Wikileaks cable and Palestinian Papers follow a pattern of the release of dubious documents to advance the neocon cause.

January 26-27, 2011 — The Wikileaks information war, courtesy of Sweden

The Departments of Defense and Justice, after treating Army Private First Class Bradley Manning as an “enemy combatant” with no rights under either the US Constitution or the Uniform Code of Military Justice, have now indicated they have failed to draw a link between the Wikileaks disclosure of over a quarter-million classified State Department cables and Manning. This disclosure means that the cables ended up in the hands of Wikileaks via another channel.

WMR has learned from informed sources in the United States and Sweden that the Swedish government, led by Moderate Party Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt, is part and parcel of the “laundering” of the State Department cables. The selective leaking of the cables was largely designed by George Soros’s Open Society Institute and his closely-linked CIA and Israeli interests to trigger popular rebellions in certain countries, particularly Tunisia, Algeria, Egypt, and Yemen, that were the subject of a many of the leaked cables.

The Wikileaks caper represents a major paradigm shift in the carrying out of information warfare campaigns using the Internet and social networking technologies like Twitter and Facebook.

Sweden was the natural place for the new information warfare planners to launder the Wikileaks documents. Sweden is officially neutral and, as was seen in the case of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, a “safe haven” for political exiles, or in Assange’s case, at least a temporary safe haven until his libido apparently got the best of him.

However, the governing Moderate Party is anything but “moderate.” The party’s prime minister from 1991 to 1994 and its leader from 1986 to 1999 was Carl Bildt,the nation;s present Foreign Minister who is a veteran of one of the birthplaces of information warfare, the Rand Corporation, a major Pentagon and CIA contractor. The major benefactors of Sweden’s Moderate Party and its two most influential politicians — Reinfeldt and Bildt — are the Swedish Wallenbergs, a world-renowned family that controls a large portfolio of companies in Sweden and abroad.

Through Investor, an investment firm, and FAM, its foundation investment company, the Wallenberg’s own some 40 percent of publicly-traded firms traded in Sweden. Jacob Wallenberg serves on the board of the Wallenberg family bank, Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken, and Scandinavian Airlines System (SAS). And the Wallnbergs have a controlling interest in Zurich-based ABB, a huge global industrial giant on whose board once sat Donald Rumsfeld, the former U.S. Secretary of Defense who funded a large part of the Pentagon’s information warfare and perception management programs. Rumsfeld served on ABB’s board in 2000, the year that the firm sold two nuclear power plants to North Korea. And in 2001, and this is where it really begins to get interesting, ABB pleaded guilty to rigging bids for U.S.government-funded building projects in Egypt, with the suspicion that bribes ended up in the pockets of the Mubarak family, who are now facing a major popular insurrection partly as a result of the Wikileaks disclosures. Working closely with the Wallenbergs are the Rothschilds, for whom George Soros is an international front man. Foreign Minister Bildt counts Soros as one of his “good friends” and he has referred to war criminal Henry Kissinger as his “idol.” The Rothschild interests in Sweden are looked after by P.G. Gyllenhammer, the CEO of N M Rothschild & Sons Scandinavia.

Currently, the Wallenberg business enterprise is negotiating with the Obama administration to purchase enough stock of the NASDAQ to give the Wallenbergs a seat on NASDAQ’s board.

Sweden is also a hotbed for “new world order” advocates with deep pockets. The Tallberg Foundation, which includes former UN official Jan Eliasson on its board, sponsors elitist conferences at which plans for increased globalization are discussed. One such conferences is schedules next month in Voksenasen, in the mountains above Oslo, the Norwegian capital.

The Wallenbergs and Swedish branch of the Rothschilds were never comfortable with the left-wing policies of Sweden’s Social Democrats, particularly their last popular Prime Minister, Olof Palme. Palme not only advanced socialist policies in Sweden but actively supported them abroad, even granting a number of progressive banned groups political sylum in Sweden. Palme was assassinated, the first of its kind in modern-day Sweden, in 1986. Palme’s assassination in a Stockholm street remains unsolved but many Swedes believe that Palme’s opposition to some of the world’s most brutal dictatorships, regimes that were customers for Sweden’s Wallenberg-owned military-industrial complex, including Nobel Industries and the Bofors weapons manufacturing firm, made the Swedish industrialists angry. Palme’s assassination paved the way for Bildt, a bitter opponent of Palme’s foreign policy, to become Sweden’s first Moderate Party prime minister, in 1991. The Moderate Party was totally in the pockets of the Swedish defense industry, including the Wallenberg family. In 2003, Swedish Social Democratic Foreign Minister Anna Lindh, who began to echo some of Palme’s original policies, especially on the Middle East, was, like Palme, assassinated in Stockholm.

This brings us to Sweden’s role in the Wikileaks affair. The corporate media is reporting that some of the State Department disclosures from U.S. embassies in Tunisia, Egypt, and other Arab countries have led, in part, to the de facto “themed revolutions” in Tunisia and Egypt, including obviously U.S.-sponsored “Day of Rage” protests in Lebanon and Yemen. Focus has been on U.S. embassy Tunis cables from January 2006 to June 2009 that focused on Ben Ali’s family as a virtual mafia involved in bribes and extortion to enrich themselves. What the selective release of cables did not state was that Ben Ali and his regime were partners of the U.S., including the Pentagon and CIA, in the torture of renditioned detainees and the suppression of domestic groups linked to Islamist causes.

