Secret trade agreement covering 68 percent of world services published by WikiLeaks

Wikileaks exposes dark sides of Ukraine’s Poroshenko (Porky), Tymoshenko

CounterPsyOps

© Photo: RIA Novosti/Evgeny Kotenko

Voice Of Russia

Two diplomatic cables made public by WikiLeaks Public Library on US Diplomacy reveal that Ukraine’s president-elect Petr Poroshenko served as an informant for US State Department. A confidential message from the US Embassy in Kiev dating back to April 29, 2006 mentions the now widely-known confectionary tycoon twice.

Back then Poroshenko reportedly handed to the US Embassy in Kiev inside information on plotting a coalition government in 2006, Wikileaks says.

The message was intended for Ambassador John Herbst to update him on how things stood in April 2006, Poroshenko describing himself as an insider from the party Nasha Ukrayina (Our Ukraine), a bloc associated with former President Viktor Yushchenko, passionately welcomed by western leaders. 

The diplomat, however, questioned the authenticity of Poroshenko’s message suspecting it to be amongst the backdoor games aimed at securing the arresting of  Yushchenko’s former allies – Yuliya…

View original post 354 more words

WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange Calls on Computer Hackers to Unite Against NSA Surveillance + Jacob Appelbaum: 30c3: To Protect And Infect

Dandelion Salad

Dandelion Salad

democracynow on Dec 31, 2013

democracynow – WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange addressed a major gathering of computer experts Monday at the Chaos Communication Congress in Hamburg, Germany, calling on them to join forces in resisting government intrusions on internet freedom and privacy.

View original post 179 more words

WikiLeaks Bradley Manning’s Attorney Addresses Public

Have you no shame?: Lies, Damned Lies, and Newspaper Reporting

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article33783.htm Have You No Shame? Lies, Damned Lies, and Newspaper Reporting By Annie Machon February 01, 2013 “Huffington Post” – -Where to start with this tangled skein of media spin, misrepresentation and outright hypocrisy? Last week the Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence presented this year’s award to Dr Tom Fingar at a ceremony jointly hosted by the prestigious Oxford Union Society. Dr Fingar, currently a visiting lecturer at Oxford, had in 2007 co-ordinated the production of the US National Intelligence Estimate – the combined analysis of all 16 of America’s intelligence agencies – which assessed that the Iranian nuclear weaponisation programme had ceased in 2003. This considered and authoritative Estimate directly thwarted the 2008 US drive towards war against Iran, and has been reaffirmed every year since then. By the very fact of doing his job of providing dispassionate and objective assessments and resisting any pressure to politicise the intelligence (à la Downing Street Memo), Dr Fingar’s work is outstanding and he is the winner of Sam Adams Award, 2012. This may say something about the parlous state of our intelligence agencies generally, but don’t get me started on that… Anyway, as I said, the award ceremony was co-hosted by the Oxford Union Society last week, and many Sam Adams Associates attended, often travelling long distances to do so. Former winners were asked to speak at the ceremony, such as FBI Coleen Rowley, GCHQ Katherine Gun, NSA Thomas Drake, and former UK Ambassador Craig Murray. Other associates, including CIA Ray McGovern, diplomats Ann Wright and Brady Kiesling and myself also said a few words. As former insiders and whistleblowers, we recognised the vitally important work that Dr Fingar had done and all spoke about the importance of integrity in intelligence. One other previous winner of the Sam Adams Award was also invited to speak – Julian Assange of Wikileaks. He spoke eloquently about the need for integrity and was gracious in praising the work of Dr Fingar. All the national and international media were invited to attend what was an historic gathering of international whistleblowers and cover an award given to someone who, by doing their job with integrity, prevented yet further ruinous war and bloodshed in the Middle East. Few attended, still fewer reported on the event, and the promised live streaming on YouTube was blocked by shadowy powers at the very last minute – an irony considering the Oxford Union is renowned as a free speech society. Read the full article here

Justice for the PayPal WikiLeaks protesters: why DDoS is free speech | Jay Leiderman

http://m.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/22/paypal-wikileaks-protesters-ddos-free-speech There is no weapon on the planet more powerful than speech. In recent years, the digital revolution has led to new and unique ways for people to express themselves, and speech has flourished around the world, bringing it closer together. As a lawyer and as someone who promotes the advancement of individual liberties, I was fascinated by the advent of online speech, which was quickly followed by the advent of online protest. Readthe full report here

Bradley Manning Denied Whistleblower Defense. Faces Life in Military Prison under Espionage Ac

The defense team for Army Private Bradley Manning will not be allowed to present evidence of his motives behind the intelligence leaks for which he faces 22 charges, a military judge ruled Thursday. The ruling, which is not available to the press or the public, underscores the fraudulent and anti-democratic character of the entire case.

