians can be sure that the vast majority of Americans would never, ever support a group whose founder is dedicated to the harm and downfall of Australia. It would never enter our minds or hearts to do that.“.
I would like to think – I do think – that the feeling is mutual. Some in Australia with anarchist or marxist leanings genuinely hate the West (as led by America) and would happily bring it down by supporting people like Assange, but the majority clearly would not. I am sure, however, that there is widespread support in Australia for genuine whistleblowers. The difference between Assange and genuine whistleblowers lies in their motivation – but that is another side issue.
davidmhoffer says:
December 21, 2010 at 10:00 am (Edit)
Smokey;
It baffles me why encryption is not required in government [and business] communications.
######
Encryption will not help with some sources and methods. No technology can prevent a determined source to remove information. Basically, if you are transmitting secret data out of a facility it will be encrypted. ( encrypted phone lines as well.. used to sound like shit). The cables ( as I understand it) were walked out. There is no defense against that other than better background checks on employees. And if they get turned, then whatever passes through their hands can walk out the building.
There is something wrong here. WL stinks What did they tell us we didn´t know.
Kitefreak has got it! And thanks for the video clip, very interesting.
Tim Ball, your point about the importance of the identity of the leaker is interesting. Particularly interesting is your attempt to finger Keith Briffa, Tim. I wonder if you would care to elaborate?
Clearly in light of the claims made by Paul Hudson the leaked files had been in circulation long before the 19 Nov 09 and at least since October. Therefore it is unlikely that those who finally made the email’s public on the 19th Nov, were all that closely connected with the CRU and are only important with regards to the service they performed for their fellow men. We are all in their debt for that but their identity should and I hope will, remain a mystery.
With regards to the original leaker (Paul Hudson’s source), although for the sake of curiosity it would be interesting to hear what else he might have to say, but if his identity was discovered, the establishment would make such an example of him that it would make other genuine potential whistle-blowers think twice. Therefore his identity must also remain a mystery IMO.
After all we have the files, which was enough to kill the AGW fraud and has been nought but a headless Zombie since the 19th Nov 09.
Wikileaks: a Big Dangerous US Government Con Job
by F. William Engdahl
The process of policing the Web was well underway before the current leaks scandal. In 2009 Democratic Senator Jay Rockefeller and Republican Olympia Snowe introduced the Cybersecurity Act of 2009 (S.773). IIt would give the President unlimited power to disconnect private-sector computers from the internet. The bill “would allow the president to ’declare a cyber-security emergency’ relating to ’non-governmental’ computer networks and do what’s necessary to respond to the threat.” We can expect that now this controversial piece of legislation will get top priority when a new Republican House and the Senate convene in January.
The US Department of Homeland Security, an agency created in the political hysteria following 9/11 2001 that has been compared to the Gestapo, has already begun policing the Internet. They are quietly seizing and shutting down internet websites (web domains) without due process or a proper trial. DHS simply seizes web domains that it wants to and posts an ominous “Department of Justice” logo on the web site. See an example at http://torrent-finder.com. Over 75 websites were seized and shut in a recent week. Right now, their focus is websites that they claim “violate copyrights,” yet the torrent-finder.com website that was seized by DHS contained no copyrighted content whatsoever. It was merely a search engine website that linked to destinations where people could access copyrighted content. Step by careful step freedom of speech can be taken away. Then what?
http://www.voltairenet.org/article167733.html
Anthony when you get in there way they shut you down. They also now know the people that don´t believe there story. All the people that watch this side and write comments. B B is watching.
“”””” davidmhoffer says:
December 21, 2010 at 9:19 am
Freedom of the press implies the right of the press to be critical of those in power, critical of their decisions, able to suggest the benefits of one choice over another or even bring up an option the government isn’t considering. Exposing wrong doing with information that was never intended to be public is where the area gets a bit grey depending on what the information was and how it was obtained. “””””
Well freedom of the press, in the interest of the public’s “right to know” is a myth.
Any visitor to WUWT is well aware; that “information” is no more credible than the origin of that information is.
So included in the information that the public has a “right to know” is the original source of that information; for without a source; the “message” is garbage.
