International Relations - Anglo-US Academia: Censorship, Intellectual Dishonesty & Bias

ꕤ Article SOURCE http://www.crikey.com.au/2015/12/18/are-us-academics-who-cite-wikileaks-blackballed/ http://www.crikey.com.au/2015/12/18/are-us-academics-who-cite-wikileaks-blackballed/ Are US academics who cite WikiLeaks blackballed? Chris Spannos | Dec 18, 2015 12:46PM While WikiLeaks continues to make strong interventions into the global news cycle, important debates have been simmering between editor Julian Assange and international relations scholars about whether or not the more than 2 million US diplomatic cables and State Department records WikiLeaks began publishing in 2010 (2,325,961 to be exact) are relevant to understanding how the world’s super-power operates and if Anglo-American academic institutions in the international relations discipline are biased toward the interests of US empire. The debate raises difficult questions. Do the cables provide insight into full-spectrum diplomacy, foreign relations, and concepts of sovereignty? If so, how can the indifference of certain prestigious associations and journals in the international relations discipline to WikiLeaks’ material be explained? Do these powerful institutions prefer to turn a blind eye to evidence that shows their theories wanting? Do they operate to provide a distorted view of the world and help prepare international studies graduates for jobs serving questionable US government interests? Speaking to Germany’s Der Spiegel magazine in July 2015, Assange suggested that institutions within the international relations discipline have failed to understand the intersection between current geopolitical and technological developments. Specifically, Assange charged that the US journal International Studies Quarterly (ISQ), published by the prestigious International Studies Association (ISA), would not accept manuscripts based on WikiLeaks’ material. Professor of international politics Daniel W. Drezner hit back on July 30 in The Washington Post, arguing that there were other explanations for why the journal was not publishing WikiLeaks’ material. However, he did concede that it is possible that the “structural forces” opposing WikiLeaks were so powerful that a scholar would eschew WikiLeaks’ publications for “fear of being blackballed”. For the thousands of undergraduate to PhD students, fellows and academic researchers facing a precarious employment market, self-censorship for fear of freezing one’s career is not unlikely. One publicised incident from November 2010 concerning the office of career services at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs (SIPA), which according to The New York Times “grooms future diplomats”, provides the perfect illustration. That year the office sent an email to students warning them against commenting on or posting WikiLeaks’ documents on social media because “engaging in these activities would call into question your ability to deal with confidential information, which is part of most positions with the federal government”. The warning came to the office through a SIPA alumnus working at the State Department. Years later, the tone of the warning continued to reverberate through the halls of one of the most reputable universities in the world. In documenting human rights abuses in June 2013 a Columbia University graduate class produced the anonymous academic paper “WikiLeaks and Iraq Body Count: the sum of parts may not add up to the whole — a comparison of two tallies of Iraqi civilian deaths”. The acknowledgements section of their report refers to the 2010 warning email and states that in light of that email it would be “unwise and perhaps unethical to acknowledge all the participating students by name”. Others participating in a peer-review process have cited additional factors curtailing their use of comprehensive and illuminating WikiLeaks publications. Former US presidential candidate for the Green Party Cynthia McKinney, for example, says that she was forced to scrub her PhD dissertation from any reference of WikiLeaks material. However Drezner, who is an ISA member and on the ISQ’s web advisory board, claims that WikiLeaks’ published diplomatic cables “are not nearly as significant as Assange believes” and that the “academic universe is indifferent to WikiLeaks”. A surprising claim, given that international human rights courts have not been indifferent to evidence derived from WikiLeaks’ published cables, including cables that show the insidious ways in which European officials attempt to conceal CIA torture in secret prisons. To help address the gap in scholarly analysis of the more than 2 million US diplomatic cables and State Department records published by WikiLeaks since 2010, WikiLeaks has produced a new book, The WikiLeaks Files: The World According to US Empire, published September 7, 2015. The book brings together journalists, researchers and experts on international law and foreign policy to examine the current cables and records. The documents are extensive. They expose US efforts —  across Bush and Obama administrations — to use bribes and threats to keep the US protected from facing war crimes allegations, conveying the fading effervescence of concepts such as “international justice” or “rule of law” in the face of a superpower that clearly believes that “might makes right”. Analysts review the efforts US diplomats take to maintain ties with dictators. They examine the meaning of human rights in the context of a global “War on Terror”. Like the cables they seek to illuminate, the 18 chapters of the book touch upon most major regions of the world. Experts on US foreign policy such as Robert Naiman, Stephen Zunes and Gareth Porter examine cables that reveal US meddling in Syria, US acceptance of Israeli violations of international law, and how the US dealt with the International Atomic Energy Agency in relation to Iranian nuclear development. The book offers a user guide written by WikiLeaks’ investigations editor Sarah Harrison on how to research WikiLeaks’ cables including meta data and content. Writing in the book’s introduction, Assange proposes that the diplomatic cables provide “the vivisection of a living empire, showing what substance flowed from which state organ and when”. Assange notes in his introduction that academic disciplines outside international relations, and where career aspirations do not go hand in hand with patronage by government institutions, have voluminous coverage of the cables. But the ISA does not accept submissions citing WikiLeaks’ material. Although ISA executive director Mark Boyer denies that the association has a formal policy against publishing WikiLeaks’ material, he says that journal editors have discussed the implications of publishing material that is legally prohibited by the US government. According to Gabriel J. Michael, author of the Yale Law School paper Who’s Afraid of WikiLeaks? Missed Opportunities in Political Science Research, the ISQ has adopted a “provisional policy” against handling manuscripts that make use of leaked documents if such use could be interpreted as mishandling “classified” material. According to an ISQ editor quoted in Michael’s paper, this policy prohibits direct quotations as well as data mining, and was developed in consultation with legal counsel. Stating that editors are currently “in an untenable position”. According to the editor, ISQ’s policy will remain in place pending broader action from the ISA, which publishes several other disciplinary journals. The ISA and ISQ concerns about handling material that the US government forbids —  which include WikiLeaks’ cables —  amount to throwing the baby out with the bathwater. The cables go into the heart of an empire, and reflect on matters that affect everyone. Without WikiLeaks, the public would still be in the dark about the Trans-Pacific Partnership “agreement” currently being negotiated. The treaty aims to rewrite the global rules on intellectual property rights and would create spheres of trade which would be protected from judicial oversight. Such agreements have the potential to change the fabric of how states operate, and the leaked cables shed light on how states negotiate significant treaties, aiming to keep citizenship participation in politics out. Where academia bans the use of important leaked documents the public loses out. SOURCE http://www.crikey.com.au/2015/12/18/are-us-academics-who-cite-wikileaks-blackballed/ Article by: Chris Spannos media activist Digital Editor @newint. Formerly at teleSUR, ZNet, NYT eXaminer, Imaginary Lines. Oxford, England @cspannos Julian Assange Editor, WikiLeaks Justice4Assange WikiLeaks Site WikiLeaks Twitter BOOK:  The WikiLeaks Files (2015) Link | here ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT That was a good article.  Did a summary, which I'll post and link to, once I edit. I'm sure everyone out there can read for themselves ... but it's my way of trying to remember. Don't know how much of this I'll remember.  It all makes sense now, but my retention isn't all that great. I've read an article recently on this topic, but I forgot all about it.  In a weird way, I even forget how serious the US are about targeting WikiLeaks.  I knew about an 'investigation' but documents released under US freedom of information provisions refer to FBI and Dept. of Justice 'proceedings', which would mean US law enforcement is (and has been) officially mounting a case. In turn, this means that Ecuador's decision to grant political asylum is vindicated. And shows how the British have done away with justice and democracy, to politically persecute Australian journalist, Julian Assange, who has: been detained for 5 years by the British, without charge; and has been subjected to a 3-year Ecuador embassy siege, at over $19-million (American dollars); in an effort to block his rightfully granted political asylum. In the article, this was a huge stand-out for me:  paraphrasing American efforts (bribes & threats) to dodge being held to account for war crimes. Resorting to bribes and threats means there's not one, but two, wrongs committed. WikiLeaks, having exposed the American war crimes, has also exposed US efforts to escape accountability for war crimes. That puts the American efforts to prosecute WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange (and WikiLeaks personnel/associates) into perspective:  and it's not a pretty one. Below is confirmation in US court documents that the FBI and US Department of Justice are officially conducting a 'proceeding' against WikiLeaks. Article Summary Anglo-US Academia, Associations & Journals (International Relations Discipline) Abetting Illegitimate Use of State Power Link | Post ꕤ

