NB: This descrip­tion con­tains mate­r­i­al not includ­ed in the orig­i­nal broad­cast.

Lis­ten:
MP3 Side 1 | Side 2

Intro­duc­tion: Con­tin­u­ing cov­er­age of the remark­able Wik­iLeaks phe­nom­e­non, the pro­gram ana­lyzes more of the diverse, sin­is­ter ele­ments stew­ing beneath the sur­face of this dish. In addi­tion to the intel­li­gence agen­cies, Nazi and fas­cist ele­ments and appar­ent mind-con­trol cults that fig­ure into the Wik­iLeaks mix, we find none oth­er than Karl Rove, the Machi­avel­lian mas­ter­mind of the Bush admin­is­tra­tion. A top advis­er to the Prime Min­is­ter of Swe­den (dubbed “the Ronald Rea­gan of Europe”), Rove’s con­sum­mate­ly cyn­i­cal method­ol­o­gy may well be man­i­fest­ing in the selec­tion of mate­r­i­al to be sur­faced by Wik­iLeaks.

Long viewed by Mr. Emory as the point man for the Under­ground Reich in the Bush (II) admin­is­tra­tion, Rove’s pres­ence may account for the fact that many of the embar­rass­ing dis­clo­sures con­tained in the Wik­iLeaks doc­u­ments are from the Obama/Hillary Clin­ton State Depart­ment. As will be seen in sub­se­quent pro­grams on Wik­iLeaks, many of the cables that have helped trig­ger upris­ings in the Mid­dle East come from the Bush State Depart­ment. (The pos­si­bil­i­ty that the Mus­lim Broth­er­hood may ben­e­fit from the tur­moil will be explored in future broad­casts.)

Among the peo­ple appar­ent­ly sup­port­ing Wik­iLeaks is financier George Soros. Gen­er­al­ly viewed as a lib­er­al, Soros may well be con­nect­ed to the Bor­mann cap­i­tal net­work, which uses Jews. (Soros got his intro­duc­tion to the busi­ness world help­ing to con­fis­cate prop­erty from Hun­gar­i­an Jews dur­ing the Holo­caust, a peri­od he has described as the hap­pi­est of his life.)

Much of the sec­ond side of the pro­gram explores the pop­u­lar upris­ing in Tunisia, trig­gered in part by Wik­iLeaks cables and–possibly–triggered by Swedish and Ger­man nation­als var­i­ous­ly described as a hunt­ing par­ty and car­ry­ing “auto­mat­ic weapons.” Might Rove, who active­ly court­ed the Mus­lim Broth­er­hood while work­ing for the Bush admin­is­tra­tion, be help­ing to orches­trate a Mus­lim Broth­er­hood takeover of much of the Arab World? This would be an alba­tross around the neck of the Oba­ma admin­is­tra­tion (“Oba­ma lost Egypt”) and would real­ize the goal of the transna­tion­als, the cor­po­ratist wing of the CIA and its cor­re­spond­ing ele­ments in the State Depart­ment. The lat­ter ele­ments have been sup­port­ive of the cor­po­ratist phi­los­o­phy of the Mus­lim Broth­er­hood, and would wel­come its ascen­sion.

Pro­gram High­lights Include: The pres­ence of online, Russ­ian cyber-crim­i­nals in the Wik­iLeaks mix; sup­port giv­en to Julian Assange by the Soros-fund­ed Front­line Club; Assange’s stat­ed desire to enlist the sup­port of Soros’ Open Soci­ety Insti­tute; Wik­iLeaks’ doc­u­ments exon­er­at­ing an Irish neo-Nazi for his appar­ent role in an attempt on the life of Boli­vian pres­i­dent Evo  Morales; Wik­iLeaks’ leak­ing of alleged State Depart­ment doc­u­ments that sup­port the Nazi/UFO pro­pa­gan­da; the “Anony­mous” milieu’s hack­ing of Tunisian gov­ern­ment sites in the run-up to the Tunisian coup.