But “the press” sees no problem in THEM standing between the public and the source. ANY NEWS story without source references is worth less than the time it takes to read or listen to.
And “The Press” loves to replace source information with euphemisms; but we can easily see around that.
For me, ANY story reported by “the press” as originating from “a white house source” means it came straight from the lips or hand of The President of The United States. (POTUS). And if that isn’t true; then he should fire whoever it was that was the “source”.
“Usually reliable sources” quite often turn out to be not reliable at all. In any case they are worthless as to information.
Anything that somebody is too ashamed of their own name to append it to their “information” is not worth wasting the time on.
I don’t believe anonymous “scientific” information either.
The press should quit fabricating the news or “analysing it” and report it for an informed public to evaluate for themselves.
And I’ve heard ALL of the arguments about information not being available without source secrecy. If you are ashamed to defend it; then don’t say it.
Don’t negotiate with terrorists. Don’t negotiate with Assange.
JA: Not at all. We are an organisation that does not promote leaking. We’re an organisation that promotes justice…
Q: You hardly discourage it when you print a couple of million private cables.
JA: … that promotes justice through the mechanism of transparency and journalism.
and,
Q: This is now public. So I’m asking you the question. Did you have sex with those women?
JA: It’s a matter of public record as far as the courts are concerned but I am not going to be exposing other people’s private lives or my own more than is absolutely necessary. That is not what a gentleman does,……
So, Assange doesn’t promote leaks and doesn’t expose other people’s private lives more than is absolutely necessary. It isn’t gentlemanly. Ok, got that.
OT:
The Globe and Mail is starting early the promotion of Dr. Andrew Weaver’s upcoming book:
“Generation Us: The Challenge of Global Warming ”
By author: Andrew Weaver
ISBN: 9781554698042
Publisher: Orca Book Publishers
Pub Date: April/01/2011
Pages: 128
Paperback $9.95″
For that cheap price here is what you’ll get:
“Global warming is not so much an environmental problem as an economic and social problem.
In clear and accessible language, Generation Us explains the phenomenon of global warming, outlines the threat it presents to future generations and offers a path toward solutions to the problem.”
The watermelon decloaks: no more green “end of the world”, “worse than we thought” etc…, just the good ol’ red political message!
“The reality of global warming has long been accepted within the scientific community, yet it remains a hotly debated topic at the political and social level. Why is this? Is it the fact that the ultimate effects of global warming will not be felt in our lifetimes? Do we really feel no moral responsibility for future generations? Dr. Weaver, one of the world’s leading experts in the field, contends that, just as humans have been responsible for creating the problem of global warming, we must also be the solution.”
Here is a publisher who is so disconnected from the debate that he tries to justify his own ignorance by publishing Weaver’s political manifesto! And it’s in the “Rapid Reads” collection from this publisher…
Purchase at your own risk!
“Do you think that might be because my credit card information doesn’t meet the requirements for publication on wikileaks?”
The requirement that the subject matter be embarrassing? It’s not like it was hard-hitting journalism with an actual purpose. “Oooo… the US thinks leader X is a self-important jerk.” Yeah, I think most of the world assumes that’s the sort of thing that goes on, just like I’m certain that 90% of foreign intelligence agencies had numerous buffoon and coyboy references to George Bush.
By trying to discredit US diplomatically, the end result is less diplomacy and more strong-arming. Good job Julian!
This has been a deliberate attempt by The Powers That Be to muddy the waters of Climategate.
Wikileaks and Climategate should not have to be mentioned in the same sentence.. and yet.. here we are.
I would say it has been a successful attempt.. so far.
I have been a regular at WUWT since Climategate broke.
The very reason I am here is because of Climategate.
It appears that there a few Wikileaks people on this thread simply here to defend their messiah.. but they will eventually depart and leave us to the science.
Like many here, I was riveted to my computer for many days, using Googles experimental technology to keep track of wherever the word ‘climategate’ appeared on the internet.
I had my own thread going on another blog which had 5,000+ hits.. but which has now been deleted for some reason.
I know it makes not a scrap of difference whether Wikileaks put up the Climategate documents or not.
For Wikileaks to give the IMPRESSION it was their release is pure evil.
