You are hereBlogs / dlindorff's blog / A government gone mad, a media gone flaccid: Attacking the Wrong People
A government gone mad, a media gone flaccid: Attacking the Wrong People
By Dave Lindorff
By Dave Lindorff
What does it say about the the American government, its president, and its military today, that the the largest military/intelligence organization in the history of mankind has launched a global manhunt for Julian Assange, head of the Wikileaks organization? And what does it say about corporate American journalists that they attack the only real journalist in the White House press corps, when she alone has shown the guts to speak truth?
The Hunt for Julian Assange
Consider first the case of Wikileaks founder Assange, whom Daniel Ellsberg, the man who leaked the Pentagon Papers, warns is in danger if found of being snuffed by the Pentagon’s search teams. First of all, let’s make something clear: he is “guilty” of no crime, but only of doing what American journalists should have done long ago: exposing the crimes of the US government. His Wikileaks famously leaked the military video showing that the crew of a helicopter gunship in Iraq in 2007 had shot up and killed a group of innocent Iraqi civilians, including two Reuters journalists, and laughed and mocked the victims as they were slaughtered. Now the same whistleblower website threatens to release hundreds of thousands of State Department cables that, among other things, reportedly include embarrassing comments by US officials about foreign leaders.
How is it (mainstream journalists ought to be asking but aren’t), that the Pentagon can unleash its vast intelligence resources to hunt down the Australian-born Assange, but cannot bring itself to devote those same resources and commitment to hunting down Osama Bin Laden, the man they claim is behind not only the attacks on the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon itself, but also the resistance to US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan?
I’m not sure which is the bigger scandal here: the Pentagon’s grotesque misallocation of resources, or the media’s unwillingness to point it out....
For the rest of this article, please go to ThisCantBeHappening.net, the new collectively-owned, journalist-run independent online newspaper, at: ThisCantBeHappening.net
- dlindorff's blog
- Login to post comments
-
- Email this page
- Printer-friendly version
There are couple of ways in which that otherwise okay sentence is misstated.
1) Wikileaks doesn't threaten anyone. If the criminal elites feel threatened by their crimes being exposed, then they only need to make sure that they stop their criminal ways. Exposing crimes is not a threat though; and threatening people is a crime.
2) Julian Assange has denied having possession of the State Department cables the Pentagon, so far, alleges were provided to Wikileaks. It's true that he might be saying this to try to buy some time in order to do what he can to make sure the copies of the cables get publicly posted, but we don't have proof that he has any of this.
I believe that the US Army intelligence officer under arrest for having allegedly provided the video recording of the 2007 massacre of around a dozen unarmed Iraqi civilians and two Reuters journalists or reporters is likely telling the truth about having provided the copies of the State Dept cables to Wikileaks; BUT, likely does not mean certainly, definitely, beyond any reasonable doubt, proven fact, et cetera. And he could be just part of a scam operation being used to try to shut down Wikileaks. It could be a con job being played on us in order to try to get us to side with the forced shutting down of Wikileaks.
We don't know. We don't have inside knowledge of the details. We only know what's reported and reports are easily falsified.
We have an extreme example of that with the video footage that Israeli leadership claims the IDF commandos filmed when they raided the Mavi Marmara, f.e. And there are many other examples. One of those are the repeated phony and falsified video recordings of persons the US govt claimed to be Osama bin Laden speaking since the 9/11 attacks in 2001; but there are plenty of examples of govts LYING and news media publishing the lies without any investigative work done.
Anyway, neither Julian Assange nor other people working with him to provide Wikileaks have threatened anyone, and he denied having the copies of the cables in his or Wikileaks' possession.
We know that, as well as the fact that the Pentagon is trying to [hunt] him down and that's it's clearly to put an end to his "troublemaking" ways. After all, we have no evidence of honesty from the Pentagon, CIA ops chiefs, et cetera. We have a lot of proof that they are [terrorist] organizations officially labelled as parts of the govt.
It's like the Mafia and other criminal organizations; what they do with "troublemakers". They SILENCE them; or certainly try.
Maybe a couple of possible reasons are the following.
Firstly, they realize that OBL most probably died ... plenty of years ago; and realize that regardless of precisely when he died, the chances of him being alive today are rather NIL.
And tey're owned by rich individuals and corporations, which are all war profiteers for whom OBL makes a scapegoat that they idiotically believe to be profitably useful, et cetera.
We haven't heard from the [real] OBL since shortly following the 9/11 attacks; definitely at no time since fall 2001. But, heh, his ghost is still useful, for profits; the delusional western leadership, war-makers, war profiteers, ... evidently believe.
Meanwhile, we all know that Julian Assange is alive and well; and we must hope that he remains that way. But the western elites don't want him to remain that way and the news media kiss and/or brownnose Corporate America's ass. To say they kiss CA's ass is more PC than saying that they're brownnosers, but heck, the latter is also a precise description.
They are co-opted and they are guilty, because they are [responsible] for this co-option. They refuse to perform their profession honourably because they know it'll cost them their jobs and salaries, incomes. They dishonourably prefer to trade their souls for money. And [trade] it is; an awfully rotten kind.
They don't care about this actually making them [traitors]. They prefer to associate their souls with money even as it's incressingly worthless.
Re. SCANDAL
Quote: "I’m not sure which is the bigger scandal here: the Pentagon’s grotesque misallocation of resources, or the media’s unwillingness to point it out....".
Firstly, I think that what the Pentagon's doing is considerably worse than only a "grotesque misallocation of resources".
We should not dismiss the fact that it's very clear that what the Pentagon is doing and saying is really exposing the Pentagon for what it is; an extremely criminal organization that's powerful, murderous, treasonous, .... The Pentagon is acting in a manner that we should immediately be able to realize as characteristic of organized crime.
Secondly, it's clear that the corporate news media is extremely and criminally complicit; AGAIN.
Both are "nothing new"; we've seen this before. We've been able to realize the above about both before, many times.
And it's scandolous every time this importantly happens. When it's about relatively minor matters, then we can easily or much more easily dismiss the flaws; but it's often not about minor matters at all.
In the latter cases, it should always cause widespread and strong public outrage; enough for large numbers of people to gather and cause a human earthquake.
We can't dismiss either, and should realize that the media is only the instrument or an instrument used to try to brainwash and, thereby, manipulate us; while it's the Pentagon that massacres millions of people and destroys countries. Regarding the former, we have power against it. We can individually see to our responsibilities to make sure that we get informed from non-corporate and honest sources. We don't, however, have the ability to stop the war machine, the Pentagon and its masters.
That distinction makes the Pentagon's conduct more truly scandalous, that is, outrageous. We can dismiss the clown fiends of media, for they really don't have control over our minds and lives. They can't really oppress us, deny us our rights and legitimate liberties, et cetera. They really have no power.
What's more scandalous; people being irresponsible citizens or members of society and letting themselves blindly follow unverified reporting, or the fiend reporters who are complicit in trying to deceive or misinform the public? I prefer to emphasize individual responsibility, so it's more scandalous to me that people are grotesquely and sadly irresponsible citizens.
Being dumb sheep is not conducive to [respect] or being respected; or meriting respect!
I would still respect a sheep's rights and legitimate liberties, but being irresponsible citizens is neither a right nor a legitimate liberty!