Former Pakistani General: CIA, Mossad behind WikiLeaks Reports

[Parker2112]

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=8909091183




"The US has a hand in this plot, and these reports (posted by the WikiLeaks website) are part of the US psychological warfare," former Chief of the Staff of the Pakistani Army General Mirza Aslam Beg told FNA in Islamabad on Tuesday.

He stated that the US could prevent the leak of information if it wanted to do so, and warned that the real plot and conspiracy pursued by these reports will be unraveled in future.

Aslam Beg further reiterated that the CIA and Israel's spy agency Mossad have launched efforts to weaken and destabilize Pakistan, and WikiLeaks reports are part of these efforts.

The remarks by the Pakistani figure came after US embassy cables posted by WikiLeaks website sparked hot reactions in the region.

In one cable, the WikiLeaks claimed, Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah, a close ally of Pakistan, reportedly called Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari the main cause of his country's woes.

Pakistani President's office responded on Monday that the leaks were "no more than an attempt to create misperceptions between two important and brotherly Muslim countries".


From BBC News:


Mr Putin said of the Wikileaks affair: "Some experts believe that somebody is deceiving Wikileaks to undermine their reputation, to use them for their own political purposes later on. That is one of the possibilities."

[Wild Cobra]

You playing into the blame-game?

[Parker2112]

I dont understand why US is powerless to shut down Wikileaks. And I know the CIA's tentacles reach into some unlikely places. But other than that, I'm just putting it out there.

What do you think?

[Nbadan]

I dont understand why US is powerless to shut down Wikileaks. And I know the CIA's tentacles reach into some unlikely places. But other than that, I'm just putting it out there.

What do you think?

I think Wiki has done a good job spreading this information out to many different sources to protect itself and its founder, so it maybe an unstoppable runaway train...

[ChumpDumper]

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=8909091183Do you actually believe this?

[Winehole23]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fars_News_Agency

[Parker2112]

Do you actually believe this?

I have no reason to believe this info. That doesnt mean it's not worth airing.

On the other hand, do you automatically dismiss it as completely incredible? Is this really that far beyond the scope of what the CIA is capable of?

[Parker2112]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fars_News_Agency

Putin alluded to the same thing in a BBC News source.

[ChumpDumper]

I have no reason to believe this info. That doesnt mean it's not worth airing.Having no reason to believe something never stopped you from believing before.

Do you believe this?

Yes or no.


On the other hand, do you automatically dismiss it as completely incredible? Is this really that far beyond the scope of what the CIA is capable of?I automatically dismiss it unless you can produce a more credible source.

Putin is not more credible.

[Parker2112]

I like to get my hands on the info early and see if reality lines up to support it. I dont see the use in kicking the info out completely from the very beginning.

I suppose you are threatened by info that doesnt align with your view of reality Chump. I on the other hand am not. I dont have to believe information in order to hear it.

Although I admit yor selective approach might be better in the long run. More efficient maybe. So long as you are listening to the right sources from the start I guess.

[Parker2112]

Having no reason to believe something never stopped you from believing before.

Do you believe this?

Yes or no.

I automatically dismiss it unless you can produce a more credible source.

Putin is not more credible.

Who the hell IS credible these days? Certainly not your government, bub.

[ChumpDumper]

Who the hell IS credible these days? Certainly not your government, bub.Who the fuck says "bub"? Do you picture yourself as Wolverine posting conspiracy theories on a message board?

And you find the Iranian news agency credible.

You have a bias, and will believe the Iranian new agency if it confirms your bias. It is the complete opposite of an open mind, and it's hilarious you have deluded yourself into thinking otherwise.

[Parker2112]

My thoughts on the matter dont have a damn thing to do with Iranian News.

This is the first I've heard of this theory, but it would explain why our govt is so helpless when it comes to this rogue organization.

I dont think the US govt would allow this shit if it didnt serve their purpose on some level. Iranians dont have to tell me that.

As for my closed mind, you have yet to provide any credible evidence as to why this is not a possibility, so how the hell would you know if I am open to any other views.

You on the other hand, are completely closed off to anything that you cant read in a M$M source. Id say that is a major handicap, not a strength.

Bub.

http://library.thinkquest.org/3500/images/wolverine_large.jpg

[ChumpDumper]

You just demanded I prove a negative.

Fail.

[Parker2112]

a negative that you are asserting. if its unprovable then dont assert it, bub.