1. The bulk of the State Depart­ment cables being accessed in the news media have come from Barack Oba­ma’s State Depart­ment and have proved embar­rass­ing to the Oba­ma admin­is­tra­tion. It devel­ops that Karl Rove is hold­ing forth in Swe­den, act­ing as an advis­er to the Swedish Prime Min­is­ter. Media spec­u­la­tion has cen­tered on the pos­si­bil­i­ty that Rove may be aid­ing in Assange’s pros­e­cu­tion. Is Rove actu­al­ly pre­sid­ing over Wik­iLeaks’ oper­a­tions in Swe­den? Is the Wik­iLeaks’ leak­ing of State Depart­ment cables part of a Rove-direct­ed covert oper­a­tion?

. . . For at least 10 years, Rove has been con­nect­ed to Swedish Prime Min­is­ter Fredrik. More recent­ly, Fredrik, who is known as “the Ronald Rea­gan of Europe,” has con­tract­ed Rove to help with his 2010 re-elec­tion cam­paign.

Rove was said to have fled to Swe­den dur­ing the pros­e­cu­tion of for­mer Alaba­ma Demo­c­ra­t­ic Gov. Don Siegel­man, who believes his pros­e­cu­tion to have been polit­i­cal­ly moti­vat­ed.

“Clear­ly, it appears that [Rove], who claims to be of Swedish descent, feels a kin­ship to Swe­den . . . and he has tak­en advan­tage of it sev­er­al times,” the source added.

Shuler’s source spec­u­lat­ed that Rove could be try­ing to pro­tect the Bush lega­cy from doc­u­ments that Wik­iLeaks may have. “The very guy who has released the doc­u­ments that dam­age the Bush­es the most is also the guy that the Bush’s num­ber one oper­a­tive can con­trol by being the Swedish prime min­is­ter’s brain and intel­li­gence and eco­nom­ic advi­sor.” . . .

“Rove’s Hand Seen in Julian Assange’s Pros­e­cu­tion, Sources Allege” by David Edwards; The Raw Sto­ry; 12/20/2010.

2a. The sub­ti­tle comes from the recent Tunisian coup, that was inspired by Wik­iLeaks’ release of a cable that was crit­i­cal of the regime of Ben Ali.

The man now pres­i­dent, Mohamed Ghan­nouchi was pro­filed in Jan­u­ary 2006 in a secret US cable in 2006, recent­ly released by Wik­ileaks. “A tech­no­crat and econ­o­mist, Ghan­nouchi has served as prime min­is­ter since 1999. Is rumored to have told many he wish­es to leave the gov­ern­ment but has not had the oppor­tu­ni­ty. Length of his ser­vice as PM also sug­gests Ben Ali [pres­i­dent until res­ig­na­tion] does not view him as a threat and he is unlike­ly to be viewed as a qual­i­fied suc­ces­sor. How­ev­er, aver­age Tunisians gen­er­al­ly view him with respect and he is well-liked in com­par­i­son to oth­er GOT and RCD [rul­ing par­ty] offi­cials.” Then US ambas­sador William Hud­son said: “Giv­en the fact Ben Ali has a dic­ta­to­r­i­al hold, it is hard to believe he’ll vol­un­tar­i­ly step down.” Even so, “the mere fact an increas­ing num­ber of Tunisians are talk­ing about the end of the Ben Ali era is remark­able.”

Pub­li­ca­tion of Wik­iLeaks sourced pri­vate US com­ments on the cor­rup­tion and nepo­tism of a hat­ed “scle­rot­ic” regime is said to have helped cre­ate Tunisi­a’s protest, and gen­er­at­ed talk by US com­men­ta­tors of a “Wik­ileaks rev­o­lu­tion”.

“Tunisia: The Wik­iLeaks Con­nec­tion” by Ian Black; The Guardian; 1/15/2011.

2b. It turns out that the Anony­mous milieu (described in FTR #732) launched attacks against Tunisian gov­ern­ment sites.

Sites belong­ing to the Min­istry of Indus­try and the Tunisian Stock Exchange were amongst sev­en tar­get­ed by the Anony­mous group since Mon­day.

Oth­er sites have been defaced for what the group calls “an out­ra­geous lev­el of cen­sor­ship” in the coun­try. . . .

“Anony­mous Activists Tar­get Tunisian Gov­ern­ment Sites”; BBC News; 1/4/2011.

3a. Ini­tial reports on the coup described a pos­si­ble role played by for­eign­ers with blond hair and blue eyes, some car­ry­ing Swedish and some car­ry­ing Ger­man pass­ports.

