By the Editor.

Dear John,

As a long-time reader of yours and fellow truth-seeker I feel compelled to reach out to you in light of the Wikileaks saga, and your very public role in it.

Anybody who has read or watched any of your works knows that you are acutely aware of the ills of globalisation, propaganda & disinformation, war, and the elite which feeds off it. I must admit then, that I was sorely disappointed to learn of your public support of Julian Assange and Wikileaks. As an investigative journalist of such great talent and experience, I expected you to spot this clever but brazen counter-intelligence programme for what it is.

There are countless ‘red flags’ with Julian Assange and Wikileaks that will alarm an objective observer. The following points simply cannot be reconciled with the notion that Wikileaks is a genuine whistle-blowing organisation. I’m interested in your opinion.

The sum total of the Wikileaks operation thus far has been an overwhelming vindication of the US-Israeli propaganda & war effort concerning Iran, Pakistan, North Korea, and other nations on the fraudulent War On Terror’s hit-list. A few examples:

It’s not only the Israelis and their American friends that want Iran crushed, the Arab world wants it too:
Wikileaks release of embassy cables reveals US concerns
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11858895

WMDs were found in Iraq:
WikiLeaks Show WMD Hunt Continued in Iraq – With Surprising Results
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/10/wikileaks-show-wmd-hunt-continued-in-iraq-with-surprising-results/

This leak would have readers believe that chemical weapons were found in Iraq, and that the civilian death toll is a meagre 60,000 rather than the one-million-plus figure that all credible estimates suggest. Oh, and it’s Iran’s fault:
Chemical Weapons, Iranian Agents and Massive Death Tolls Exposed in WikiLeaks’ Iraq Docs
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/10/chemical-weapons-iranian-agents-and-massive-death-tolls-exposed-in-wikileaks-iraq-docs/

The two arch-nemeses of the Anglo-American globalist axis are conveniently implicated here:
Iran Fortifies Its Arsenal With the Aid of North Korea
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/middleeast/29missiles.html

And another one:
WikiLeaks: Burma ‘building nuclear site with North Korea’s help’
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8193002/WikiLeaks-Burma-building-nuclear-site-with-North-Koreas-help.html

Here, Wikileaks and The Guardian champion the need for neoliberal takeovers of Venezuela’s state-owned oil company:
WikiLeaks cables: Oil giants squeeze Chávez as Venezuela struggles
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/09/wikileaks-oil-giants-squeeze-chavez

This cable is eerily reminiscent of the old ’45 minute’ claim:
WikiLeaks Cable: Iranian Missiles Can Strike Israel in 12 Minutes
http://www.aolnews.com/2011/01/03/wikileaks-cable-iranian-missiles-can-strike-israel-in-12-minute/

After Israel murders Turkish citizens in international waters, Turkey protests. This timely leak paints Turkey as a terrorist-supporter:
WikiLeaks release to show NATO ally Turkey helped Al Qaeda in Iraq
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/11/wikileaks-turkey-helped-al-qaeda-iraq/

You get the idea.

One could argue that these news stories don’t necessarily prove that Wikileaks has underhanded intentions; the corporate media is cherry-picking the stories that fit its pro-establishment line. I would respond to such arguments by stating the obvious: Julian Assange is a ‘new media’ expert, and skilled hacker of world renown. He knew that the corporate media would apply such spin, yet he still chose to leak first exclusively to corporate outlets such as Der Spiegel, The Guardian, and subsequently the New York Times. A few hundred cables are released, they run their stories and the damage is done. The remaining cables are released at snail’s pace while the Western street is feverishly devouring the stories it is fed. For a group ostensibly committed to exposing the truth, Wikileaks’ strategy is puzzling.

These corporate outlets including the New York Times lied zealously to take us to Iraq – what makes you think they’ve suddenly developed a penchant for the truth? The NYT has even admitted contacting the US government, seeking suggestions for what to redact from the cables! Surely a novel way to ‘leak’ government ‘secrets’.

As far as Assange himself is concerned, I’ve been racking my brains to try and explain the following. Perhaps you can shed some light.

What kind of anti-establishment whistleblower is a self-professed proponent of free-market capitalism? Free-market capitalism is the leading cause of war, death, destruction, torture, oppression, and the subversion of democracy worldwide. Needless to say, you already knew that.

Tellingly, if you read the aforementioned interview with Assange, you will also find his statement that “WikiLeaks is designed to make capitalism more free…”

What kind of anti-establishment whistleblower protects the cover-up of 9/11 from scrutiny, calling it a ‘false conspiracy’? He would have us believe that when two 100-storey steel-framed skyscrapers are hit by planes they explode into dust in seconds leaving little debris larger than a phone book, and a three-storey rubble pile.

He would have us believe that WTC-7, a third steel-framed skyscraper that fell in an identical fashion that day, collapsed because of fire. This is an event with no historical precedent. This is an event that the 9/11 Commission report’s 571 pages did not mention once. This is an event that Senator Joe Lieberman says did not occur. It would seem that Assange is in good company.

Assange, the head of a global media organisation whose raison d’être is exposing government secrets and crimes, is unaware of the wealth of evidence proving this cover-up? It takes considerable ignorance to believe that, John.

What kind of anti-establishment whistleblower is defended by a corporate lawyer who is a Freeman of the City of London – leading centre of global banking and finance? Mark Stephens has even represented state organs and corporate media heavyweights such as ABC, CNN, and the New York Times.

What kind of anti-establishment whistleblower is given awards by The Economist magazine? We’re talking about a mainstream media outlet that is a known free-market cheerleader, and is part owned by the Rothschild banking family.

The very media that you rightfully deride for being a purveyor of state propaganda is trumpeting the cause of Julian Assange and Wikileaks. Does that not raise questions in your mind?

Honestly John, can you see Mordechai Vanunu getting slick photo-shoots, exclusive interviews and round-the-clock front page coverage at the likes of The Guardian, New York Times, and Forbes magazine?

I don’t for a moment question your integrity. Perhaps there’s a simpler reason for your wholesale purchase of the Wikileaks fraud. Assange has very publicly, been pursued and threatened with imprisonment, even assassination and execution. All of this for leaking the kinds of secrets that your career has aimed to expose. As a journalist, a fear of sharing a similar fate to Assange is understandable. Sadly when fear enters the room, rational thought cowers in the corner.

The global anti-war public has abandoned rational thought in favour of fevered celebrity worship. Some journalists have done the same, perhaps due to empathy or fear. I think it’s time that we took a step back and employed rational thought once again.

Do you doubt that they would be capable of this? Counter-intelligence is not a new concept or technique; it’s been employed for decades – it is necessary that something like Wikileaks should be approached with caution. Those among us who’d ordinarily spot propaganda at twenty paces are at risk of being led away by the nose like a blinkered horse.

Now more than ever, we have to be vigilant and coldly objective; they won’t try the barefaced WMD lies of 2003 this time around. Ever resourceful, they are stepping up their game and employing the next tool in the drawer.

“If you want to know the truth about Iraq, join the millions who have given up on the silences of the mainstream media.” ~ John Pilger, November 2005.