Thursday 21 July 2011

No, Mr. Murdoch, We are the Ones Who Have Been Humbled

By Gordon Duff, Senior Editor


Is Murdoch the Bald One on the Left?
Murdoch seems to have his “ducks in a row,” the “fall guys” are falling, the press is showing the appropriate sympathy for a poor old man betrayed by bad employees. Politicians in the US are lining up behind Murdoch, the curtain of silence, of course many of them have been on his payroll in one way or another, more of his “creatures,” the army of “living dead” that feed on all of us.
Of Murdoch’s “assets,” his most lethal “stinger” has been Julian Assange and Wikileaks. Their secret love affair is subject to continual obfuscations and denials though they are the political sweetheart team of all time, a veritable “Dr. Evil and MiniMe” of journalism.
From the Guardian, a Julian Assange “love tap” threat against Murdoch, his secret patron:
Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, claimed today (July 20, 2010) he was in possession of “insurance” files on Rupert Murdoch and his global media company, News Corporation.
Assange also claimed that WikiLeaks holds more than 500 confidential US diplomatic cables on one broadcasting organisation.
Speaking to journalist John Pilger for an interview to be published tomorrow in the latest edition of the New Statesman, Assange said: “There are 504 US embassy cables on one broadcasting organisation and there are cables on Murdoch and News Corp.”
Pilger, as with Assange, another Murdoch asset, can be seen peddling war on Iran, a Murdoch/Assange/Israel/Neocon project now seemingly slipping between their fingers. The video “evidence” is presented below. Runtime 1 hour 48 minutes…background for when you have time.
From Veterans Today:

AUSSIE “PEACENIKS”…DRUMBEAT FOR WAR ON IRAN

STOPPED JUST SHORT OF HANDING OUT WEAPONS…
Remember the old Hitler joke, “We want peace…a piece of Poland, a piece of France…”
To some Australians, peace has a different meaning than to the rest of us. When you get some folks together, Australia’s powerful Israel lobby, the “old line” Marxists, and the America haters, reality goes right out the window. If this represents “peace activists,” war as a business, war as a way of life, endless war is under very little threat.
The video below is recommended for only the strong of stomach or for the French who find that special “Jerry Lewis” humor in absurdity.
The theatrics are clear, carefully timed and have specific purposes:
The tone is unmistakeable, pure hate for America. The problem isn’t opposition to America’s failed policies, its the purposeful use of obfuscation to cover the root of those policies.
Murdoch is working, is spending and spending to break the connections that will break him, connections to his Jewish background, connections to Israeli intelligence and spying activities, connections to political bribery in a dozen countries, connections to an agenda that looks, more and more, like war crimes than scandal mongering. One connection that is protected with the same vigor as his high level ties to Israel is Murdoch’s “man behind the scenes” role in managing Julian Assange and Wikileaks.
Today, Australian Prime Minister Gillard called for investigations paralleling those in Britain. Yesterday, she was marching to Rupert Murdoch’s tune. She drew criticism from the masters at News Corp who are still able to “sting” in Australia.
Today, Prime Minister Cameron is explaining to parliament why he employed a criminal as one of his highest advisors. His explanation will be no more meaningful than the apology Britain received for decades of base deception and more, so much more. Cameron is Murdoch’s creature.
The US says it has its own plans but no one believes it, America is too far gone. It has no will of its own, not anymore. When the “Fox News” can of worms is opened, it can never be closed, a decade of rigged elections, millions in bribes, perhaps even ties to the Bush insiders who helped plan 9/11 and the subsequent coverup might surface. Fox News, the “brand” Americans know Murdoch by is more than simply conspiracy theories and racial hate in the form of news. That’s simply the ugly surface.
Video runtime, 6 minutes.

Beloved Philanthropist Dame Elisabeth Murdoch with Rabbi Chaim Herzog
There will be no investigation of any consequence in the U.S.
But can we blame Rupert Murdoch, the mystery-man claiming to be the son of an impoverished Australian “something or other” and a mother “hard wired” to the biggest banking houses of Europe.
Murdoch doesn’t pretend to be a “born again” PT Barnum, not hardly. His public persona is very much that of the villain and power mad tyrant.
Rupert, for some reason, told an Israeli audience presenting him a humanitarian award in 2009 that he was not Jewish. So I guess this is Father McDuffy here paying his mother a visit in a Rabbi costume as a joke?
Why the deception? Dame Elisabeth is revered from one end of Australia to the other for her many years of philanthropy to numerous institutions there. Why publicly deny his mother legacy?
Eye of Newt…
Murdoch kept no secrets, not many at least. He started by pouring millions into politics. There it is legal, somewhat at least. Laundering bribes through book deals like the one he had with Newt Gingrich, is legal, somewhat. Congress spent decades installing the needed laxity that allows special interest money to move straight into tax free retirement accounts. Gingrich didn’t invent the system, he just plays it better than anyone else.
Gingrich managed to survive an ethics investigation though his obvious lack of character has left him nonviable, even in American politics.
There are dozens, perhaps hundreds of ways to turn money into power, especially in Washington, home of not just congress but the FBI, CIA, Pentagon and a hundred other shadowy organizations filled with petty bureaucrats feeding on the American taxpayers. They can write imaginary books, advise publications, go on radio or TV and mumble unintelligibly.
Gingrich is Murdoch’s “thing” his creature. Millions have gone to Gingrich through Murdoch and the reciprocation has been epic, paid for by the lives of thousands of Americans, more around the world, paid for in, not only blood but history, paid for by selling out America’s future:
In 1994, Gingrich’s wife, Marianne, was hired by the Israel Export Development Company. This was while her husband, Congressman Newt Gingrich had just announced support for that company’s free trade zone in Israel. Gingrich had already established himself as “fair game” after a series of ethics and IRS investigations involving the GOPAC organization and its questionable financial practices. Sources:
(“Gingrich Aided Export Firm That Employed His Wife”, NY Times News Service, San Francisco Chronicle, February 7, 1995 pA7)
(“Gingrich, Critic of ‘Business as Usual,’ Helps Out Special Interests Like ‘Any Member of Congress’”, Phil Kuntz, Wall Street Journal, April 3, 1995 pA16)
Both articles, exposing the Gingrich/Israel connection were in the Wall Street Journal, a newspaper later purchased by Murdoch, a paper unlikely to carry such as story ever again.
Soon afterward, Newt was called on to aid Murdoch in an FCC complaint made by NBC. They contended that foreign ownership of Fox, Murdoch was not an American, was illegal. Murdoch then gave Gingrich $4.5 million through his publishing company, Harper Collins, to write a book. Murdoch had offered similar deals to Margaret Thatcher and other politicians where Murdoch had regulatory problems. This time, when Newt was found to be meeting with Murdoch’s lobbyists, it all blew up in his face and he was forced to give the money back.
When it came down to “splainin’ time,” Newt and Murdoch denied it all, then it came out that they met secretly on a park bench. Then they claimed Murdoch’s agent, Lynn Chu and Gingrich’s “associate” Jeff Eisenach had cut the deal and forgot to tell them about it. Rupert Murdoch got to keep Fox News and the Neocons gained control of content, making Fox the unofficial voice of Israel, the Republican Party and the military/industrial complex.
Thus began the Gingrich/Murdoch partnership which continues to this day. Sources:
(“Gingrich’s political education”, Jeff Gerth and Stephen Labaton (NY Times News Service), San Francisco Examiner, February 12, 1995 pA6)
(“IRS clears Gingrich donation that led to his House censure”, Capitol Hill Blue Website, February 4, 1999)
(Ethics Committee Drops Last of 84 Charges Against Gingrich ,By Curt Anderson (Associated Press), Washington Post, October 11, 1998, Page A13)
“Use of Tax-Exempt Groups Integral to Political Strategy”, by Charles R. Babcock, Washington Post, January 7, 1997, Page A01)
(“Jump-Start: How Speaker Gingrich Grabbed Power and Attention So Quickly”, Wall Street Journal, January 19, 1995 pA1
(“The Inner Quest of Newt Gingrich”, Gail Sheehy, Vanity Fair, September 1995 p147 “Gingrich, Murdoch reveal lobbyist’s role at meeting”, Katharine Seelye (NY Times News Service), San Francisco Examiner, pA1 “Murdoch, Gingrich Admit They Talked”, San Francisco Chronicle, January 13, 1995)
(“The Mysterious Mrs. Newt”, Martin Fletcher (London Times News Service), SF Examiner, January 15, 1995 pA4 “Newt’s Near Misses”, Ron Curran, The Bay Guardian, January 11, 1995 p10)
(“Newt, Inc.”, Dennis Bernstein, Bay Guardian, February 1, 1995 p19)
With the new Supreme Court ruling making unlimited corporate contributions acceptable, in reality, of course, legalizing bribery of public officials on an unprecedented scale as a form of “free speech” (money talks), Murdoch has ramped up his efforts, openly buying politicians. Murdoch money may have purchased, during our last congressional election, 125 seats. With 480 members of congress “sworn” to support Israel, right or wrong, no matter the cost to the United States, is this same list also Murdoch’s list? How many are owned, borrowed or rented, maybe blackmailed? Do they trade like baseball cards, do they spoil if not refrigerated after opening?
The court that “elected” Bush based on “equal protection” allowed corporations feudal rights in America under “freedom of speech.” What better nation could Murdoch put under his greasy thumb.
Whatever has been done, is done, half of Washington is on a hidden payroll of some special interest group, invariably one filled with bad intentions for the United States, and uncovering the real “Murdoch” may be the key toward breaking this process down and beginning to reassert American influence in Washington.
He has been caught. Now he fights to break the “connections.” Murdoch isn’t “Murdoch,” he is a conspiracy within conspiracies, he is political parties, he is a law onto himself, he is, to the weak and fearful, the voice and presence of the creator of the universe himself.
He has chosen to “rule in hell,” and rule he does. As for “hell,” he brought it with him in his bag of tricks.