The 25-year-old soldier is accused of transmitting hundreds of thousands of government and military documents to whistleblower organization WikiLeaks, which published the material. Among the documents were evidence of war crimes, including a video WikiLeaks published under the name “Collateral Murder,” showing US military helicopters gunning down Iraqi civilians, journalists and first responders in cold blood. Other documents made clear that the US vastly underreported civilian casualties in Afghanistan.

Army Colonel Denise Lind, the judge overseeing the ongoing pretrial hearings at Fort Meade, Maryland, granted a government motion that questions of conscience and “good faith” are irrelevant in the case. This strips Manning of any potential legal protection offered under a whistleblower status and prevents any discussion of the content of the leaked material from reaching the American public.

Manning was detained on May 26, 2010, after computer hacker Adrian Lamo turned a series of chat conversations over to the US government. In the logs, Manning allegedly described collecting the materials while working as an Army intelligence analyst in Baghdad. He reportedly told Lamo that he felt compelled to act out of good conscience. The government and military networks, he said, contained “incredible things, awful things…that belonged in the public domain, and not on some server stored in a dark room in Washington DC.”

Manning faces life in military prison under the Espionage Act. Prosecutors for the Obama administration argue that he is guilty of “aiding the enemy” for leaking information that was subsequently made available on the Internet to anyone, including enemies of the United States. If Manning is convicted, the case will set a dangerous precedent for other whistleblowers, as well as media and watchdog organizations, journalists, bloggers, and anyone who accesses information that the government deems sensitive to US interests.

This is precisely the Obama administration’s intent. During arguments January 9, prosecutors explicitly stated that the government saw no difference between WikiLeaks and newspapers such as the New York Times. Like the bulk of the Manning hearing to date, this declaration received little media attention.

In her ruling Thursday, Lind said Manning’s motive could not be considered as a factor until the young soldier either entered a plea or was found guilty. At that point, Lind said, Manning’s rationale could become a factor that might influence a reduction in his sentencing. The Justice Department is no doubt eyeing a plea agreement that would require Manning to testify in a future military trial against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

Lind also blocked the defense team, led by civilian lawyer David Coombs, from presenting evidence that the publication of documents that Manning is accused of leaking caused no harm to US security or personnel.

Issues of motive are precluded from arguments on charges that Manning “wrongfully and wantonly cause[d] to be published on the Internet intelligence belonging to the United States government,” Lind ruled, or for charges where the government asserts that Manning had “reason to believe such information could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation.” The defense could raise issues of motive only when addressing the “aiding the enemy” charge to argue that Manning did not know dealing with WikiLeaks would be tantamount to “dealing with the enemy.”

Prosecutors are seeking to tie Manning and WikiLeaks to Al Qaeda. In order to do this, the government has culled together flimsy evidence, including vague references by alleged Al Qaeda-linked propagandists who have said WikiLeaks might provide insight into US activity in the Middle East. A 2010 issue of Inspire magazine, for example, entered as evidence Wednesday, contained a line attributed to an Al Qaeda operative: “[A]nything useful from WikiLeaks can be archived and used to help the mujahideen.” Prosecutors also claim they have evidence collected from the raid of Osama bin Laden’s compound showing that he had reviewed WikiLeaks-published material.

Under Lind’s ruling, the government’s own damage assessments into the impact of the leaks on US interests will not be admitted into evidence until sentencing. Numerous intelligence assessments submitted to the Congressional “WikiLeaks Task Force” found no harm was caused.

