by Scott Creighton
I’ve been asked on several occasions about what I think is going on with Wikileaks and all these document dumps they are releasing trying to derail the Hillary train, at least in terms of appearances, when in fact we all know that Wikileaks is a CIA honeypot designed to:
Wikileaks was established in 2006 at a time when real whistle-blowers like William Binney, Russ Tice, Mark Klein (Room 641A ) and a few others were starting to make things really difficult for our glorious leaders who had a totally different world in mind for us to live in. You may also recall in 2004 the story of Abu Ghraib broke complete with leaked photos depicting horrific torture being conducted by our troops who were running the detention center.
So in 2006 something needed to be done in order to keep real whistle-blowers from getting their stories on the front pages of every news paper and website in the country and thus, Wikileaks was born. The idea of a honeypot was hatched.
They got Julian Assange to act as it’s front-man. A sleazy character, who, like most other assets they procure for such operations, had a long history of criminal behavior and a strange history of being forgiven for it.
“As a teenager in Melbourne, he (Assange) belonged to a hacker collective called the International Subversives. He eventually pled guilty to 24 counts of breaking into Australian government and commercial websites to test their security gaps, but was released on bond for good behavior. His official bio describes him as “Australia’s most famous ethical hacker.” In the years that followed, Assange helped write a book about his exploits in the online underground and says he went on to become an investigative journalist for Australian and British newspapers.” Mother Jones, 2010
In 1987, part of the folklore of Julian Assange has him hacking the Pentagon at the tender age of 16. Four years later in 1991, he was caught hacking an Australian multinational telecom company and arrested. He was charge with 31 major hacking crimes and later, in 1996, he pled guilty to 25 of those. 25 felony charges. He was released for “good behavior”
What was that “good behavior” you ask?
In 1993 Assange gave technical advice to the Victoria Police Child Exploitation Unit and assisted with prosecutions. In the same year he was involved in starting one of the first public Internet service providers in Australia, Suburbia Public Access Network
That’s right. He got his mind right and helped the system bust other criminals.
It should also be noted that when Wikileaks first started up, they openly admitted they were run by a bunch of Chinese dissident “hackers”. These are the same types of “hacktivists” who work for groups like USAID and the Soros’ Open Society Foundation who work to promote regime change in various countries on behalf of the CIA and the masters of the universe. Julian Assange describes his ideology as being in support of market libertarianism. Yeah, free market neoliberalism.
I am certainly not the only one out here who sees Wikileaks and Assange for what they really are.
“Steven Aftergood, who writes the Federation of American Scientists’ Secrecy News blog and has published thousands of leaked or classified documents, says he wasn’t impressed with WikiLeaks’ “conveyor-belt approach” to publishing anything it came across. “To me, transparency is a means to an end, and that end is an invigorated political life, accountable institutions, opportunities for public engagement. For them, transparency and exposure seem to be ends in themselves,” says Aftergood”…
“John Young, founder of the pioneering whistleblower site, Cryptome.org, is skeptical. Assange reverently describes Cryptome as WikiLeaks’ “spiritual godfather.” But Young claims he was conned into registering the WikiLeaks domain when Assange’s team first launched (the site is no longer under his name). He fought back by leaking his correspondence with WikiLeaks. “WikiLeaks is a fraud,” he wrote to Assange’s list, hinting that the new site was a CIA data mining operation. “Fuck your cute hustle and disinformation campaign against legitimate dissent. Same old shit, working for the enemy.” Mother Jones, 2010
A “disinformation campaign against legitimate dissent” and “working for the enemy”. A pretty straight forward assessment of Wikileaks and Assange from a real whistle-blower website.
When they first came online, Wikileaks made a name for themselves with the “Collateral Murder” video which was designed to give them all sorts of whistle-blower street-cred but the video itself was carefully chosen in that it could easily be chalked up to the “fog of war” since two of the party members did have AKs on them and the film crews’ tripod did look like some sort of weapon from a distance. The van that was shot up was harder to justify but it was still an active combat area with troops on the ground a couple blocks away and thus they could end up saying they were taking precautions to make sure those troops weren’t ambushed.
I wrote about all of this years ago.
I also kept up with the Julian Assange controlled opposition psyop as it developed over the years:
As if we needed any more proof of what Wikileaks really is, read this from WIRED back in May of 2011;
“WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange now makes his associates sign a draconian nondisclosure agreement that, among other things, asserts that the organization’s huge trove of leaked material is “solely the property of WikiLeaks,” according to a report Wednesday.
“You accept and agree that the information disclosed, or to be disclosed to you pursuant to this agreement is, by its nature, valuable proprietary commercial information,” the agreement reads, “the misuse or unauthorized disclosure of which would be likely to cause us considerable damage.”
The confidentiality agreement (.pdf), revealed by the New Statesman, imposes a penalty of 12 million British pounds– nearly $20 million — on anyone responsible for a significant leak of the organization’s unpublished material. The figure is based on a “typical open-market valuation” of WikiLeaks’ collection, the agreement claims.” WIRED
The CIA honeypot would make leakers sign a contract with them expressly forbidding them from leaking their stuff after they hand it over to Wikileaks under penalty of being ruined financially for the rest of their lives. That way they could ensure once they had control of the information given to them in good faith by a whistle-blower, they could bury it forever if they chose to do so, without fear that the whistle-blower would get impatient waiting for the release and give it to someone else.
That’s not the work of a whistle-blower site. That’s the signature of a honeypot. No… question… about… it.
Started in Dec. of 2006, Wikileaks was being promoted in the MSM very early on. In fact, it was promoted as a whistle-blower site by the mainstream press even before it leaked a single document.
“By March, more than one million leaked documents from governments and corporations in Asia, the Middle East, sub-Saharan Africa and the former Soviet Bloc will be available online in a bold new collective experiment in whistle-blowing. That is, of course, as long as you don’t accept any of the conspiracy theories brewing that Wikileaks.org could be a front for the CIA or some other intelligence agency.” TIME Jan. 2007
From the start and even before the start, the Mockingbirds at TIME and the Washington Post were telling us about Wikileaks and more importantly, telling us what to think about them … and what NOT to think about them. Specifically the Mockingbirds were telling us it was a “conspiracy theory” to think Wikileaks was a CIA honeypot. Kind of an odd position for an establishment rag to take regarding a website that was supposed to help bring down the establishment don’t you think?
All of this should make it perfectly clear to anyone not named Glenn Greenwald that Wikileaks is, was and always shall be a CIA honeypot designed to sucker in unwise whistle-blowers and vacuum up their potentially damaging leaks before they can be shown the light of day. They also serve the purpose of an irregular warfare operation in support of military campaigns across the world via various degrees of “hearts and minds” operations attempting to build popular support for those military objectives.
What’s going on with these leaks that look to undermine Hillary Clinton’s chances at winning the White House, Julian Assange’s disappearing act and the death of Gavin MacFadyen?
Let’s take these one at a time.
First of all, Wikileaks is saying Equador is behind the silencing of Julian Assange. The MSM is applauding them for doing it. The foreign minister of the country says they did so in order to keep from being perceived as trying to influence the electoral process of another country. But Assange is not Wikileaks and these Podesta email leaks have continued without a hitch ever since even though Assange himself has been “missing in action” for a while now leaving many to speculate about his welfare. He is no longer conducting his doorway press conferences anymore and hasn’t been Tweeting since his internet access was supposedly shut down.
But he has recently made contact with someone.
Yesterday Gavin MacFadyen died of unknown causes. MacFadyen was reportedly a director at Wikileaks and a long time documentary maker and publisher of his own internet transparancy organization the Centre for Investigative Journalism.
“WikiLeaks director and founder of the Centre for Investigative Journalism Gavin MacFadyen has died at age 76. The cause of death is yet unknown. His ‘fellows in arms’ have flocked online to post their farewells, including WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange. ” RT
Wikileaks issued a statement as did Julian Assange (though Wikileaks):
Gavin Macfadyen was mentor to Assange (and his closest friend in London), to WikiLeaks’ Sarah Harrison, Joseph Farrell and many others.
— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) October 23, 2016
Gavin Macfadyen, beloved director of WikiLeaks, now takes his fists and his fight to battle God. Sock it to him, forever, Gavin. -JA pic.twitter.com/7zyzs1Qxxk
— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) October 23, 2016
We are told “JA” stands for Julian Assange.
So apparently Assange can still communicate with Wikileaks. And apparently Assange says MacFadyen was a “director” of Wikileaks. Got that? Good.
Now here’s a little info on MacFadyen’s CIJ which is housed at the University of London (home of neoliberalism birthplace, the London School of Economics):
The CIJ’s supporters include reporters from the BBC Radio and Television, Canal Plus (Paris), CBS 60 Minutes, Channel Four, Private Eye, Sunday Times Insight Team, the New York Times, World in Action producers and WikiLeaks.
In 2007 the CIJ acquired registered charity status and attracted support from a number of foundations including the Open Society Institute, the David and Elaine Potter Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Park Foundation, the Reva and David Logan Foundation, Democratie en Media, Goldsmiths, University of London and several smaller private trusts.
So MacFadyen’s little project teaching “journalism” to young impressionable minds is housed in the same institution as the London School of Economics and backed by the Ford Foundation and Soros’ Open Society Institute? And they get support from New York Times and 60 Minutes?
Makes you kind of wonder if he simply ran a Mockingbird training program over in London.
The death of MacFadyen is interesting though. The timing is impossible to ignore.
Look, as you can see, I know what Wikileaks is, I know what Assange is. And I know what Macfadyen was. That’s not the question.
The question is… what is going on here?
This might be the most fascinating spy story to ever take shape in the history of our country and it looks like no one, I mean NO ONE, is seeing it for what it is.
There is obviously a conflict in the Obama White House regarding our involvement in Syria. There are tons of former advisors who are practically begging for bombing campaigns and the head of the Pentagon apparently deliberately undermined a cease-fire agreement with Syria and Russia so that tensions would be stoked in that country.
We also know Hillary Clinton had to pressure Obama to allow her to destroy Libya on behalf of British and French national interests. That is a fact. Everyone knows she is a warmonger and thus, that is why she is supported by all the neocons from the former administration who brought us the fiasco of the Iraq War in 2003.
None of that is a controversial statement on my part. The conflict between the factions in the White House is well documented.
So what are we seeing with all of these Wikileaks email dumps?
William Binney recently said that the intelligence industry knows exactly where those leaks came from. All of them. He said it was an inside job coming either from the NSA or some other alphabet agency or perhaps even from a whistle-blower (with regard to the DNC leaks)
And that makes perfect sense.
I know that we sometimes get caught up in the trap of looking at the masters of the universe and all their minions as a monolithic entity all moving toward the same goal in the same direction but my guess is, that simply isn’t the case.
It could be that there is a fascinating war going on inside the military intelligence complex between factions that hold very different opinions about how this country needs to advance their shared neoliberal globalist agenda.
Look at what Sec. of Defense Ash Carter just did to the State Department’s cease-fire agreement in Syria. Is it really so hard to imagine a similar mutiny is resulting in intelligence assets being used to influence our elections here in the states like they try to do all over the world?
So of course the story about “Russian hacking” would emerge very, very quickly from anonymous intelligence sources. The last thing either side would want to do is expose the battle raging between factions inside our own military intelligence apparatus. That would be disastrous. The roll back against the intelligence agencies for interfering with our own elections would be tremendous and neither camp wants to see that because both sides fully expect to use these agencies and these powers to the fullest in the future.
Of course, this is all speculation but it is informed speculation. Were our intelligence assets really dedicated to silencing Wikileaks all these years, Assange would have long since been ‘retired’ along with his entire staff and the website itself shuttered. The proof of Wikileaks’ real purpose has been with us for years. We understand that.
Now we see real damage being done to Hillary’s campaign as well as to the DNC itself and we have to ask ourselves why it is being allowed to continue.
We also see someone clearly affiliated with Wikileaks and our intelligence agencies end up dead under mysterious circumstances. Funny isn’t it? After all these years serving as director of Wikileaks, this man ends up dying right now as they are apparently doing some real damage to one of our presidential nominees.
Is this a war between competing factions in the intelligence industry? Is it all for show, just the precursor to the last act of the Wikileaks psyop looking to provide the final pretext for shuttering the internet and making dissent a criminal act?
I don’t know. But it is damn fascinating isn’t it? This is probably the most interesting spy story I’ve ever seen and unfortunately we probably wont know anything about it for at least ten years or so. It certainly puts that bullshit phony Snowden psyop to shame, now doesn’t it?