WikiLeaks in conspiracy space
I thought my response to a comment Lex posted at ChicagoBoyz might be of equal interest here.
Lex wrote:
This is starting to remind me a little bit of Robert Anton Wilson. Even the squirrels in the trees are in on the conspiracy. What conspiracy? You know, the conspiracy
My comment follows…
Indeed, it seems there’s plenty of room in conspiracy space for WikiLeaks:
Wikileaks – A Big, Dangerous US Government Con Job
By F. William Engdahl
12-10-10The 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.
*
WikiLeaks – More Israeli Game Theory Warfare?
By Jeff Gates
12-1-10“The United States is the real victim of WikiLeaks. It’s an action aimed at discrediting them.” Franco Frattini, Foreign Minister of Italy
The impact of the WikiLeaks release of diplomatic cables fits the behavior profile of those well versed in game theory warfare. When Israeli mathematician Robert J. Aumann received the 2005 Nobel Prize in economic science for his work on game theory, he conceded, “the entire school of thought that we have developed here in Israel” has turned “Israel into the leading authority in this field.” The candor of this Israeli-American offered a rare insight into an enclave long known for waging war from the shadows. Israel’s most notable success to date was “fixing” the intelligence that induced the U.S. to invade Iraq in pursuit of a geopolitical agenda long sought by Tel Aviv. When waging intelligence wars, timing is often the critical factor for game-theory war planners. The outcome of the WikiLeaks release suggests a psy-ops directed at the U.S.
BTW, both theories come via the same publisher, rense.com.
December 12th, 2010 at 8:34 pm
"It’s an action aimed at discrediting them." No it is not. We need to look at the Get-out-of-jail-card first.
December 12th, 2010 at 8:36 pm
Just remember Gore is an idiot, ha! At least as far as discrediting goes.
December 12th, 2010 at 9:21 pm
I’m baffled by most of the responses to the Wikileaks data dump of U. S. diplomatic correspondence. I can see how the leaks are damaging to the State Department, to the Secretary of State, and to the most authoritarian regimes on our friends list. I don’t think it’s nearly as clear how the leaks are damaging to the United States. Could somebody state the case for me?
December 13th, 2010 at 12:35 am
I am with Dave on this one. I just don’t see it.
December 13th, 2010 at 1:03 am
Here’s a brief version of Charles Krauthammer’s response to that question:
I can see the Pakistani situation becoming more unstable as a result of confirmation that we had approval from Gilani for drone attacks — and these kinds of practical consideration (whiskey in Sana’a, drones in Islamabad) running in parallel with vindictiveness engendered by embarrassment would make for a potent brew as far as getting back at Assange is concerned.
.
Others have suggested that US intelligence agencies will be more reluctant to share information with each other in the post-WL atmosphere.
December 13th, 2010 at 2:15 am
I’m usually on the same page with Krauthammer, but this one leaves me cold. Both of his points are nits in the big picture. I’m not even sure the Wiki event would qualify as a "Black Swan" for DoS…perhaps, but given the inherit inefficiencies of the bureaucracy, "what is the big deal?" There is dirt to be sure, but not many surprises. It would be good to remember that diplomats aren’t exactly "lock-boxes" of information.
December 13th, 2010 at 3:20 am
Hi Dave & Lex,
.
First, I know for a fact that State Department document access has been pulled from military channels and the current discussion of restoration is nothing along the lines what would be required to make diplomatic information "actionable’ to military commands in Afghanistan or elsewhere. Getting information flowing again to those who need it in a timely manner will take years
.
Speculatively, I would say that State’s action means that what the rest of the IC shares with the DoD and deployed commands is likewise tightly circumscribed. How many foreign VIPs mentioned in wikileak docs are also CIA sources? Many I would argue. And they are now burned. As are the Americans, officials, businessmen and reporters they have talked to who are now, correctly or not, going to be ID by adversary counterintelligence as US intelligence agents. Most ppl won’t read all the wiklileaks docs but you can bet there will be furious crossreferencing and database building by the Russians, Chinese, Iranians etc. to out our relatively tiny foreign intel cohort, under diplo cover and not.
.
That’s damage. Is it the end of our ability to conduct diplomacy or gather intel ? No. But it’s going to put a dent in our already mediocre HUMINT capabilities.
December 14th, 2010 at 3:07 pm
OK. Even so. What Assange did publicly, with whatever resources he has, we have to assume others were able to do secretly, with the resources of large states to draw on. Assange did a service by publicly disclosing how flimsy our security is on this important information. The emperor’s nudity is an embarrassment. But it is better to know the truth about it.
December 14th, 2010 at 3:58 pm
"Assange did a service by publicly disclosing how flimsy our security is on this important information. The emperor’s nudity is an embarrassment. But it is better to know the truth about it"
December 14th, 2010 at 9:18 pm
I heard heard a few days ago on [something I can’t recall] that it was Sergeant Manning at one pint and he got busted back down to PFC (not related to Wikileaks). Can anybody confirm?
December 14th, 2010 at 9:23 pm
Got it. Busted From Specialist (not Sergeant).
.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/09/AR2010060906170.html