Manning has been held for nearly 1,000 days without conviction. From July 2010 to April 2011, he was subjected to mistreatment at Quantico Marine brig in Virginia, including solitary confinement and forced nudity and harassment by guards. Brig officials reported to the Pentagon on Manning’s day-to-day conditions and disregarded recommendations from psychiatric staff that the young soldier be treated less severely.

Coombs argued that Manning’s treatment amounted to “unlawful pretrial punishment,” and called for charges to be dismissed. Instead, Lind granted a reduction of only 112 days—an absurdity in the face of a potential life sentence—and insisted that the harsh treatment was necessary to ensure Manning “did not hurt or kill himself and was present for trial.”

Manning’s court martial has been delayed once again; he is scheduled to face trial June 3. The defense argued that the government has shown “tremendous lack of diligence in the processing of this case,” violating Manning’s right to a speedy trial. On Wednesday, Coombs argued that the length of time would weaken the ability of witnesses to give reliable testimony. “It is just common sense to say, witnesses will say, ‘It has been several years, I don’t recall,’ ” he said. The government invoked national security to justify the delay.

Read the Full Report via the Centre for research on Globalization

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, economic, scientific, and educational issues. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Watch “U S Demands to Assassinate Assange” on YouTube

Jennifer Robinson: Brief to Canberra meeting of MPs re Julian Assange | WL Central

http://wlcentral.org/node/1418 The following brief was submitted to the meeting outlined here by WL Central: On 2nd March 2011 at 9.15am a meeting was held, organised by Andrew Laming (Liberal Party MP Bowman Qld) at Parliament House Canberra to allow federal parliamentarians who wished to attend, some insights into the matters of Julian Assange facing extradition from the UK to Sweden, and facing (subject to that extradition process) a possible trial in Sweden and another possible extradition to the USA thereafter. Among others, MPs Andrew Laming, Malcolm Turnbull, Doug Cameron and Sarah Hanson-Young were in attendance, along with parliamentary staff members. Three speakers made themselves available for oral presentations and questions: Greg Barns, barrister from Tasmania; former Australian diplomat Tony Kevin and Peter Kemp solicitor from NSW, the latter two made written material available for the parliamentarians reprinted here with their permission. The following brief was submitted to the meeting by Jennifer Robinson of the firm Finers Stephens Innocent. She is part of the legal team representing Julian Assange in the extradition proceedings requested by Sweden. Jennifer Robinson’s biography. 1. I am writing to you to provide a briefing for the meeting of members of Federal Parliament on Wednesday 2 March 2011 regarding the case against Julian Assange. This briefing note sets out the timeline of events and the human rights concerns that we have raised in relation to Julian’s case in Sweden. 2. Julian is facing extradition to Sweden pursuant to a European Arrest Warrant (EAW). He is currently electronically tagged and held under virtual house arrest, having spent nine days in solitary confinement in a London prison for a crime that he has not been charged with and in relation to allegations that he emphatically denies. 3. It is mutually concerning that an Australian citizen like Julian has been treated in ways which would not accord with the standards of Australian law or indeed international law. As I set out in this note, if he is extradited to Sweden, he will be held incommunicado, in solitary confinement, and without bail for several months and then tried in secret on allegations which are weak and which would not constitute a crime in Australia or in the UK. In such event, it can be predicted that Australians will be outraged and that considerable damage will eventuate in respect of relations between Australia and Sweden. 4. It is hoped that this briefing note will act as a resource for concerned Australian MPs to raise questions and to take action on Julian’s behalf. Read the full report here

Julian Assange Christmas 2012 Message from Ecuador Embassy

Watch “Julian Assange, Wikileaks and the People Interviews, Sydney, Australia – 14th December 2012” on YouTube

Anonymous Global Day of Protest “Defend Your Freedoms” #OpNov5 #OpTrapwire #OpAustralia Flyers #Anons

Some flyers made for OpNov5 and OpVendetta – Please use these and spread throughout your local area. Invite anyone who has any issues to air their grievances with their local government.

#OpNov5 – Global Day of Protest – Defend Your Freedoms.