Although the protesters in Tunisia and Egypt have legitimate grievances against the deposed President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali and Hosni Mubarak, respectively, the neocons and Zionist shills in London, Washington, and New York have been hyping the demonstrations as “Eastern European”-style revolutions, including those that took place against communist governments in the late 1980s and the more recent Soros-funded “colored” revolutions in Ukraine, Georgia, and Kyrgyzstan. However, that is where the neocons get it wrong.

The popular uprisings by the people in Tunisia and Egypt, as well as other countries, being referred to as “Winds of Change” across the Arab World by the corporatist media, have more to do with the economic situations in their countries. The plight of the Tunisian, Egyptian, Lebanese, and Algerian people is no different than that of the Greeks, Albanians, Irish, British, Italians, and Spanish who have stormed government and banking facilities in their own nations. And the “Arab Street” understands perfectly well who is behind the corrupt regimes that have destroyed their nations’ economies: the global bankers and globalists. The Arab Street, unlike Western-backed dictators like Mubarak and Ben Ali, do have affinity for the plight of the people of Palestine and U.S.-occupied Iraq and Afghanistan, and opening the floodgates of the Arab Street on the presidential palaces and rump parliaments of Arab dictatorships will have unintended consequences for the bankers and neocon media moguls in their plush offices and homes in Europe and the United States. Egyptians are well-aware of Mubarak’s ill-treatment of the people of Gaza by his incessant blocking of international aid convoys via Egypt to Gaza, brutality only exceeded by the Israeli regime. The neocons’ “winds of change” may one day blow their beloved Israel off the map, replaced by a secular “Republic of Palestine,” where an Arab majority would rule without the specter of apartheid and second-class status to a religious elite who claim nonsensical “divine” rights to land and political power.

The release of the “Palestine papers,” which are of dubious origin and authenticity, by Al Jazeera, which has increasingly become infiltrated by globalists and neocons, is merely another attempt at pulling off a Wikileaks-type operation to destabilize Palestine at a time when governments around the world are recognizing the independence of Palestine within 1967 borders and Palestine is gaining more and more international good will at the expense of the Zionists and lebensraum expansionists who govern Israel.

The neocon media hacks and policy wonks mistakenly believe that liberal and pro-Israel progressives will accede to power in Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Sudan, Algeria, Libya, Syria, and other Arab countries. They are wrong, dead wrong. Just as democratic elections resulted in success at the polls for Hamas in Palestine and Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Arab masses have no time for Israel and its major supporters, the United States, Sarkozy in France, and the three major British political parties. The Tunisian masses realize that if it were not for Sarkozy and his Zionist-backed government in Paris, Ben Ali would not have lasted in power in Tunisia for as long as he did. There was clearly an attempt to co-opt the Tunisian revolution by globalists, something that Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi stated in recent remarks. Qaddafi said he supported the Tunisian revolution but was concerned that the popular masses could see their uprising detoured by outside influences. Qaddafi also said that the Wikileaks cable release resulted from “lying ambassadors in order to create chaos.”

In Yemen, a U.S. ally in the war against “terrorism,” protesters have taken to the streets to demand the ouster of President Ali Abdullah Saleh. However, Yemen is not Tunisia. The former People’s Democratic Republic of Yemen, a socialist nation where labor unions headquartered in Aden had significant influence, was united with North Yemen in 1990, the result of globalist intrigue as the Soviet Union collapsed, leaving Moscow’s ally, South Yemen, vulnerable. South Yemen wants its independence restored and many of the anti-Saleh protesters support the former socialist leaders of South Yemen: Ali Salem al-Baidh, Ali Nasser Mohammed, and Haidar Abu Bakr al-Attas. The globalists, who have engineered the independence of South Sudan, which will be a U.S. and Israeli vassal state with a lot of oil, do not want to see South Yemen come back, a nation that will trumpet workers’ rights and progressive socialism. Just as Qaddafi warned about detouring popular revolts, Sheikh Tarek al-Fadhli has entered the fray, burning the South Yemeni independence flag, along with that of unified Yemen. Al-Fadhli fought with Saleh against the South in the 1994 civil war. But before that, Fadhli fought in Afghanistan with the forces of Osama Bin Laden. After the defeat of the South in 1994, al-Fadhli raised the American and British flags on his palace in southern Yemen. It seems that Bin Laden’s friends and allies are always on call when they are most needed by Washington, London, and Tel Aviv. Al Fadhli is now trying to hijack the Yemeni revolution by stamping out South Yemen’s desire for restoration of its independence.

While the neocon corporatist media hails self-immolation suicides and street protests in Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt, Lebanon, Yemen, Sudan, and Mauritania, it studiously avoid mentioning Morocco, where a U.S.- and Israeli-supported king reigns and where Moroccan troops illegally occupy Western Sahara. Moroccans and Sahrawis have no more rights than their fellow Arabs in Algeria, Egypt, and Yemen. But what Morocco does have is a pro-Israeli U.S. embassy that ensures that Morocco and its American Jewish and Israeli-owned golf courses, resorts, and condominiums remain safe from a popular uprising by the Moroccan and Sahrawi peoples. Hence, Mr. Assange and his Wallenberg and Soros handlers did not see fit to release any cables from Rabat that would place King Mohammed VI and his royal court in a bad light.

~ by redwolfwarrior on January 26, 2011.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: