The American Mainstream Media is once again being called on to do a marvelous job of ignoring the implications of the latest WikiLeaks data dump and not ask any question which would lead Americans to think for themselves. Why shouldn’t they play along? The American Media were accessories to Bush’s War Crimes by their silence, so why shouldn’t they, once again, help divert America’s attention away from the presentation of more evidence of his war crimes?
All the media coverage of the leaks focuses attention on just one fellow, Julian Assange. If that fallaciously conjures up an impression of a lone hacker who rounds up some embarrassing information and then hits the “post” button on his computer and releases the material to the world; that will make the task of branding the fellow as a crazy lone wolf nut so much easier. It takes days for people at the New York Times or Germany’s Der Spiegel magazine to go through all the new available material and yet they would have us believe that this guy rounds up all that massive amount of material, puts it into order for a file, and then sits back and waits for the moment when he feels like posting it, all by himself.
Why the delay? Is the release of the material negotiable? If so; how so?
Doesn’t it seem logical that for that much work, there must be more than one fellow doing the clerk work? If that is true then one has to ask, is the “lone leaker” paying the others out of his own pocket? If that premise were valid then the good guys who hate to see all the negative publicity produced by the WikiLeaks could stop them by killing the fellow at the center of the operations. That hasn’t happened yet. Are we supposed to believe that some specialists working for the USA can’t put the hit on this guy?
It should be obvious to the least computer savvy reporter writing about the latest document dump that it wasn’t done on a personal computer bought at the local Radio Shack. Doesn’t the massive quantity of electronic data indicate that it has to be assembled on a gigantic mainframe and wouldn’t such a rig leave its electronic fingerprints on the files which would mean that American intelligence investigators could easily identify the specific machine which is the source for all the WikiLeaks material?
Wouldn’t it then be time for the US to call in their top hackers and sabotage Assange’s machine? If the American computer security people could do that and haven’t done it; who gets a pass?
This just in! As this columnist was preparing to post this column, a Google News search revealed that the BBC was reporting a hack attack on the WikiLeaks site.
Could it be that the people who are responsible for the WikiLeaks material are very upset with what George W. Bush did? Who has the most to loose if George W. Bush dies of old age and never even gets a ticket for his misdeeds? Wouldn’t a failure to punish Bush make the International Court of Justice (AKA the World Court) look pathetic and impotent?
Could the WikiLeaks revelations be part of an effort by the folks at the World Court in the Hague to make it impossible for the citizens of the USA to hold to the “he didn’t know” defense and thus force the USA to either fully endorse Bush’s war crimes and protect him from prosecution or turn him over to the World Court for a war crimes trial?
Doesn’t the Assange, who is reported to be an Australian citizen, live close to where the World Court is located?
Who has the power to collect all the diplomatic messages involved in the latest release? If some Commie spies collected the material, wouldn’t they compromise themselves and their methods by releasing the new material? Does the World Court have the ability to collect (subpoena?) the material that was just released? Can any of the countries who signed up to be part of the World Court, decline a request for material for use in an ongoing investigation?
The USA opted out of the World Court when George W. Bush was President. Wouldn’t it be a grand coincidence if by doing so he also slowed down any future investigations into his conduct while in office?
Hypothetically think of it in terms of Adolf Eichmann being caught in Germany rather than Argentina and then the Germans refused to turn him over to another country for a trial.
Doesn’t the World Court accumulate evidence in anticipation of possible war crimes trials? If they have a bunch of evidence and no possibility of a trial what do they do with the evidence? Just put it in a warehouse? Couldn’t they leak the evidence so that the media would eventually just have to put two and two together and figure out “who done it?” and then start crying for Justice?
Wouldn’t Germany be rather upset with it if they had to pay dearly when their country’s leaders were put on trial for war crimes and then had to sit idly by and watch the country that beat them skate on their war crimes? Think they’d be more than just a little willing to prove the principles elaborated in the Nuremburg War Crimes Trials weren’t all one way streets?
Think Germany would be more than a little anxious to see Americans in the defendants’ docket? Or would they endorse some hypocrisy at their own expense?
Doesn’t the Occam’s Razor principle method of reasoning point to a World Court effort?
How come the New York Times always leaves it up to the World’s Laziest Journalist to figure these things out? Will the World’s Laziest Journalist be invited to their Christmas bacchanal?
On a cold rainy Saturday in the SF Bay area, it seemed like a good idea to postpone a column about Black Friday and use the impending WikiLeaks document dump for a bit of amusement via a variation on the old board game called Clue. It used to be that newspapers would carry columns that were not pure political propaganda; now it seems that it’s up to web based bloggers to challenge people to think for themselves.
At the very same time that the latest WikiLeaks material was being released to the world, this columnist was starting a read of Keith Richards new autobiography, Life, and we were struck by an odd possibility. In the first chapter, Keith confesses that he got away with a massive amount of naughty behavior. Does the USA think that it has become the international equivalent of a Keith Richards nation with special “I can get away with all the naughty behavior I want” celebrity status?
If the United States is going to continually mock the principles on which the World Court was established; wouldn’t that type of attitude only enrage the people who work in and for the World Court? Wouldn’t they, of all the potential suspects, be the most enthusiastic people when these massive amounts of incriminating evidence turn up?
Don’t detectives first ask “who has the most to gain?” Isn’t it obvious that as the leaks continue, the pressure for the USA to turn over George W. Bush will also continue to mount?
If the World Court were the “man behind the curtain” for the WikiLeaks, wouldn’t they be helped along by diplomatic immunity?
It used to be that IBM promoted plaques that urged people to “Think.” Where has that attitude gone? Now, it has been replaced by ubiquitous signs showing a generic face and the word “Obey.”
If these WikiLeaks dumps keep happening, the USA will have to no other option than to elect JEB Bush President so that he can grant a Presidential Pardon for war crimes to his brother and then the matter will be firmly and finally settled once and for all.
Keith Richards (augmented by help from James Fox [Life Little Brown and Company hardback page 18]) has written: “But there was one last condition. We had to give a press conference before we went and be photographed with our arms around the judge. Ronnie (Wood) and I conducted our press conference from the bench. I was wearing a fireman’s hat by this time and I was filmed pounding the gavel and announcing to the press, ‘Case Closed.’”
Now the disk jockey will play Spade Cooley’s 1947 hit “You Can’t Take Texas out of Me,” Johnny Cash’s “Live from Folsom Prison” album, and Jerry Lee “The Killer” Lewis’s biggest hit “Great Balls of Fire.” We have to go to try to find the betting odds on JEB. Have a “such is life” type week.