Wikileaks has questionable origins and motives that are fairly easy to discover.
Climategate.. when clearly understood.. is huge enough to change your ‘world view’.
There has been nothing from Wikileaks that even comes close to that sort of impact.
Even the Iraq Apache shootings that have been posted on this thread are old news.
I had two similar videos posted on my youtube account 4 years ago that was getting 3,000+ hits per day.. but which has now been deleted for some reason.
If people think of Wikileaks when they think of Climategate.. then we have a problem.
There will be the danger people will dismiss the Climategate emails purely because of Wikileaks.
We cannot let this happen.
Everyone should make their own personal effort to not let Wikileaks and Climategate be associated together.
If we don’t.. I suspect all our hard work will be undone.. and before we know it.. there will a world wide price on CO2.
And make no mistake.. that is the intention of Assange.
Let this Assange idiot brag away, it keeps Climate Gate in the headlines!
Thanks for re-posting the links to the original stories, Anthony, that whole event was nothing less of breathtaking! When the CRU emails surface on the Russian server, I searched them for Sen. Jim Inhofe’s name, and found several emails. I then notified Jim’s office about these specific emails (November 23, 2009 7:09:12 PM CST), and eventually the emails were the focus of Jim’s US Senate Minority Report.
Please see: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/02/23/climategate-minority-report/
I’d like to thank everyone who played a role in this, no matter how large or small….this will surely be remembered as one of the great signal events in the history of science.
Will says:
December 21, 2010 at 1:34 am
Essential reading : http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=22389
————–
Yes, that article is indeed essential reading.
I am amazed by most of the comments here, and the level of orwellization our societies seem to have reached.
Reading through these comments, I am reminded of that old dictum attributed to an ideal consumer of news: “What I hear on tv comes in through one ear and out of my mouth”
Ross McKitrick’s ‘poser’ summation couldn’t be more correct on Assange.
He’s just another in the latest ‘Soros Puppets’ that have popped up outta nowhere for Christmas.
Last night’s banner under the news read: ‘Assange women fear STD from liaison…’
(I mean…….ABC……..runnin’ daytime drama drivel designed to keep us salivating.
Awwwhhh, come on, Guys… These ‘god-like’ (legends only in their own minds) can’t even make up a good script… Let alone ‘scare us anymore’.
The ‘assange character’ (complete with a ‘mommy-assange designed to ‘pull heartstrings’ when ‘son’ is ‘off the air’ and in prissie’…)
…As for him being an ‘Aussie’ ~ ‘they’ cause the ‘Plot to thicken’ ’cause the normally GREAT relations between the U.S. and Australian citizens could get (ohhh, I’m SOOO Afraid……NOT!)… ‘strained’?) The two ‘Friends/Mates’??? (No Way ~ especially when Julia has one country and Barry has the other…, right?)
This lame sh** has been thought through thoroughly by Behaviorists (drool, drool)…… and like most of these ‘bozos like Assange’ the final ‘button’ after ‘fame’ or ‘world-wide notoriety’ (see a pathetic angry Algore, here) their ‘final buttons’ to motivate them are…..SEX.
I bet this Julian guy even KNOWS these two ‘ladies’ from the same schools of indoctrination they attended over the years… That’s not a ‘stretch’ at all when you learn that ‘they’ have been playing us in the middle by placing two ‘friends’/’sympathizers’ at either end to drag us to. By playing the game that way ~ whether we choose …..Left OR Right…..we fall into their hands.
The best thing about all of this is that ‘they’ still think we’re simply ‘animals’ to ‘Pavlov-ize’ or ‘Skinner-ize’. It’s refreshing to see that they STILL believe their own hype…and… (as the Bible says, and I’m paraphrasing) ‘folks that like to dig pits for their enemies will fall into one of their own making.’ What grand poetic irony.
Do you ‘see’ that the ‘two women’ do ‘two things’? ~ actually more, but I’ll keep it to just ‘two’.
1. Guys ARE after all – still ‘guys’ (Thank God) and to get (or keep) their interest, arouse them in a sexual manner. ie: Remember when Chris Monckton placed a ‘shapely sigh’ in one of his ‘Missives’??? (Do you remember what you felt like when you read those words? Could you imagine yourself sitting right where Chris was..?
