Much of the press seems to have gotten “talking points” from somewhere, leading them to the material Brzezinski picked up when he “trashed” Wikileaks. We did the “math” on the Afghanistan leak. 80% of the stories to hit the media mentioned Pakistan aiding the Taliban. We did the actual count and found 38 reports out of 92,000 documents that were unsubstantiated reports of Pakistani activity in Afghanistan.
We are seeing it again, Israel the hero, sparkling clean, a land of angels and wizards, surrounded by dirty Arabs and Paki’s and now, seemingly worst of all, the corrupt and inept Americans, exposed for what they are, OK, almost exposed except for one thing, everything Americans are accused of in Wikileaks was done in support of Israel, at the direction of their powerful AIPAC lobby. Nothing of this is mentioned nor the fact that the leaders in Washington who formulated the policies Wikileaks is trashing are, largely, Israeli citizens.
If it looks too good to be true, trust me on this, run like hell!
Put yourself in the place of a decent and honest reporter. You wait, your pulse pounding, 92,000 documents. You have your entire staff, the obits guy, the restaurant critic, all sitting up at your house, pounding down tequila and espresso. Five of you and 92,000 documents, that’s 18,400 each. You can each scan only 500 documents an hour, that’s a day and a half, but you have a deadline and your Wikileaks lead story has to be in for the morning paper.
You get a text message to check your email. You have a list of articles there, the real “gold” among the senseless time wasting “chaff.” You have one of those moments of moral dilemma. For a real reporter, in the real world, that moment came and went without notice.
You can now make the deadline, and you have the lead story, Pakistan is running the Taiban, murdering American troops, Iranians are swimming the Euphrates, bringing IED’s into Iraq and a 74 year old grandfather from Rawalpindi is managing world terrorism when he isn’t on CNN.
You’ve been Wiki-had!
With reporters finding, just the right places in Wikileaks, we wanted to look at the odds. Golfing is a good comparison, so we checked the odds of someone getting a “hole in one” playing golf. Is finding the right articles in Wikileaks easier or harder than getting a “hole in one” playing golf?
In 1999, Golf Digest reported, “One insurance company puts a PGA Tour pro’s chances at 1 in 3,756 and an amateur’s at 1 in 12,750.”
That same issue reported that the “odds of an amateur making two holes-in-one in a round are 9,222,500 to 1.”
Ireland’s National Hole in One Club puts the odds a little lower for one ace: “The estimated odds of acing a hole with any given swing are one in 33,000.”
And an article in the magazine Navy Newsstand, citing Sports Illustrated as its source, put the odds at 45,000 to 1 for “scoring a hole-in-one on a typical par-3 golf hole.”
This is the comparison we came up with. With our odds, were there only one Wikileak, at 4,130 compared to “hole in one” odds for a golfing pro at 3,756, the analogy works. Thus, 38 out of 92,000 articles is about the same as getting a hole in one. However, when you consider this is the 3rd straight hole in one for Wikileaks, the odds figure to be well over 20 million to one against. Wikileaks beats the odds bigtime.
We call this “the luck of the press.”
I am a member of the press, maybe, if I am lucky, I can find a $50,000 check and first class air to Israel in my mailbox. Any bets on my chances?
RIGGING THE GAME, BUYING THE UMPIRE, COOKING THE BOOKS..WIKIMATH
Oh, you didn’t know we “farmed out” our intelligence? This is illegal, of course. Did America have private companies, some owned by Israelis, operating in Afghanistan, companies tied directly to the Mossad, producing intelligence reports that were then picked out by Wikileaks then hand fed to the press. Let’s do the math.
This is the kind of thing former National Security Advisor Brzezinski is talking about. It is also what others in the media are talking about. Today, Wayne Madsen on Russia Today spoke of the same thing, how Wikileaks seems aimed directly at the enemies of Israel. Madsen, as with so many others, makes the point that Wikileaks is, as he says it, “cherrypicking” intelligence that seems to make Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu very happy.
IS THERE A LESSON?
The last few days, Paul Craig Roberts and I have been trading emails, a three way debate with Robbie the Pict (actual name), a well known UK activist. Paul wrote this today:
“For example, the US print and TV media and the US government have made it completely clear that they have no regard for the First Amendment. Consider CNN’s Wolf Blitzer’s reaction to the leaked diplomatic cables that reveal how the US government uses deceptions, bribes, and threats to control other governments and to deceive the American and other publics. Blitzer is outraged that information revealing the US government’s improprieties reached the people, or some of them. As Alexander Cockburn wrote, Blitzer demanded that the US government take the necessary steps to make certain that journalists and the American people never again find out what their government is up to.”
Wikileaks is like mother’s milk to people who have starved for openness and justice.