#OpNov5 Sydney Flyer – OpNov5SydneyFlyer (PDF)

#OpNov5 Sydney Flyer ODT (OpenOffice) – OpNov5Sydney(ODT)

#OpNov5 Global day of Protest Flyer – Globaldayofprotest(PDF)

#OpNov5 Global day of Protest Flyer ODT (OpenOffice) – Globaldayofprotest(ODT)

#OpNov5 Australia Wide Flyer (PDF) – OpNov5Australia(PDF)

#OpNov5 Australia Wide Flyer ODT (openoffice) – OpNov5Australia(ODT)

#OpNov5 “Protect Your Freedoms” Flyer (PDF) – protectyourfreedomflyer(PDF)

#OpNov5 “Protect Your Freedoms” Flyer (ODT) – protectyourfreedomflyer(ODT)

Paper (Printable) Anon Mask –  Print and Use Mask

Declassified Documents Reveal US Military Designated Assange ‘Enemy of State’

This is the same designation held by al-Qaeda, and it means that Assange could be killed or detained without trial

by John Glaser, September 26, 2012

Print This | Share This

Newly declassified documents have revealed that the US military designated WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange an enemy of the state, who can be killed or detained without trial.

The documents were released under a Freedom of Information Act request for an investigation into a US Air Force cyber analyst who allegedly expressed support for WikiLeaks and attended pro-Assange demonstrations.

The investigation, the documents reveal, was meant to determine whether this analyst, who had a top-secret security clearance, had given classified information to WikiLeaks supporters, who the documents describe as an “anti-US and/or anti-military group.”

The documents allege this suspect may have been “communicating with the enemy, 104-D,” an article in the US Uniform Code of Military Justice that prohibits military personnel from “communicating, corresponding or holding intercourse with the enemy,” the same designation held by al-Qaeda.

Assange’s US attorney, Michael Ratner, claims this designation has very dangerous implications and could be interpreted as a green light to kill or detain Assange without charge or trial.

“It appears that Julian Assange and WikiLeaks are the ‘enemy.’ An enemy is dealt with under the laws of war, which could include killing, capturing, detaining without trial, etc.,” Ratner warned.

WikiLeaks is nothing more than a publishing platform and Julian Assange is properly understood as a journalist. For the US military to designate him in the same class as al-Qaeda militants is the greatest affront to first amendment press freedoms in a very long time.

PFC Bradley Manning, Information & false classification: Violations of Human Rights by the United States of America (PDF)

PFC Bradley Manning, Information & false classification: Violations of Human Rights by the United States of America

By: R.A. Fowler

Academic Document – NOTE: Due to the current copyright laws and my status as a University Student, i must post the following note:

 The attached document is Copyrighted to R.A. Fowler. This paper may be used at your own  discretion, please link to this page for source information and validation of this statement of usage. This paper may be used by University Students globally in regards to the treatment of Bradley Manning and Violations of human rights by the United States of America but must adhere to the following passage for your own legal protection. Please all Academics NOTE: This document has been submitted via an academic system that looks for fraudulent works. Any use of this information in any academic documents must be cited correctly or the issue of Fraud may be raised by your Academic Advisor.

PFC Bradley Manning, Information & False Classification: Violations of Human Rights by the United States of America (PDF DOWNLOAD) copyright 2012

Ecuador grants Asylum to Julian Assange: FM Speech Video (full)

Last night i witnessed a Historic Event. The first ever Australian Citizen granted Asylum. THANK YOU ECUADOR!

The full speech by Ecuador Foreign Minister is below. Standing up for Human Rights is something we ALL must do. UK, USA, Sweden and Australia have all shown their complete disregard for the rights of humans. We as humanity, must stand for Assange and Bradley Manning. “If you don’t stand for something, You’ll fall for anything”.

Wikileaks – Global Intelligence Files – Re: Israel/Iran – Barak hails munitions blast in Iran

As published by Wikileaks Here

Ive changed some of the word colouring to red to highlight some interesting facts that have come up in this email. Serious this is a MUST READ about Iran, Israel and the USA.