[Parker2112]

yeah that shit just happened chump :eyebrows

[ChumpDumper]

a negative that you are asserting. if its unprovable then dont assert it, bub.I never asserted it was completely impossible, bub. In said I am inclined not to believe the Iranian news agency because they are so full of shit, bub. Your bias has prevented you from being able to read and understand English, bub.

You believe the Iranian news agency and want to spread its message, bub.

That shit just happened, bub.

[Parker2112]

never said i believed em. you did. but why rely on what was actually said when you can put words in my mouth.

the bub shit is fun aint it?

just dont kill it for me.

[ChumpDumper]

never said i believed em. you did. but why rely on what was actually said when you can put words in my mouth.So you don't believe them, bub?

It's very simple, bub.

You either believe them or you don't, bub.

I don't believe them because they are so full of shit, bub.

You want to keep an open mind about the Iranian news agency, bub.


the bub shit is fun aint it?No, bub. It isn't, bub.


just dont kill it for me.Tough shit, bub.

[LnGrrrR]

I dont understand why US is powerless to shut down Wikileaks. And I know the CIA's tentacles reach into some unlikely places. But other than that, I'm just putting it out there.

What do you think?

How would you shut down wikileaks? You can shut down a site, but it will just pop up elsewhere. And sharing classified info, AFAIK, isn't a crime unless you're been charged with protecting said info.

[LnGrrrR]

Who the fuck says "bub"? Do you picture yourself as Wolverine posting conspiracy theories on a message board?


:lmao

I think I just peed myself a little there.

[Parker2112]

:lmao

I think I just peed myself a little there.

yeah, it was pretty funny

[RandomGuy]

a negative that you are asserting. if its unprovable then dont assert it, bub.

First off, generally one has to assume the opposite of any assertion, until that assertion is proven to a reasonable degree.

You are always very careful to not commit to things and hide behind "i'm just saying" or "I'm just asking questions".

It is fairly obvious that either you are simply trying to bait people, or simply provide some facile cover for your more paranoid views of reality.

It is a fun game to play. Let's see if you can detect the pattern here.


Is Parker2112 wearing adult diapers? I'm just asking.

I mean I have no reason to believe he is, but haven't seen any evidence that contradicts the fact he has a baby fetish. For all I know, he could be wearing a bonnet and sucking on a pacifier right now.

I have no reason to believe this info. That doesnt mean it's not worth airing.

On the other hand, do you automatically dismiss it as completely incredible? Is this really that far beyond the scope of what the Parker2112 is capable of?

I like to get my hands on the info early and see if reality of his baby fetish lines up to support it. I dont see the use in kicking the info out completely from the very beginning.

The implication and assertion is fairly clear here. I might never come out and make a direct assertion, but any fair reading can ferret that out.

[Parker2112]

I would counter by saying dont rule out anything till you can actually rule it out.

And you guys tend to rule out anything that doesnt fit the commonly accepted paradigm, as fed to you by the MSM, a body which has already been shown to be culling facts contradictory to the message govt wants you to hear.

[RandomGuy]

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: WikiLeaks 'leaks' are just United States ploy to make me look bad (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/11/29/2010-11-29_mahmoud_ahmadinejad_wikileaks_leaks_are_just_un ited_states_ploy_to_make_me_look_.html?r=news)

Astonishingly enough the official state Iranian news source found someone that agrees with Mr. Ahmedinejad, and ran the story, as seen in the OP.

Shocking.

Iran's government has every reason to construct this lie to continue the demonization of the US that has always proved very useful in keeping its citizens in line before.

That is how the Iranian government controls its own people, and has for decades. All the faults, incompetance, and corruption of the Iranian government get lumped into blanket condemnations of the CIA and the evil west. "Its not our fault that you can't find a job, its the CIA".

I find it the height of irony that someone who generally seems to believe that the big bad US government is controlling the American people through propaganda, suddenly decides that another governments very obvious propadanda to control its own people is credible.

[RandomGuy]

I would counter by saying dont rule out anything till you can actually rule it out.

And you guys tend to rule out anything that doesnt fit the commonly accepted paradigm, as fed to you by the MSM, a body which has already been shown to be culling facts contradictory to the message govt wants you to hear.

I mean I can't rule out that you are wearing diapers and sucking on a pacifier until I can actually rule it out.

:rolleyes

While I wouldn't rule it out, I can assign probabilities, and come to some reasonable conclusions, based on imperfect data.

