Sunday 19 December 2010

Canard Takes a Leak

Whether by way of the Department of Defense and its sundry intelligence services and dis-info campaigns, or the simple existence of State Department memo caches, the US plutocracy has been able to use this thing we call Wikileaks to its bottom-line advantage. Only now they have a tool with which they can shape opinion worldwide, no longer restricted to the oft-criticized insulation of the American press.

The salient note of interest here is that the leaks themselves have so far been taken at face-value. Neither source nor stooge has protested their veracity. The only point of contention relates to interpretation.

Amidst cries of "breech!" and the simultaneous claims that "this is nothing new", yet somehow "puts us at risk", the offices from which this information is said to have sprung have managed to disseminate with ironic subtlety a couple of image-critical ideas: 1) that they give a shit about Saudis being as strong a sponsor of terrorist activity as anyone on their watch-list, and as a logical consequence 2) that there is a war on terror.

Color me all for transparency to the point of sundering statutes of secrecy, and whatnot. But IF there is sustainable public curiosity that isn't overwhelmed by the sheer mass of that which doesn't seem to surprise anyone, the monolith has still managed to propagate this most crucial part of the farce.

UPDATE: Look. I'm not saying that Assange and Biden are the same guy. I'm just reminding anyone who pays attention that the US government and her beneficiaries have proven in the past to be effective at deliberately leaking shit, pretending to be concerned about the source of the leak, and benefiting from a favorable framing of the subsequent discussion that began with the conventional wisdom that both the information leaked and the leaks themselves put the government in an unfavorable light.