 

On Monday February 27th, 2012, WikiLeaks began publishing The Global Intelligence Files, over five million e-mails from the Texas headquartered “global intelligence” company Stratfor. The e-mails date between July 2004 and late December 2011. They reveal the inner workings of a company that fronts as an intelligence publisher, but provides confidential intelligence services to large corporations, such as Bhopal’s Dow Chemical Co., Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and government agencies, including the US Department of Homeland Security, the US Marines and the US Defence Intelligence Agency. The emails show Stratfor’s web of informers, pay-off structure, payment laundering techniques and psychological methods.
Re: [alpha] S3/G3* ISRAEL/IRAN – Barak hails munitions blast in Iran
Email-ID 185945
Date 2011-11-14 15:40:05
From bokhari@stratfor.com
To alpha@stratfor.com
List-Name alpha@stratfor.com
I am not saying that we should believe something only when it hits the OS.
My point is about proceeding forward from a single source report. We
shouldn’t completely dismiss it but the issue is confirmation before
something related pops up in the OS.

On 11/14/11 9:30 AM, Fred Burton wrote:

Yes but an intelligence agency that secures a single piece of insight
that is then corroborated by the infamous OS leads one to believe that
either the same source is responsible for both or perhaps there is smoke
that indicates a fire? We tend to not believe things unless there is
OS. The best intel never see’s the light of day. I’m more circumspect
when it is in the OS…unless of course, we planted it.

p.s. I’m offended that we may believe an Iranian before a Jew.

cc: APAC, JINSA.

On 11/14/2011 8:21 AM, Kamran Bokhari wrote:

As an intelligence entity we can’t simply accept a single piece of
insight as truth.

On 11/14/11 9:10 AM, Fred Burton wrote:

Guerrilla actions behind enemy lines.

If we think the Izzies have set back waiting on Iran to create a
bomb we are like the CIA with their inability to predict just about
anything.

Check INSIGHT I posted last week that everyone discounted. How come
if its not in OS we nash our teeth? Intelligence agencies exist to
have sources. That is what we are.

On 11/14/2011 8:06 AM, Kamran Bokhari wrote:

Penetrating a major military installation and causing a blast is a
totally different ballgame. Not saying it can’t happen. But we
can’t assume that because they did stuxnet that they are capable
of doing this blast as well. It is a huge leap in capabilities.

Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

———————————————————————-

From: “Sean Noonan”
Sender: alpha-bounces@stratfor.com
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 08:03:34 -0600 (CST)
To: Alpha List
ReplyTo: Alpha List
Subject: Re: [alpha] S3/G3* ISRAEL/IRAN – Barak hails munitions
blast in Iran
It clearly does not. Look at the thousand centrifuges. Please
reread the 2 stuxnet analyses.

There are enough iranians who have aliyah’d to israel that they
could easily train a persian looking, farsi speaking jew to go
into Iran for sabotage and not get caught. I don’t know that this
is happening nor do I assume that there would not be mistakes, but
its very possible to do this undetected. The key is recruiting
human agents on the bases. This was clearly done with stuxnet,
though it may have been unknowingly

———————————————————————-

From: “Kamran Bokhari”
Sender: alpha-bounces@stratfor.com
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 07:59:47 -0600 (CST)
To: Alpha List
ReplyTo: Alpha List
Subject: Re: [alpha] S3/G3* ISRAEL/IRAN – Barak hails munitions
blast in Iran
Yeah this seems really unlikely. ’79 was a whole different
reality. The security establishment has the placed locked down.
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

———————————————————————-

From: Abe Selig
Sender: alpha-bounces@stratfor.com
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 07:45:14 -0600 (CST)
To: Alpha List
ReplyTo: Alpha List
Subject: Re: [alpha] S3/G3* ISRAEL/IRAN – Barak hails munitions
blast in Iran
There are still about 20,000 Jews in Iran (Tehran and Esfahan
mostly), but IMO, they are far too scared of being accused as
Israeli spies too actually help Israel out.

On 11/14/11 7:32 AM, Sean Noonan wrote:

Ah. As stick said, they would more likely use proxies. But if
not, special operations forces do often move undetected. Don’t
think of them as going in on a helicopter, think of them as
going in with a group of migrant workers crossing the border.
There used to be a lot of jews in Iran, not so much anymore,
that’s who I would recruit form.

———————————————————————-

From: “Kamran Bokhari”
To: “Alpha List”
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2011 7:11:15 AM
Subject: Re: [alpha] S3/G3* ISRAEL/IRAN – Barak hails munitions
blast in Iran

See insight below.
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

———————————————————————-

From: Sean Noonan
Sender: alpha-bounces@stratfor.com
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 07:10:06 -0600 (CST)
To: Alpha List
ReplyTo: Alpha List
Subject: Re: [alpha] S3/G3* ISRAEL/IRAN – Barak hails munitions
blast in Iran
what commandos?