. . . Police said they had caught two men with Swedish pass­ports after one of the shoot­ing inci­dents, and state tele­vi­sion quot­ed a secu­ri­ty source as say­ing four peo­ple car­ry­ing Ger­man pass­ports had been detained in the same inci­dent.

How­ev­er, the Swedish news agency TT said the men were part of a Swedish group vis­it­ing Tunisia to hunt wild boar who had been attacked by a mob. . . .

“Tunisia Forces Fight Pres­i­den­tial Guards” by Tarek Ama­ra and Chris­t­ian Lowe; yahoo.com; 1/16/2011.

3b. Interestingly–and per­haps significantly–an ear­li­er, [now] cached ver­sion of the sto­ry had a sig­nif­i­cant detail, which was scrubbed from lat­er ver­sions of the sto­ry. In this con­text, it is impor­tant to  remem­ber that there are ongo­ing oper­a­tional links between Swedish and Ger­man neo-Nazis. In FTR #734, we will exam­ine the pos­si­bil­i­ty that the coup will ulti­mate­ly ben­e­fit the Mus­lim Broth­er­hood.

Police said they had caught two men with Swedish pass­ports after one of the shoot­ing inci­dents, and state tele­vi­sion quot­ed a secu­ri­ty source as say­ing four peo­ple car­ry­ing Ger­man pass­ports had been detained in the same inci­dent.

It showed what it said were the detained for­eign­ers, with blond hair and fair com­plex­ions, being guard­ed by armed police, and said the arms they were car­ry­ing includ­ed auto­mat­ic weapons. [Ital­ics are mine–D.E.]

How­ev­er, the Swedish news agency TT said the men were part of a Swedish group vis­it­ing Tunisia to hunt wild boar who had been attacked by a mob. . . .

“Tunisia Forces Fight Pres­i­den­tial Guards” by Tarek Ama­ra and Chris­t­ian Lowe; yahoo.com; 1/16/2011.

4. Among the ingre­di­ents in Wik­iLeaks soup appears to be bil­lion­aire financier George Soros, who has pro­vid­ed financ­ing to the Front­line Club, one of the insti­tu­tions sup­port­ing Julian Assange.

. . . Mr. [Vaughn] Smith set up Front­line by bor­row­ing £3 mil­lion ($5.7 mil­lion) against his family’s estate in Nor­folk, Eng­land, and has received financ­ing for its events from the Open Soci­ety Insti­tute, a phil­an­thropic orga­ni­za­tion set up by the bil­lion­aire investor and phil­an­thropist George Soros. Though Front­line has yet to break even, Mr. Smith is weigh­ing the pos­si­bil­i­ty of open­ing a club in New York or Wash­ing­ton, per­haps with a local busi­ness part­ner. . . .

“In Lon­don, A Haven and a Forum for War Reporters” by Eric Pfan­ner; The New York Times; 8/26/2010.

5. The rela­tion­ship between Assange and the Front­line Club is detailed in a Guardian arti­cle.

There has been mount­ing dis­qui­et among some mem­bers of the Front­line Club over the rela­tion­ship forged between its founder, Vaugh­an Smith, and Julian Assange  of Wik­iLeaks.

Now Smith has invit­ed con­cerned mem­bers to an “open forum” tomor­row evening to dis­cuss the issue. It will begin with a con­ver­sa­tion between Smith and John Owen, chair­man of the club’s board of trustees.

Smith will explain the deci­sion-mak­ing process behind the club’s involve­ment with Assange. He spent two months work­ing from the club before his arrest in ear­ly Decem­ber. He is fac­ing extra­di­tion to Swe­den.

When Assange was refused bail because he had no fixed abode, Smith offered his home in Nor­folk as an address in order to secure bail for Assange. He has been stay­ing there since being released. . . .

“Front­line Club to Dis­cuss Founder’s Sup­port for Julian Assange” by Roy Greenslade; The Guardian; 1/18/2011.

6. There are indi­ca­tions that Wik­iLeaks had intend­ed to enlist the sup­port of Soros all along.

. . .  Oper­at­ing a Web site to post leaked doc­u­ments isn’t very expen­sive (Young esti­mates he spends a lit­tle over $100 a month for Cryp­tome’s serv­er space). So when oth­er Wik­ileaks founders start­ed to talk about the need to raise $5 mil­lion and com­plained that an ini­tial round of pub­lic­i­ty had affect­ed “our del­i­cate nego­ti­a­tions with the Open Soci­ety Insti­tute and oth­er fund­ing bod­ies,” Young says, he resigned from the effort. . . .