Wiki-Hacking
What was called “hacking,” really “spying,” has turned out to be a major national security scandal in Britain. This week, the head of Scotland Yard resigned because of bribery issues as did their chief of counter-terrorism. This sure as hell doesn’t sound much like the usual naughty sex and celeb gossip the newsies are trying to color this as. Is someone ever going to ask why the head of Scotland Yard’s counter-terrorism unit got burned for dealings with a simple smut publisher? We are supposed to accept that, and put our heads back into the sand?
Of course, it isn’t just Murdoch and Newcorp/Fox that is dirty here. It’s all of them.
I am surprised no one has made the tie in yet. Where has Wikileaks gone? Isn’t poor Julian Assange, secret protege of Rupert Murdoch, still under “house arrest” somewhere? Fox News had a role early on, building the credibility of Julian Assange as a “hacker” and “enemy of the state” though Assange prove to be everything but.
What did Fox do? It orchestrated attacks, half hearted at best, against Assange, using New Gingrich, Murdoch associate (as is Assange) and Bill O’Reilly, next to Sean Hannity, the saddest part of the Fox “humbug” stable of talking heads.
This, in itself, isn’t enough.
  • Fox is “Islamophobic”…and Wikileaks material continually bashed Arabs and, in particular, Pakistan
  • Fox protects Israel and so does Wikileaks, perhaps more than that:
“Assange met with Israeli officials in Geneva earlier this year and struck the secret deal. The Israel government, it seems, had somehow found out or expected that the documents to be leaked contained a large number of documents about the Israeli attacks on Lebanon and Gaza in 2006 and 2008-9 respectively. These documents, which are said to have originated mainly from the Israeli embassies in Tel Aviv and Beirut, where removed and possibly destroyed by Assange, who is the only person who knows the password that can open these documents, the sources added.”
  • Fox (except for a short period in late 2010) opposes any new investigation into 9/11. Julian Assange is a powerful opponent of a new and open investigation of 9/11 for “reasons unknown and unknowable.”
“More importantly, Wikileaks has never had a document mentioning the 9/11 investigation, the controversy over the “9/12″ secret flight to Israel or the “dancing Israeli’s,” the 5 Mossad agents arrested on the George Washington bridge on 9/11 in a van with 2,000 pounds of explosives. This group, admittedly “documenting” the 9/11 attack for the Israeli government was kept in custody for 10 months and only released after diplomatic wrangling and a major lobbying effort.
Hundreds of cables were generated by this issue and thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, tied to 9/11. All magically disappeared at the hands of Julian Assange whose public statements on 9/11 now make him suspect.Fox supports an attack on Iran, something also openly supported by Julian Assange. Iran had been a continual target of Wikileaks.
  • Fox has continually called for an attack on Iran. Assange has supported this position and Wikileaks has been filled with “seeded material” condemning Iran. This made Assange more good friends along with his “pretend” enemies:
“Following the leak (and even before), Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a press conference that Israel had “worked in advance” to limit any damage from leaks, adding that “no classified Israeli material was exposed by WikiLeaks.” In an interview with the Time magazine around the same time, Assange praised Netanyahu as a hero of transparency and openness!”
  • Newscorp/Fox’s downfall hasn’t been charges of “hacking.” The real crimes that were covered up were tied to blackmail and corruption. The new crimes are simply the bribery used to cover the old crimes. Newscorp has been about blackmail, political blackmail. Here, Wikileaks and Murdoch parallel, leaks leaked and leaks not leaked. When Assange “withheld” or “censored” material, what was the reward, the “tit for tat” as it were? Who collected? Who or what was the organization that built Assange, the “heroic figure,” always photographed like Mussolini, from nothing? Only Murdoch has that power, has the “moral laxity,” now well established, for such an “operation.”
The current scandal, initially spying or “hacking” and now public bribery, top officials for some reason, centered around, not “gossip” but terrorism, resignations from officials tied to the investigations of the 7/7 bombings in particular, has clear national security implications for Britain and, of course, the United States.
Is Wikileaks connected somehow? We think so. For those who have forgotten, this is the cover story of why Wikileaks was discredited;
Assange was found to be working directly with major papers, the New York Times, the Guardian, and others. Items that were “unfavourable” to Israel were edited out. Other items, as we learned from Zbigniew Brezenski, were “edited in” or “seeded.” These items were false, planted by a national security agency, which we tracked to Israel.
Reports have come in today, tying Wikileaks founder, Julian Assange, directly to Israeli intelligence and “Israel friendly” media outlets. We are told Assange, while at a Geneva meeting, agreed to allow Israel to select or censor all Wikileak output.
Despite the dramatic arrest of Julian Assange for rape, a story long hyped by the media, Assange “the martyr” now appears to be Assange “the Israeli spy.” Reports from inside Wikileaks differ greatly from the image presented by the press, an Assange tied to ultra-nationalist Israeli groups, an Assange with an extremist agenda, an Assange who sees himself as a geopolitical player, willing to censor, willing to fabricate and willing to betray.
On the Brezenski interview with Judy Woodruff that helped Wikileaks implode:
ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI: But I think the most serious issues are not those which are getting the headlines right now. Who cares if Berlusconi is described as a clown. Most Italians agree with that. Who cares if Putin is described as an alpha dog? He probably is flattered by it.
The real issue is, who is feeding Wikipedia on this issue — Wiki — Wiki — WikiLeaks on this issue? They’re getting a lot of information which seems trivial, inconsequential, but some of it seems surprisingly pointed. …The very pointed references to Arab leaders could have as their objective undermining their political credibility at home, because this kind of public identification of their hostility towards Iran could actually play against them at home.
Editor’s note: The use of the term, “pointed” is key. This indicates two classes of information and also begins building a hypothesis to support “intent.” If there is “intent” in the leaks, then they are an intelligence operation, not a leak.
It’s, rather, a question of whether WikiLeaks are being manipulated by interested parties that want to either complicate our relationship with other governments or want to undermine some governments, because some of these items that are being emphasized and have surfaced are very pointed.
And I wonder whether, in fact, there aren’t some operations internationally, intelligence services, that are feeding stuff to WikiLeaks, because it is a unique opportunity to embarrass us, to embarrass our position, but also to undermine our relations with particular governments.
Editor’s note: Brzezinsky goes exactly there, indicating his belief that Wikileaks is tied to an intelligence agency. This is a full and direct challenge to the credibility of wikileaks showing no reservations whatsoever.
For example, leaving aside the personal gossip about Sarkozy or Berlusconi or Putin, the business about the Turks is clearly calculated in terms of its potential impact on disrupting the American-Turkish relationship….the top leaders, Erdogan and Davutoglu and so forth, are using some really, really, very sharp language.
JUDY WOODRUFF: But this is 250 — it’s a quarter-of-a-million documents.
ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI: Precisely.
JUDY WOODRUFF: How easy would it be to seed this to make sure that it was slanted a certain way?
ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI: Seeding — seeding it is very easy. I have no doubt that WikiLeaks is getting a lot of the stuff from sort of relatively unimportant sources, like the one that perhaps is identified on the air. But it may be getting stuff at the same time from interested intelligence parties who want to manipulate the process and achieve certain very specific objectives.
Editor’s note: Brzezinski’s assertion is that “chickenfeed,” things off the news, low level “junk” intel is being “seeded” by an intelligence service to serve an agenda with “very specific objectives.” Can anything be more clear?
STEPHEN HADLEY : The — what we know or what has been said publicly is it looks like a data dump through a pretty junior-level person. So, in terms of that material, it looks like a data dump. Generally, in Washington, I have had the rule that, if there are two explanations, one is conspiracy and one is incompetence, you ought to go with incompetence. You will be right 90 percent of the time.
Editor’s note: The Obama administration withdrew the AIPAC spying convictions when it was clear that Stephen Hadley would be put on the stand by the defense. Hadley’s very close relationship with the defendants in this spy trial brings up a number of interesting questions which are not hard to answer if you read his response above.
ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI: But, Steve, the other foreign intelligence services don’t have to wait for me to make that suggestion. I think they can think of it themselves, particularly
Why Tie Them Together At All?
Would you allow a 4 year old to have a loaded gun? If you were a prime minister or president, there are ways you could be “encouraged” to do pretty much exactly that. What we have been doing, we being the press, we being too many of the public, we have been allowing that 4 year old to walk among us, Glock in hand, picking one of us off every so often, silent as long as we were allowed to go our merry way.
When the British Parliament lets Murdoch off the hook, not even a hand slap, when Attorney General Eric Holder walks away from the investigation of Fox News that was requested by the few remaining “clean” members of congress, we will have only given that 4 year old a bigger gun.
As the world closed in on Assange, his powerful protectors, Dershowitz and the unseen others, raised their finger on his behalf.
Was it Murdoch pulling his strings and, if so, who is the real master puppeteer?
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
Posted by at
Labels: ,

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)