He ‘held your attention’ by showing you what was ‘right next to him’…and that’s ‘fantasy time’ for most of you studs out there…
Guys! I’m sure it was Truth, but…..what Sir C of M ‘used’ is what every ‘good writer’ does to keep his audience’s attention!!! It’s guaranteed to work EVERY time, p.s.! (I do hope you guys brush up on Pavlovian/Skinner stuff or you might let a few ‘pop flies’ get past you in the next months… ‘the world’ needs you to catch them all.) A good writer will appeal to your senses, right? That’s what the introduction of these two socialist/marxist babes do…they bring in ‘James/Julian’……Bond. I wonder what car he drives…….
(Then…….he lands……..can it be??? ‘safe and sound’ into “jail” by the very folks that are helping to put on this whole farce, courtesy of more Soro’s $$$. (all of these globalists are prostitutes, p.s.)
*So, gals ‘1’ and ‘2’ ‘stir up one’s sexuality…for we all know ‘sex sells’, right? (I put this in here so that those who may say I didn’t get to my POINT, won’t miss them…) Think of James Bond stuff…how many movies has been done on this fantasy? Let’s say ‘enough to know it works’ by Behaviorist Idiots. They’ll lead you with one head or the other………BOTH preferably, to make it really interesting for them…
2. The appearance of these two (‘wowie zowie’ are they as ‘hot’ as the Russian spy photos of that babe from NYC???!!! and……she was NOTHING, right? But, again ‘sex sells’… or so they think.) also divides women from men. When you want ‘confusion to rule’ you divide folks up……. Australians from Americans………Leftist’s from Rightists……..women from men….. THAT way, we all feel separated from each other….. and we lose our unity……..our HUMANNESS.
Think me silly, I truly don’t care a WIT about what anyone thinks of me……..((as I’ve lost ALL FEAR OF MEN ~NOT a sexual term for you heathens, p.s…so don’t be ignorant if you post, k?~ and I’m totally schooled on how this GOOD/evil thing works……..and I’m on the winning side, praise Jesus.
(Hey! It’s the Christmas Season and I’m gonna leave one for you guys to think about!)
WHY is it, do you think……….that ‘they’ always are displaying Jesus in His ‘swaddling clothes’???????????? I mean…….. cutie pie lil’ baby in the manger…in (I’m in Australia……) nappies! and……..then………patheticly LOVING broken man on a cross…….STILL in ‘nappies’…….huh????????
No Worries for an answer, gentlemen and gentlewomen. ‘They’ want you to keep a vision of Jesus in your mind as this ‘nut in diapers’ ~ rather than Who and WHAT He is RIGHT THIS VERY MOMENT. It keeps Jesus ~ impotent-looking……right???
If you don’t agree ~ lemme take you out for YOUR NEXT BIRTHDAY at the finest restaurant in your town………dressed as you were on the day of YOUR BIRTH…
unless you were Julian Assange, or another of his perv compatriots (we know who they are, right?) you wouldn’t take me up on my offer.
Why? ‘Cause you’d want to celebrate YOUR BIRTHDAY the way you look NOW. It’d be TOTAL HUMILIATION for you, while others would jus’ laugh and laugh…..
Well kiddo’s………..someday soon……….He’s coming back…and consider this another ‘Christmas Pressie’ for you……..He’s no longer a baby and He’s no longer hanging NAKED on a cross… My Savior has grown up, resurrected, and SAVED MY ASS (August 7th 3am, 1990)………so, here’s hoping you’ll call out to Him, too.
Be Blessed and Be Ready and enjoy this Season because (phew!) He ain’t no baby no more…
Cynthia Lauren Thorpe
James Sexton says: “You [Assange] hardly discourage it [leaking] when you print a couple of million private cables” and “…Assange doesn’t promote leaks and doesn’t expose other people’s private lives more than is absolutely necessary. It isn’t gentlemanly.”