———————————————————————-

From: “Kamran Bokhari”
To: “Alpha List”
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2011 6:39:07 AM
Subject: Re: [alpha] S3/G3* ISRAEL/IRAN – Barak hails munitions
blast in Iran

How did Israeli commandos get to operate deep inside Iran
without being detected?
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

———————————————————————-

From: Sean Noonan
Sender: alpha-bounces@stratfor.com
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 05:54:41 -0600 (CST)
To: Alpha List
ReplyTo: Alpha List
Subject: Re: [alpha] S3/G3* ISRAEL/IRAN – Barak hails munitions
blast in Iran
I agree. The argument here is that the proponents of
conventional war are ones that want the oil prices-–but is it
really that simple? What about other economic effects? For
Israel, by this argument, it doesn’t matter what method as long
as it sets Iran back—-I agree with this. However, the
confidence that this guy has does not show publicly. By that, I
mean look at what Dagan was saying a year ago, and how quiet
Israeli leaders have been. Suddenly they are really pushing the
issue, and while Dagan isn’t it, his line is that conventional
war would be a mistake, not that Iran doesn’t need to be dealt
with. I don’t really like trying to interpret public
statements, but I think there is something here, and that’s why
I keep pushing this.

———————————————————————-

From: “Chris Farnham”
To: “Alpha List”
Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2011 7:22:52 PM
Subject: Re: [alpha] S3/G3* ISRAEL/IRAN – Barak hails munitions
blast in Iran

I think the info that Fred sent in previously needs to be looked
quite seriously here.

The insight seems like quite a stretch however it has been put
out there for some reason or another and is now playing in to
what we are seeing.

Insight below:

Source below was asked to clarify his remarks that the nuclear
infrastructure had been destroyed. Source response:

Israeli commandos in collaboration with Kurd forces destroyed
few underground facilities mainly used for the Iranian defense
and nuclear research projects.

Despite the reports in the media and against any public
knowledge, the promoter of a massive Israeli attack on Syria is
the axis India-Russia-Turkey-Saudi Arabia. The axis
US-Germany-France-China is against such an attack from obvious
reasons. Not many people know that Russia is one of Israel’s
largest military partners and India is Israel’s largest client.

If a direct conflict between Iran and Israel erupts, Russia and
Saudi Arabia will gain the advantages on oil increasing prices.
On the other hand, China and Europe are expected to loose from
an oil crisis as a result of a conflict. Based on Israeli plans,
the attack on Iran will last only 48 hours but will be so
destructive that Iran will be unable to retaliate or recover and
the government will fall. It is hard to believe that Hamas or
Hezbollah will try to get involved in this conflict.

In the open media many are pushing and expecting Israel to
launch a massive attack on Iran. Even if the Israelis have the
capabilities and are ready to attack by air, sea and land, there
is no need to attack the nuclear program at this point after the
commandos destroyed a significant part of it.

If a massive attack on Iran happens soon, then the attack will
have political and oil reasons and not nuclear. It is also very
hard to believe that the Israelis will initiate an attack unless
they act as a contractor for other nations or if Iran or its
proxies attack first. With the revealed of the new UN report the
Israelis have green light to take care of the Iranian proxies in
Gaza and Lebanon now with the entire world watching Iran. I
think that we should expect escalations on these fronts rather
than an Israeli attack on Iran.

On 11/7/11 8:09 AM, Chris Farnham wrote: Ah, what? Israel has
already destroyed the Iranian prog/infra and this is all being
engineered by Europeans so people forget about the economy
crisis?!

How and when did the Israelis destroy the infra on the ground?

Why is that we see the vast majority of the increase in pressure
coming from Israel (I mean straight from people’s mouths) and
from the US (Such as Albright in the WaPo)?

Would anyone actually accept that this could let the Europeans
forget about the Euro crisis, something they have been
experiencing every day for over a year?!

Do we attribute any credibility to this item at all? I don’t
even see what possible disinfo purposes this could serve.