1) Such claims about CIA/Massad plots are continually made by the Iranian goverment, to hide from their own people just how unliked and incompetant they are.

2) Such actions as leaking confidential memos from foreign rulers are incimal to US interests.

3) The unproven, and most tenuous underlying assumption here is that the US can "prevent the leaks", but since the leaks are happening it must be purposeful.

[RandomGuy]

I dont understand why US is powerless to shut down Wikileaks. And I know the CIA's tentacles reach into some unlikely places. But other than that, I'm just putting it out there.

What do you think?

I think the US government is doing what it can to shut it down, but Mr. Assange has been very savvy legally and technically.

The US government has limits to what it can accomplish openly. Despite what you probably think, no small part of those limits are put on it by what the American people as a whole will tolerate its government doing/saying.

[Parker2112]

Until some additional data comes to the surface, your diaper/pacifier scenario is somewhere near the overall % of adults that engage in this behavior. I am assuming less than 1%. The odds would be the same with you.

[Parker2112]

how does that jibe with someone making a claim that the US govt is involved in covert activities, and the odds being assumed (by you and chump) to be 0?

ANd the reaction is typical.

[Parker2112]

Here RG. Have some fun. this one is on me.

http://theintelhub.com/2010/08/07/wikileaks-whistleblowers-cointelpro/

[RandomGuy]

how does that jibe with someone making a claim that the US govt is involved in covert activities, and the odds being assumed (by you and chump) to be 0?

ANd the reaction is typical.

I never said the odds were zero.

I think it is more likely, especially given what I know of Iranian state-controlled media, that they are making up self-serving lies, than US intelligence services doing something that damages diplomatic efforts.

... and by "more likely" I mean almost certainly.

Which do you think is more likely?

That the Iranian state media is making up some self-serving lies,

or

US intelligence agencies are feeding this to some unknown purpose?

[RandomGuy]

Here RG. Have some fun. this one is on me.

http://theintelhub.com/2010/08/07/wikileaks-whistleblowers-cointelpro/

Reality through conspiracy-colored glasses.

He downplays the damage of the leaks, and plays up the ways in which they are "good" for "the establishment to make his case.


Perhaps the most sinister information brought forth by the war logs is the claim that the Pakistani ISI are working in cohesion with the Taliban. The suggestion by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that the ISI has known and hidden the whereabouts of top Al Qaeda members is nothing more than a ploy to push for more drone attacks, as well as a possible troop deployment inside Pakistan. As reported in the New York Times, the logs go as far as claiming that members of the ISI have worked with the Taliban to organize groups of militants! War propaganda anyone?

Hand-wavy dismissals, and an example of ad hominem logical fallacy. Hardly indicative of someone trying to get at the truth.

The entire article is rife with unproven, and unsupported assertions. It is little more than some hack regurgitating other hacks' claims.

If this is the kind of source you rely on to tell you the truth, it does not surprise me that you find Iranian state media is credible.

Perfect example of confirmation bias on your part.

[Parker2112]

I trust US intel about 3% more than Iranian press...so 53%-47% Iran is lying.

[Parker2112]

Reality through conspiracy-colored glasses.

He downplays the damage of the leaks, and plays up the ways in which they are "good" for "the establishment to make his case.



Hand-wavy dismissals, and an example of ad hominem logical fallacy. Hardly indicative of someone trying to get at the truth.

The entire article is rife with unproven, and unsupported assertions. It is little more than some hack regurgitating other hacks' claims.

If this is the kind of source you rely on to tell you the truth, it does not surprise me that you find Iranian state media is credible.

Perfect example of confirmation bias on your part.

I googled that 2 seconds before I posted.

Hence the reference to having fun.

[RandomGuy]

I trust US intel about 3% more than Iranian press...so 53%-47% Iran is lying.

Based on your unproven assertion that the US could stop the leaks if it wanted to?

Link?

Your claim, your burden of proof.

[Parker2112]

Based on the CIA's track record for telling the truth being comparable to Irans.

[RandomGuy]

Until some additional data comes to the surface, your diaper/pacifier scenario is somewhere near the overall % of adults that engage in this behavior. I am assuming less than 1%. The odds would be the same with you.

Indeed.

I dont see the use in kicking the info about your possible fetish out completely from the very beginning, though.

[RandomGuy]

Based on the CIA's track record for telling the truth being comparable to Irans.

Does the CIA have to be responsible to Congressional oversight?