Is Wikileaks being manipulated by an intelligence service?

By Alan Hart

The Wikileaks revelation that some Persian Gulf Arab leaders wanted (and still want?) America to attack Iran is confirmation of what some of us thought we knew – that Arab leaders are not merely impotent but as dangerously deluded as their Israeli counterparts.

Netanyahu was absolutely correct when he told a group of editors in Tel Aviv that “Israel has not been damaged at all by the Wikileaks publications.” A senior Israeli government official went further in his response to questions from AFP. He said: “We have come out looking good.” The leaked documents, he added, “confirm that the whole Middle East is terrified by the prospect of a nuclear Iran… The Arab countries are pushing the United States towards military action more forcefully than Israel.”

Actually the assertion that “the whole Middle East is terrified by the prospect of a nuclear Iran” is nonsense. The Arab regimes which more or less do the bidding of America-and-Zionism are terrified, but the same cannot be said of many of their repressed subjects. As Noam Chomsky pointed out in a recent interview with Open Democracy’s Amy Goodman, a poll of Arab opinion indicates that 80% regard Israel as the major threat in the region. Iran is seen as a threat by only 10%. The poll also indicated that 57% believe the region would be a more safe place if Iran had nuclear weapons. (As with Israel/Palestine, the regimes are effectively on one side – that of America-and-Israel, and the Arab masses are on the other side – that of the Palestinians).

The only good news confirmed by the latest Wiki leaked documents is that President Obama has so far resisted pressure from both Israel and the Arabs. (In fairness it should not be forgotten that President George “Dubya” Bush also said “No” to an attack on Iran when Vice President Cheney wanted him to authorize it).

There is no mystery about why any U.S. president who is not completely nuts will refuse to authorize an American attack on Iran (and do his best to stop Israel going it alone, no doubt with clearance through Saudi airspace). An American attack on Iran would have huge and possibly incalculable consequences for American interests. It would set in motion an escalating and possibly unending counter offensive including unbridled terrorism against American forces and facilities (civilian and business as well as military) around the world. And while that was happening, what is left of the global economy could be wrecked by sustained rises in the price of oil.

If those Arab leaders who pressed America to attack Iran discount the catastrophe scenario indicated above, they are very, very irresponsible. But there is more to their folly.

I don’t believe Iran’s ruling mullahs want nuclear weapons, but under pressure from the Revolutionary Guards (the real power in the country when push comes to shove?), they may have agreed in principle a while ago that Iran should have at least the possibility of developing a nuclear bomb for deterrence.

Prior to the publication of Wiki’s latest leaks, the question of how far and how fast Iran should go to have the possibility of developing a nuclear bomb was still the subject of debate in the leadership in all of its manifestations. It may be that Wiki’s revelations will play into the hands of those in Tehran who are insisting that Iran must have a nuclear bomb for deterrence.

While I was absorbing what the Wiki leaks confirmed about the attitudes of Arab leaders, I asked myself this question: What would I want if I was an Iranian, even one who hated the present regime?

My answer?

I would want my government, whatever its composition, to crash ahead with developing a nuclear bomb for deterrence. I would tell myself that was the only way to keep Iran safe from Arab-backed Israeli threats. And when challenged in argument, I would say, “Do you think America and Britain would have invaded Iraq if Saddam Hussein had nuclear weapons?”

My main point?

If Iran does become a nuclear-armed state, it will be because of Israeli threats and Arab leadership’s endorsement of them.

Now to a most controversial question, one at least as controversial as the various 9/11 conspiracy theories.

Is Wikileaks being manipulated by intelligence services – one or several?

There are a number of bloggers – some of them informed writers with credibility, some of them uninformed, anti-Semitic conspiracy theory nutters – who think the answer is “Yes”. More to the point is that no less a figure than Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Carter’s National Security Advisor, thinks the answer could be “Yes”. He said so in an interview with PBS’s Judy Woodruff and also in a subsequent BBC World Service (Radio) interview.

To Judy Woodruff he said:

“The real issue is, who is feeding Wikileaks? 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…It’s 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… 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.”