Key is the word “private“. Compare these WL emails with the Climategate emails, which have generally been agreed to have been work-related and therefore not private. The WL emails between bureaucrats are typically sent from government-owned computers during government-paid time, and are at least partly related to government business. No matter how much the sender would prefer each email not to reach the light of day, it is questionable whether such an email qualifies as “private“.
To put it more simply : The WL emails were not private. The issues are the law and motivation. What happened between Assange and the Swedish ladies was private in nature, but again the issue is the law.
Steven Mosher says:
December 21, 2010 at 2:17 pm
Smokey;
It baffles me why encryption is not required in government [and business] communications.
######
Encryption will not help with some sources and methods. No technology can prevent a determined source to remove information. Basically, if you are transmitting secret data out of a facility it will be encrypted. ( encrypted phone lines as well.. used to sound like shit). The cables ( as I understand it) were walked out.>>>
I said is isn’t as easy as “just encrypt everything” and I also said that any system 100% secure would be impossible to use. But the above is innacurate. The security breach currently in the news and a less recent one in Israel were the result of (as best I can tell from the limited information I’ve bothered to read) the result of sloppy or lax security practices. However, a “determined source” versus a well designed and maintained security plan is an easy bet. I’ll take the plan.
Military class security relies in part on buildings that cannot pass RF and other frequencies through their outer walls. Increases the price of the building, but “transmit” all you want, it isn’t going anywhere. Phone lines, power lines, etc can all be filtered so that frequencies that can carry data are blocked. And don’t start telling me that they can be easily removed by a “turned” employee because while that is true, you can detect the change via all kinds of methods from both inside and outside the building, kilometers away. Data that can’t be transmitted must be transferred onto a device. Thin client systems are pretty much a keyboard, mouse and screen. Secure class thin client devices have no usb ports, no serial ports, nothing. Just the ethernet port to the lan, and data isn’t sent down that, just an image. You’d need a camera and couple hundred years to photograph as many documents as wikileaks got.
Biometric authentication is cheap these days, and if you think that cutting off someone’s thumb or gouging out an eye like they do in the movies will work, guess again.
There are commercialy available applications that sit on the server operating system and intercept all traffic. They can identify credit card numbers, social insurance numbers, health numbers and so on and by policy prevent them from being copied to any physical device.
I could go on, but point is that the breaches in the news today were just about sloppy management. Determined security meets determined hacker… hacker loses.
F. William Engdahl on Wikileaks
December 10, 2010
excerpts:
The story on the surface makes for a script for a new Oliver Stone Hollywood thriller. A 39-year old Australian hacker holds the President of the United States and his State Department hostage to a gigantic cyber “leak,” unless the President leaves Julian Assange and his Wikileaks free to release hundreds of thousands of pages of sensitive US Government memos. A closer look at the details, so far carefully leaked by the most ultra-establishment of international media such as the New York Times, reveals a clear agenda. That agenda coincidentally serves to buttress the agenda of US geopolitics around the world from Iran to Russia to North Korea. The Wikileaks is a big and dangerous US intelligence Con Job **which will likely be used to police the Internet.**
It is almost too perfectly-scripted to be true. A discontented 22-year old US Army soldier on duty in Baghdad, Bradley Manning, a low-grade US Army intelligence analyst, described as a loner, a gay in the military, a disgruntled “computer geek,” sifts through classified information at Forward Operating Base Hammer. He decides to secretly download US State Department email communications from the entire world over a period of eight months for hours a day, onto his blank CDs while pretending to be listening to Lady Gaga.
[…]
He [Assange] selects as exclusive newspapers to decide what is to be leaked the New York Times, which did such service in promoting faked propaganda against Saddam that led to the Iraqi war, the London Guardian and Der Spiegel. Assange claims he had no time to sift through so many pages so handed them to the trusted editors of the establishment media for them to decide what should be released. Very “anti-establishment” that. The New York Times even assigned one of its top people, David E. Sanger, to control the release of the Wikileaks material. Sanger is no establishment outsider. He sits as a member of the elite Council on Foreign Relations as well as the Aspen Institute Strategy Group together with the likes of Condi Rice, former Defense Secretary William Perry, former CIA head John Deutch, former State Department Deputy Secretary and now World Bank head Robert Zoellick among others.
[…]
Full article:
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=22357