“Wik­ileaks’ Estranged Co-Founder Becomes a Crit­ic (Q&A)” by Declan McCul­lough; Cnet News; 7/20/2010.

7a. Hav­ing helped the Nazis with the con­fis­ca­tion of Jew­ish prop­er­ty dur­ing the Holo­caust in his Native Hun­gary, Soros is remark­ably free of pangs of con­science con­cern­ing his actions. He has described this as the “hap­pi­est” time of his life!

[George Soros Inter­view On 60 Min­utes]

When the Nazis occu­pied Budapest in 1944, George Soros’ father was a suc­cess­ful lawyer. He lived on an island in the Danube and liked to com­mute to work in a row­boat. But know­ing there were prob­lems ahead for the Jews, he decid­ed to split his fam­i­ly up. He bought them forged papers and he bribed a gov­ern­ment offi­cial to take 14-year-old George Soros in and swear that he was his Chris­t­ian god­son. But sur­vival car­ried a heavy price tag. While hun­dreds of thou­sands of Hun­gar­i­an Jews were being shipped off to the death camps, George Soros accom­pa­nied his pho­ny god­fa­ther on his appoint­ed rounds, con­fis­cat­ing prop­er­ty from the Jews.

(Vin­tage footage of Jews walk­ing in line; man drag­ging lit­tle boy in line)

KROFT: (Voiceover) These are pic­tures from 1944 of what hap­pened to George Soros’ friends and neigh­bors.

(Vin­tage footage of women and men with bags over their shoul­ders walk­ing; crowd by a train)

KROFT: (Voiceover) You’re a Hun­gar­i­an Jew…

Mr. SOROS: (Voiceover) Mm-hmm.

KROFT: (Voiceover) …who escaped the Holo­caust…

(Vin­tage footage of women walk­ing by train)

Mr. SOROS: (Voiceover) Mm-hmm.

(Vin­tage footage of peo­ple get­ting on train)

KROFT: (Voiceover) …by–by pos­ing as a Chris­t­ian.

Mr. SOROS: (Voiceover) Right.

(Vin­tage footage of women help­ing each oth­er get on train; train door clos­ing with peo­ple in box­car)

KROFT: (Voiceover) And you watched lots of peo­ple get shipped off to the death camps.

Mr. SOROS: Right. I was 14 years old. And I would say that that’s when my char­ac­ter was made.

KROFT: In what way?

Mr. SOROS: That one should think ahead. One should under­stand and–and antic­i­pate events and when–when one is threat­ened. It was a tremen­dous threat of evil. I mean, it was a–a very per­son­al expe­ri­ence of evil.

KROFT: My under­stand­ing is that you went out with this pro­tec­tor of yours who swore that you were his adopt­ed god­son.

Mr. SOROS: Yes. Yes.

KROFT: Went out, in fact, and helped in the con­fis­ca­tion of prop­er­ty from the Jews.

Mr. SOROS: Yes. That’s right. Yes.

KROFT: I mean, that’s–that sounds like an expe­ri­ence that would send lots of peo­ple to the psy­chi­atric couch for many, many years. Was it dif­fi­cult?

Mr. SOROS: Not–not at all. Not at all. Maybe as a child you don’t–you don’t see the con­nec­tion. But it was–it cre­at­ed no–no prob­lem at all.

KROFT: No feel­ing of guilt?

Mr. SOROS: No.

KROFT: For exam­ple that, ‘I’m Jew­ish and here I am, watch­ing these peo­ple go. I could just as eas­i­ly be there. I should be there.’ None of that?

Mr. SOROS: Well, of course I c–I could be on the oth­er side or I could be the one from whom the thing is being tak­en away. But there was no sense that I should­n’t be there, because that was–well, actu­al­ly, in a fun­ny way, it’s just like in markets–that if I weren’t there–of course, I was­n’t doing it, but some­body else would–would–would be tak­ing it away any­how. And it was the–whether I was there or not, I was only a spec­ta­tor, the prop­er­ty was being tak­en away. So the–I had no role in tak­ing away that prop­er­ty. So I had no sense of guilt. . . .

“Soros Helped the Nazis Dur­ing Holo­caust”; sweetness-light.com.