Another way to look at the matter is to ask this question. If a visitor from Outer Space studied the first two days of Wikileak’s revelations, what preliminary conclusion would he (or she) come to?

I think it’s entirely possible that he (or she) would say: “The main message is clear. Iran is the biggest single threat to the peace of the region and the world and not only because the Israelis say so. Arab leaders agree with them.  The secondary message is that apart from the Arab leaders who say they share Israel’s assessment, other Muslim leaders, those in Turkey and Pakistan especially, are not to be trusted.”

And here’s another question. Which party benefited most from the first two days of Wikileaks revelations? The obvious answer is the Zionist state of Israel.

I must also confess that I have a nagging worry (small but real) about the possibility that Julian Paul Assange, Wikileaks’ founder, has been compromised in some way and is open to manipulation. My concern on this account is the fact that he is a 9/11 conspiracy denier. He is firmly on the record as saying: “I’m constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud.”

As I have said on public platforms in America and written in a number of articles for the worldwide web, I think there is irrefutable evidence that the Twin Towers were not brought down by the planes and their burning fuel.

My own conclusion at the present time is that I don’t have a conclusion; but I think the question of whether or not Wikileaks is being manipulated, and if so by whom, is worthy of deep and serious investigation.

Alan Hart is a former ITN and BBC Panorama foreign correspondent who covered wars and conflicts wherever they were taking place in the world and specialized in the Middle East.  His Latest book Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, is a three-volume epic in its American edition.  He blogs on www.alanhart.net and tweets on www.twitter.com/alanauthor.


  1. Rehmat on the 02. Dec, 2010 remarked #

    Wikileaks ia an US-Israeli project to create more rift between the Islamic Republic and its Arab neighbors.

    The conspiracies of the Arab puppet regimes against Iran since the 1979 Islamic Revolution – are no secret to the politically aware people in the region. These puppet regimes were installed by the withdrawing Western colonialists to look after their interest in the region and protect the West’s ‘policeman’ Israel.

    Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has dismissed the documents as “worthless mischief” which would not affect Tehran’s relations with its Arab neighbours, exposed as having pressed for a US military strike against its nuclear sites.


  2. JOHN CHUCKMAN on the 02. Dec, 2010 remarked #


    “All bizarre and nonsensical conspiracy theory of course.”

    It is not at all clear why you should say that. The “of course” only emphasizes the lack of analytical basis for your total dismissal.

    Especially when one considers that in the end you yourself suggest a theme to the material.

    “Ultimately, they put the onus on Middle Eastern countries to explain themselves. The cables are America’s own explanations. Neither Iran nor many of its Arab friends and enemies like being held to account overmuch.”

    In our own lifetimes, we have learned of many dark operations more impressive than the selected release of some not-all-that-secret documents, many of them having release dates of not too many years in the future. The term “conspiracy theory” is now consistently used to disparage those who are genuinely puzzled about the official explanations of certain big events.

    Yes, we have the paranoid extreme, but that extends into the mainstream too, even into politics.

    In the end you must judge major news events by the standards of the late I.F. Stone. You must read different versions and explanations and make comparisons and weightings. You must judge the purport of the material itself, what it is intended to say or not say.

    We live in a shadow world as never before in human history with vast intelligence establishments working day and night and a press now reduced to a small number of owners who have their own reasons for giving slants to affairs or even completely misrepresenting them.

    Truth is perceived infrequently, but there are immensely well-financed establishments busy “getting out the story” and even creating it in some cases. To say otherwise is to admit to extreme naiveté or perhaps dishonesty.

    When was the last time a paper like your Telegraph or even the New York Times did some serious investigative journalism for readers? Especially where the earth-shaking matters are concerned, rather than mother’s milk stuff like the abuse of parliamentary expenses. Almost never.

    Where were you with Blair’s countless lies? Bush’s lies and absurdities? We lived through a set of events in which, after the greatest peace march in history, Blair managed to twist the truth and lie his way into doing something against the overwhelming sense of the British people. And the press pretty well let it happen.