On 11/7/11 7:54 AM, Benjamin Preisler wrote:

Code: IL701
Publication: for background
Attribution: none
Source Description – Confirmed Israeli Intelligence Agent
Source reliability: Still testing
Item credibility: untested
Source handler: Fred

Source was asked what he thought of reports that the Israelis
were preparing a military offensive against Iran. Response:

I think this is a diversion. The Israelis already destroyed
all the Iranian nuclear infrastructure on the ground weeks
ago. The current “let’s bomb Iran” campaign was ordered by the
EU leaders to divert the public attention from their at home
financial problems. It plays also well for the US since
Pakistan, Russia and N. Korea are mentioned in the report.

The result of this campaign will be massive attacks on Gaza
and strikes on Hezbollah in both Lebanon and Syria.

—

———————————————————————-

From: “Reva Bhalla”
To: analysts@stratfor.com
Sent: Monday, 14 November, 2011 11:52:04 AM
Subject: Re: S3/G3* ISRAEL/IRAN – Barak hails munitions blast in
Iran

wow, that’s an extremely revealing statement. The Israelis (i
believe it was even Barak then too) made very similar comments
following the Stuxnet news as well. THe whole ‘I’m not going to
admit publicly that we did it, but boy that was nice.’

i think we need a piece laying out the details as far as we know
of what happened and where and point out the holes in the
accident theory. i think our assessment on the constraints of an
Israeli attack on Iranian sites holds. It’s the sabotage efforts
where the most resources are being concentrated, which makes a
lot of strategic and tactical sense for Israel and US in dealing
with Iran at this stage

———————————————————————-

From: “Ben West”
To: “alerts”
Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2011 2:40:06 PM
Subject: S3/G3* ISRAEL/IRAN – Barak hails munitions blast in
Iran

Interesting comments by the defense minister.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5i28MvYyqR9sGxc2cZ4U1QlPPQFLA?docId=CNG.93c1b5af9b6cb71a17bf389563809eb2.a1
Israel hails deadly blast in Iran

(AFP) – 1 hour ago

JERUSALEM – Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak on Sunday hailed
the deadly munitions blast at a base of Iran’s elite
Revolutionary Guards and hoped for more such incidents.

“I don’t know the extent of the explosion,” he told military
radio, asked about the incident. “But it would be desirable if
they multiply.”

Iran said earlier that a senior general who pioneered an
artillery and missile unit was among the 17 Guards reported
killed in Saturday’s blast at Bid Ganeh, near the town of Malard
on the western outskirts of Tehran.

Guards spokesman commander Ramezan Sharif said the blast, which
Iran said was an accident, occurred as “ammunition was taken out
of the depot and was being moved outside toward the appropriate
site.”

Set up after the 1979 Islamic revolution to defend Iran, the
Guards are in charge of the Islamic republic’s missile
programme, including Shahab-3 missiles with a range of 2,000
kilometres (1,200 miles) capable of hitting Israel.

Saturday’s blast came amid international condemnation of Iran
since the release of a new UN nuclear watchdog report accusing
Tehran of working towards the development of nuclear warheads to
fit inside its medium-range missiles.

Israeli officials have in past weeks warned Iran of the
possibility of military strikes against its nuclear sites.

Ben West
Tactical Analyst
STRATFOR
512-744-4300
ext. 4340

—

Chris Farnham
Senior Watch Officer, STRATFOR
Australia Mobile: 0423372241
Email: chris.farnham@stratfor.com
http://www.stratfor.com

—
Sean Noonan
Tactical Analyst
STRATFOR
T: +1 512-279-9479 | M: +1 512-758-5967
http://www.STRATFOR.com

—
Sean Noonan
Tactical Analyst
STRATFOR
T: +1 512-279-9479 | M: +1 512-758-5967
http://www.STRATFOR.com

—
Sean Noonan
Tactical Analyst
STRATFOR
T: +1 512-279-9479 | M: +1 512-758-5967
http://www.STRATFOR.com

—
–
Abe Selig
Officer, Operations Center
STRATFOR
T: 512.279.9489 | M: 512.574.3846
http://www.STRATFOR.com

 

Republished from wikileaks.org under the “fair use” Copyright Policy.