Earlier this week, WikiLeaks announced that they were making available to the public a searchable database of the collection of U.S. Department of State emails she had kept, illegally, on a “non-government, privately maintained server” in an apparent effort to keep some of her official email correspondence as Secretary of State outside of the public record-keeping requirements laid down for all members of the US government. This set of emails, unlike the previous WikiLeaks documents, was reviewed before its release by US Government censors in the “intelligence community”, so many of the documents are heavily censored. Even the most cursory perusal of these documents reveals dozens of almost completely censored emails, proving that Hillary Clinton was, indeed, storing highly classified “secret” documents on her “private” server, which was, if not specifically illegal, certainly placing many of the Department of State’s top secret information – and the email identities and addresses of her correspondents – at substantial risk of being hacked. In fact, the email account of one of her frequent correspondents WAS hacked, which is how the existence of Clinton’s “private” server was first disclosed. If Clinton’s private server was not in fact hacked, it came within a “send” command’s distance from being pwn3d.
So, we took a look at the database, expecting to see the usual heavily censored (and boring) fare – and for the most part we were not disappointed. Looking through the series of emails sent in the period immediately before and after the attack on the US Embassy in Libya (in which Department of State hatchet man J. Christopher Stevens was sent to see if he could use his “diplomatic skills” to cut a deal with St. Peter at the Pearly Gates) we found very little that was interesting. Fawning underlings of Clinton sent gushing emails expressing their “awe” at her public tribute to Stevens the day after his murder took place in a manner not dissimilar to the fate of Muammar Gaddafi at the hands of the US-backed “Libyan rebels”:
So this was all mostly very tedious stuff when it wasn’t flat-out throw-up-in-your-own-mouth-worthy. Either HRC’s private server had nothing interesting coming through as Stevens was fighting for his life or those emails have been sent into the US’ Secret Archives – where they will remain until J. Christopher Stevens attains sainthood… or until 2027 – whichever comes first.
The entire myth of J. Christopher Stevens being a “State Dept. diplomat” has always amused this writer. The U.S. Government doesn’t send in a diplomat to do the bloody work that was taking place in Libya during the run-up to the lynching of Gaddaffi & Sons (and who knows how many others). Clinton said as much in the tribute to Stevens she gave that made her underlings cry in Foggy Bottom:
There are 30,322 emails in this WikiLeaks archive – and being just a tiny organization with no budget we will probably not find the time to go through all this garbage. We have much more interesting and important things to read for our other projects. But we did dig far enough into this pail of shit to pull out this one interesting document, which reveals a bit of the true nature of bourgeois journalism in the “Land of the Free(TM)”, where journalists sell their souls in exchange for precious “access” to the criminals who stalk the halls of power in Washington, D.C.
This document describes the debriefing given to the US Department of State on the subject of a major release of US classified documents by WikiLeaks in 2010. The briefing was given by none other than Michael Gordon, the “Chief Military Correspondent” of the New York Times! The Times was one of the newspapers selected by WikiLeaks to help manage the US release of their expose of “the largest classified military leak in history”. The documents were part of the enormous cache of top secret US documents that were to be released on Friday, 22 October 2010 as”The Iraq War Logs”. The New York Times was one of the newspapers that was going to have this “exclusive”; various elements of the “War Logs” were to be released simultaneously by The Times, Le Monde and Britain’s Channel 4. It was a spectacular release of information that shocked the world; but it wasn’t going to be a surprise for the US Government, thanks to Michael Gordon! Gordon – who had collaborated infamously with the NY Times’ Judith Miller
to produce some of the sinister, fabricated US propaganda that helped steamroll the US into the Iraq War in 2002, and who then built his career as a pro-US propagandist “embedded” with the US troops as they rampaged through Iraq – arrived at the Department of State a full TWO DAYS BEFORE the story was to “break” in order to assist his US Government partners in preparing their “spin doctoring” of the incredibly damaging leak. So much for “journalistic objectivity”!
Gordon laid it all out for his clients, like a good journalistic prostitute should:
“He confirmed the 5-6 themes we’ve been discussing that will be the focus of NYT stories:
- More on civilian casualties than has been public so far
- More on detainee abuse than has been public so far
- Iranian involvement in Iraq
- More on contractors than has been public so far – although on this one, he didn’t seem like there would be any great surprises here
- A small report on the US hikers”
“In addition, Gordon identified two others:
The “surrender to the helicopter” issue, which is the focus of a story his colleague is working on — and, apparently, the focus of other news stories (he said this a couple of times)
- Kurdish-Arab tensions, and the US role in deconflicting those tensions. Gordon said that for him, this was the most important topic long-term – but he also said this will be of much less interest to European papers doing stories”
Do you suppose that Gordon cleared this discussion with his colleague who was working on a story the State Dept. hadn’t yet heard of? Who knows? For a scumbag like Gordon nothing is more important than the advancement of his own career.
Gordon also reassured the assembled Department of State cretins that they had no need to worry: the New York Times would, as always, bend over backwards – and forwards if necessary – to make sure that no element of the US war machine or its agents would suffer complete exposure:
“NYT has adhered to the process followed after their first meeting at the WH (when the Af/Pak documents were released), and has gone to great efforts to redact names, as well as information regarding force protection and intelligence”. Now, there’s true loyalty to king and country for you! Murder away, boys and girls! The New York Times has your backs!
The full, sordid document is available here:
It was a dumb idea to work with the New York Times in the first place. After what they did in the run-up to the Iraq War, they should have been driven out of business; they certainly didn’t deserve the golden opportunity WikiLeaks presented them. The New York Times even conspired to have the release set for a Saturday: by publishing this way, they ensured a very low distribution of the WikiLeaks revelations (Saturday papers have far lower circulation than either the regular weekday papers or the Sunday paper). Perhaps in the future WikiLeaks should approach one or several of the better socialist papers in the USA and help them get the circulation they deserve by offering them a global scoop instead of casting their pearls before such swine.
Friends of WikiLeaks – Chicago