    We only have a few genuine investigative journalists in the world, and they include notably Seymour Hersh and Robert Fisk. But even their work must be subject to evaluation. They can have things planted on them, and they make mistakes.

    The WikiLeaks material is undoubtedly authentic, but that does not at all exclude an underlying purpose in its release.

    It is a well-known practice of intelligence agencies to give large bits of genuine material, none of it too compromising, in order to get either an important piece of intelligence in return or to “bury” some damaging deception like a fish hook planted in a minnow.

    The CIA used to brag of having a huge house organ whose keys could be played to create the sense of a Bach fugue of seeming news. It was talking about all the publications, both compliant and duped, in which it could plant a story and have it reverberate ultimately as a convincing event.

    I’m not sure whether WikiLeaks itself falls into the compliant or duped category, but the nature of the material, the main themes plus the many important things undoubtedly missing, say something important to those listening carefully.

    I am completely underwhelmed by the content of the military WikiLeaks, both this time and previously.

    Very little there that well-informed people did not already know. Yes, of course, the juicy tidbits about so-and-so said are fun, and so they are meant to be, but they are not all that informative.

    I am sure there are countless lies and atrocities contained in the universe covered so far by WikiLeaks, but they are not in the material released.

    The idea that no one knows where Assange is also strikes me as slightly ridiculous in this age of massive intelligence operations and the trampling of individual rights in the name of fighting terror.

    If you think otherwise because of Osama bin Laden, you are rather late in learning he has been dead since the bombing of Tora Bora. The United States has kept him alive, as it were, for a focus in its insane War on Terror.

    Cui bono?

    The US looks like an innocent victim, just guilty of some unpleasant gossip here and there. Who wouldn’t know that? Israel gains support for an attack on Iran.

    The leaks serve Israeli-Pentagon interests.

    And do so in a convincing, seemingly disinterested way.

    These leaks also serve America’s now cancerously-swollen intelligence apparatus in seeking more repression and secrecy within American society.

    Your off-hand dismissal is unfair and unwarranted.

  3. JulieAnnie ROTHSCHILDS on the 02. Dec, 2010 remarked #

    PissyLeaks just said their propaganda is there to ‘open up’ China and Russia. TRANSLATION: China and Russia are the only TWO nations who have NOT LET ROTHSCHILDS TAKE OVER THEIR CENTRAL BANKING STRUCTURE.

    PissyLeaks insists that Osama bin DeComposin is still alive (second resurrection in the past 2,000 years, if you don’t count in the tens of thousands of ‘dead’ and re-spawned AL-CIA-DA kingpins the U.S.S.A. swears to jeezuz it’s killed, over and over again!)

    PissyLeaks is featured in Washington Post almost on a daily basis, being portrayed as a threat to the national security interests of the U.S.S.A. again.

    HINT: unless this is now Bizarro World, virtually every single PissyLeaks revelation is beneficial solely to ISRAEL and ISRAEL ALONE, and the ROTHSCHILDS BANKING CARTEL.

    it’d be interesting to see how much George Soros really has to do with this (a russian jew thrown the hell out of Russia for being another shekel grubber they couldn’t tolerate).

    Lastly, JulieAnne AssHanger’s mommy is upset because we all know her son to be a MOSSAD ASSET and a calibrated leaker.

    Follow the money, and look at the only nation the PissyLeaks has not splattered with false allegations and bullshit. There’s only one.

    That nation is ISRAEL.

    you need not do too much analysis here to figure out who’s spilling the volumes of crap via PissyLeaks.

    PissyLeaks would have been one of the nearly 80 websites the DHS shut down this past week for alleged copyright infringement, if it posed a threat to the U.S.S.A., but why do you suppose it was not even touched.

    HINT: IT IS CLEARLY A MOSSAD/CIA asset, a tool of zionist banking cartel ROTHSCHILDS, and a calibrated leak source designed to perpetuate global wars, mass murdering, and more ROTHSCHILDS banking cartel enslavement of the world’s nations.

    Open up China and Russia to ROTHSCHILDS? Hell will freeze over first, JulieAnnie..you can take that to your ROTHSCHILDS banksters who bankroll you.

Leave a Comment