7b. The pos­si­bil­i­ty that Soros may actu­al­ly be a “Bor­mann Jew” is one to be con­sid­ered. The pro­gram notes that the Bor­mann cap­i­tal net­work has long made a point of uti­liz­ing Jews. A syn­op­tic overview of the Bor­mann net­work can be found in the descrip­tion for FTR #305.

Using Jews as pri­ma­ry oper­a­tives has a num­ber of advan­tages: it pro­vides an excel­lent cov­er for a Nazi mon­ey-laun­der­ing oper­a­tion; the cap­i­tal derived for the state of Israel helps to assure con­nivance and silence on the part of the Israeli author­i­ties with regard to the exis­tence of the Bor­mann net­work and the Under­ground Reich; peo­ple can point to the great wealth of Bor­mann Jews and blame eco­nom­ic dis­tress on them. This, in turn, plays into the old stereo­types about Jews.

“. . . Since the found­ing of Israel, the Fed­er­al Repub­lic of Ger­many had paid out 85.3 bil­lion marks, by the end of 1977, to sur­vivors of the Holo­caust. East Ger­many ignores any such lia­bil­i­ty. From South Amer­i­ca, where pay­ment must be made with sub­tle­ty, the Bor­mann orga­ni­za­tion has made a sub­stan­tial con­tri­bu­tion. It has drawn many of the bright­est Jew­ish busi­ness­men into a par­tic­i­pa­to­ry role in the devel­op­ment of many of its cor­po­ra­tions, and many of these Jews share their pros­per­i­ty most gen­er­ous­ly with Israel. If their pro­pos­als are sound, they are even pro­vid­ed with a spe­cial­ly dis­pensed ven­ture cap­i­tal fund. I spoke with one Jew­ish busi­ness­man in Hart­ford, Con­necti­cut. He had arrived there quite unknown sev­er­al years before our con­ver­sa­tion, but with Bor­mann mon­ey as his lever­age. Today he is more than a mil­lion­aire, a qui­et leader in the com­mu­ni­ty with a cer­tain share of his prof­its ear­marked, as always, for his ven­ture cap­i­tal bene­fac­tors. This has tak­en place in many oth­er instances across Amer­i­ca and demon­strates how Bormann’s peo­ple oper­ate in the con­tem­po­rary com­mer­cial world, in con­trast to the fan­ci­ful non­sense with which Nazis are described in so much ‘lit­er­a­ture.’ So much empha­sis is placed on select Jew­ish par­tic­i­pa­tion in Bor­mann com­pa­nies that when Adolf Eich­mann was seized and tak­en to Tel Aviv to stand tri­al, it pro­duced a shock wave in the Jew­ish and Ger­man com­mu­ni­ties of Buenos Aires. Jew­ish lead­ers informed the Israeli author­i­ties in no uncer­tain terms that this must nev­er hap­pen again because a rep­e­ti­tion would per­ma­nent­ly rup­ture rela­tions with the Ger­mans of Latin Amer­i­ca, as well as with the Bor­mann orga­ni­za­tion, and cut off the flow of Jew­ish mon­ey to Israel. It nev­er hap­pened again, and the pur­suit of Bor­mann qui­et­ed down at the request of these Jew­ish lead­ers. He is resid­ing in an Argen­tine safe haven, pro­tect­ed by the most effi­cient Ger­man infra­struc­ture in his­to­ry as well as by all those whose pros­per­i­ty depends on his well-being. Per­son­al invi­ta­tion is the only way to reach him.”

(Mar­tin Bor­mann: Nazi in Exile; Paul Man­ning; Copy­right 1981 [HC]; Lyle Stu­art Inc.; ISBN 0–8184-0309–8; pp. 226–227.)

7c. In order to pro­vide some per­spec­tive on the admit­ted­ly strange and (for some) out­ra­geous con­cept of  “Bor­mann Jews,” we relate an inci­dent in which orga­nized crime king­pin Mey­er Lan­sky tried to black­mail the Bor­mann group, which result­ed in his removal from Israel.

“A reveal­ing insight into this inter­na­tion­al finan­cial and indus­tri­al net­work was giv­en me by a mem­ber of the Bor­mann orga­ni­za­tion resid­ing in West Ger­many. Mey­er Lan­sky, he said, the finan­cial advi­sor to the Las Vegas—Miami under­world sent a mes­sage to Bor­mann through my West Ger­man SS con­tact. Lan­sky promised that if he received a piece of Bormann’s action he would keep the Israeli agents off Bormann’s back. ‘I have a very good rela­tion with the Israeli secret police’ was his claim, although he was to be kicked out of Israel when his pres­ence became too noted—and also at the urg­ing of Bormann’s secu­ri­ty chief in South Amer­i­ca. At the time Lan­sky was in the pent­house suite of Jerusalem’s King David Hotel, in which he owned stock. He had fled to Israel to evade a U.S. fed­er­al war­rant for his arrest. He sent his mes­sage to Bor­mann through his bag man in Switzer­land, John Pull­man, also want­ed in the Unit­ed States on a fed­er­al war­rant. Lan­sky told Pull­man to make this offer ‘which he can’t refuse.’ The offer was for­ward­ed to Buenos Aires, where it was greet­ed with laugh­ter. When the laugh­ter died down, it was replaced with action. Mey­er was evict­ed from Israel and was told by Swiss author­i­ties to stay out of their coun­try, so he flew to South Amer­i­ca. There he offered any pres­i­dent who would give him asy­lum a cool $1 mil­lion in cash. He was turned down every­where and had to con­tin­ue his flight to Mia­mi, where U.S. mar­shals, alert­ed, were wait­ing to take him into cus­tody.”

(Ibid.; pp. 227–228.)

8. After relat­ing a num­ber of sto­ries about what was termed [In FTR #732] “the attack of the cyber-Wan­der­vo­gel”, the broad­cast reca­pit­u­lates a num­ber of arti­cles from the “News and Sup­ple­men­tal” cat­e­go­ry. Not­ing a strange doc­u­ment from Wik­iLeaks [alleged­ly real], the broad­cast weights the charges in that doc­u­ment, con­cern­ing alleged flights of UFO’s based at or near Antarc­ti­ca that are sup­pos­ed­ly threat­en­ing the Unit­ed States. What­ev­er its intent, this plays into the neo-Nazi theme of the “Aryan race” descend­ing from space aliens and man­i­fest­ing an inher­ent hered­i­tary supe­ri­or­i­ty as a result. (Wik­iLeaks’ anti-Semit­ic oper­a­tive Joran Jer­mas aka “Israel Shamir” has works trans­lat­ed by Lars Andel­skog, who has traf­ficked in these kinds of the­o­ries.)

Recent­ly a for­mer Bush (I), Bush (II) and Rea­gan staffer was found mur­dered. In that con­text, the pro­gram rumi­nates about the pos­si­bil­i­ty that his death may have been linked with a Wik­iLeaks dis­clo­sure that the U.S. and Ger­many had been plan­ning the joint devel­op­ment of a recon­nais­sance satel­lite system–Wheeler had been involved with the Mitre Cor­po­ra­tion, which has been deeply involved with the devel­op­ment of recon­nais­sance satel­lites.

Anoth­er line of spec­u­la­tion con­cerned the death of an Irish neo-Nazi in an alleged attempt on the life of Boli­vian pres­i­dent Evo Morales. A Wik­iLeaks doc­u­ment spec­u­lates about the pos­si­bil­i­ty that he had been set up, either by the State Depart­ment or by Morales him­self. (An alleged State Depart­ment memo con­tends that Morales him­self was set­ting up a provocation–a pho­ny attempt on his life to jus­ti­fy a crack­down on oppo­nents. That is a sce­nario I would not put past Morales. It may also be that the State Depart­ment was uti­liz­ing Dwyer–the Nazi–and the oth­er mer­ce­nar­ies in order to neu­tral­ize Morales, for whom they have no use. In any event, the Wik­iLeaks doc­u­ment exon­er­ates Dwyer of any wrong­do­ing. He was just a vic­tim.)

9. Yet anoth­er of the unsa­vory ingre­di­ents in Wik­iLeaks soup appears to be an ele­ment of Russ­ian orga­nized crime involved with using the Internet–what Assange in an inter­view called “Russ­ian phish­ing mafia.” In what may be a log­i­cal devel­op­ment from this sce­nario, a Russ­ian mafia data theft con­sor­tium is host­ing their OWN wik­iLeaks! And Assange and co are appar­ent­ly not com­ment­ing on it or doing any­thing to redi­rect those look­ing for the “Real” Wik­iLeaks to the right sites.

...Spamhaus has for over a year regard­ed Hei­hachi as an out­fit run ‘by crim­i­nals for crim­i­nals’ in the same mould as the crim­i­nal Est­do­mains. The Pana­ma-reg­is­tered but Russ­ian-run heihachi.net is high­ly involved in bot­net com­mand and con­trol and the host­ing of Russ­ian cyber­crime. We also note that the con­tent at mirror.wikileaks.info is rather unlike what’s at the real Wik­ileaks mir­rors which sug­gests that the wikileaks.info site may not be under the con­trol of Wik­ileaks itself, but rather some oth­er group. You can find the real site at wikileaks.ch, wikileaks.is, wikileaks.nl, and many oth­er mir­ror sites around the world.

...Cur­rent­ly wikileaks.info is serv­ing leaked doc­u­ments to the world, from a serv­er con­trolled by Russ­ian cyber­crim­i­nals, to an audi­ence that faith­ful­ly believes any­thing with a ‘Wik­ileaks’ logo on it. That has got to send shiv­ers down the spines of ratio­nal minds.

...In a state­ment released today on wikileaks.info enti­tled “Spamhaus’ False Alle­ga­tions Against wikileaks.info”, the per­son run­ning the wikileaks.info site (which is not con­nect­ed with Julian Assange or the real Wik­ileaks orga­ni­za­tion) called Spamhaus’s infor­ma­tion on his cyber­crime host “false” and “none of our busi­ness” and called on peo­ple to con­tact Spamhaus and “voice your opin­ion”. Con­se­quent­ly Spamhaus has now received a num­ber of emails some ask­ing if we “want to be next”, some telling us to stop black­list­ing Wik­ileaks (obvi­ous­ly they don’t under­stand that we nev­er did) and oth­ers claim­ing we are “a pawn of US Gov­ern­ment Agen­cies”.

...Few of the peo­ple who con­tact­ed us realised that the ‘press release’ they had read was not writ­ten by Wik­ileaks and not issued by Wik­ileaks — but by the wikileaks.info site only — the very site we are warn­ing about (which by no coin­ci­dence is host­ed on the same Russ­ian based cyber­crime-run heihachi.net serv­er as irc.anonops.net). Many peo­ple thought that the “press release” was issued “by Wik­ileaks”. In fact there has been no press release about this by Wik­ileaks and none of the offi­cial Wik­ileaks mir­rors sites even recog­nise the wikileaks.info mir­ror. We won­der how long it will be before Wik­ileaks sup­port­ers wake up and start to ques­tion why wikileaks.info is not on the list of real Wik­ileaks mir­rors at wikileaks.ch.

... Spamhaus con­tin­ues to warn Wik­ileaks read­ers to make sure they are view­ing and down­load­ing doc­u­ments only from an offi­cial Wik­ileaks mir­ror site. Mean­while, despite many attempts to con­tact the real Wik­ileaks, there has been no word from Wik­ileaks itself. . . .

“Wik­iLeaks Mir­ror Mal­ware Warn­ing” by Quentin Jenk­ins; Spamhaus; 12/14/2010.

10. An op-ed piece pub­lished by the Mass­a­chu­setts Insti­tute of Tech­nol­o­gy high­light­ed many of the salient aspects of the Wik­iLeaks sce­nario.

. . . In a recent inter­view with The New York­er, Julian Assange, the direc­tor of Wik­iLeaks, was asked if he would ever refrain from releas­ing infor­ma­tion he knew might get some­one killed. The ques­tion was not just hypo­thet­i­cal: a year and a half ear­li­er, Assange had pub­lished a study that detailed tech­ni­cal vul­ner­a­bil­i­ties in active­ly employed U.S. Army coun­ter­mea­sures against impro­vised explo­sive devices.

There was no con­ceiv­able ben­e­fit to pub­lish­ing the infor­ma­tion. The Army need­ed no extra pres­sure to address the vul­ner­a­bil­i­ties — it was already des­per­ate­ly search­ing for new coun­ter­mea­sures to pro­tect its sol­diers. The only ben­e­fi­cia­ries were insur­gents, who, using Assange’s gift, could bet­ter mur­der U.S. ser­vice­men.

In response to the inter­view ques­tion, Assange was blase. Yes, he admit­ted, there might be some “blood on our hands,” some “col­lat­er­al dam­age, if you will.” But unlike the jour­nal­is­tic world at large, he didn’t feel it was his duty to weigh and pass judg­ment on the val­ue of the infor­ma­tion he made pub­lic. Trans­paren­cy, the Wik­iLeaks founder obsti­nate­ly insist­ed, would cre­ate a bet­ter soci­ety for all, and we must be will­ing to break a few eggs to make the omelette.

As he hides behind this rea­son­ing, Assange has released the Social Secu­ri­ty num­bers of U.S. mil­i­tary per­son­nel, open­ing them up to iden­ti­ty theft. He has revealed the names of Afghan civil­ians who col­lab­o­rate with U.S. forces, a move that was greet­ed with joy by Tal­iban com­man­ders, who quick­ly promised to hunt down and exe­cute those named. He has betrayed the iden­ti­ties of human rights activists and jour­nal­ists who, at great risk to them­selves, passed infor­ma­tion on their con­di­tions to U.S. diplo­mats. In dis­cussing one source, a diplo­mat pleads: “Please Pro­tect,” and for good rea­son — with the informant’s iden­ti­ty now known, there is a seri­ous risk that this the poor woman who trust­ed the Unit­ed States will be whisked off to prison or worse.

Assange has billed this as some jour­nal­is­ti­cal­ly sig­nif­i­cant reveal, but if the recent cable releas­es reveal any­thing at all, it’s that what the U.S. says in pub­lic and what it does in pri­vate are remark­ably well matched. We’re work­ing hard to secure loose nuclear mate­r­i­al. We’re wor­ried about ter­ror­ism. We’re try­ing to unwind Guan­tanamo Bay. Noth­ing that is said about for­eign pow­ers in the cables is very sur­pris­ing. Rus­sia is no longer a demo­c­ra­t­ic coun­try. Some ele­ments of the Pak­istani gov­ern­ment can­not be trust­ed. Chi­na is launch­ing cyber-attacks against the Unit­ed States. Assange — a com­put­er hack­er, not a pol­i­cy wonk — may be igno­rant enough to con­sid­er cables nov­el, but they reveal very lit­tle of use, and most of the infor­ma­tion (with­out the harm­ful details) has already been pur­pose­ly leaked by the gov­ern­ment itself. There is no big lie, no grand hypocrisy, no Chom­skyan or Mearsheimer­an con­spir­a­cy afoot. If this was a whis­tle-blow­ing oper­a­tion, who was the whis­tle being blown on? Much as it was with the Iraq and Afghanistan leaks, the results were a big yawn. And like reveal­ing the fre­quen­cies that our IED jam­mers work on, Assange immense­ly dam­aged U.S. efforts, but added lit­tle to the dis­cus­sion.

The great­est irony is that by prov­ing trans­paren­cy can be used for evil as well as good, Assange hasn’t just harmed our nation­al secu­ri­ty, he’s poi­soned the very move­ment he pur­ports to lead. After 9/11, we worked hard to tear down the walls between agen­cies and encour­age a free flow of infor­ma­tion that would bet­ter help us con­nect the dots on issues such as ter­ror­ism. It is like­ly that in the after­math of Wik­iLeaks’ attack, our gov­ern­ment will return to its Cold War ways, silo-ing infor­ma­tion, reduc­ing what it writes down, and secur­ing itself against releas­es, good or bad.

Mr. Assange and his con­spir­a­tors tell us they are part of a “New Jour­nal­ism,” unmo­ti­vat­ed by prof­it or par­ti­san­ship (nev­er mind their past attempts to auc­tion off their finds or the unabashed ide­o­log­i­cal spin that accom­pa­nies their leaks). But the truth is that their moti­va­tion is as old as time itself; like small chil­dren play­ing with fires, fas­ci­nat­ed with their own pow­er to destroy, Assange and com­pa­ny are set­ting the world aflame mere­ly to watch it burn. They are not cru­saders for a bet­ter soci­ety. They are nihilists. They are anar­chists. And they are ene­mies of the Unit­ed States. . . .

“The Nihilism of Wik­iLeaks and Julian Assange Com­pro­mis­es U.S. Secu­ri­ty” by Kei­th Yost; The Tech; 12/03/2010.