Sweden vs Morocco -- Another Swedish Diplomatic Blunder?

ꕤ Article SOURCE as marked Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR) partially recognized state controls thin strip of Western Sahara region claims sovereignty over entire territory of Western Sahara Western Sahara -- a former Spanish colony SADR proclaimed by the Polisario Front - 1976, in Bir Lehlou, Western Sahara SADR government controls about 20–25% of the territory it claims territories under SADR control referred to as "the Liberated Territories" or "the Free Zone". Morocco controls and administers the rest of the disputed territory and calls these lands its Southern Provinces. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahrawi_Arab_Democratic_Republic Polisario Front aka , Frente Polisario, FRELISARIO or POLISARIO "Popular Front for the Liberation of Saguia el-Hamra and Río de Oro" Sahrawi rebel national liberation movement working to end Moroccan presence in Western Sahara militating for independence of Western Sahara since 1973 originally against Spanish rule but after 1975: against Mauritania & Morocco 1979 onwards:  against Morocco only Polisario Front is based in Algeria, Algeria Polisario Front is responsible for the Tindouf refugee camps Polisario Front maintains a cease-fire with Morocco since 1991 (see Settlement Plan) Polisario Front is outlawed in parts of Western Sahara under Moroccan control Sahrawi Sahrawis are Sunni Muslims of the Maliki rite or school As with most Saharan peoples living in the Sahara, the Sahrawi culture is mixed. Shows mainly Berber-Tuareg characteristics eg privileged position of women identical to the neighbouring Berber-speaking Tuaregs plus:  some additional Bedouin Arab and black African characteristics strong tribal & cultural links between the Sahrawis and Mauritanian populations, incl. historical allegiance to some Moorish emirates 1975 - Internatinal court ruling recommended the UN to continue to pursue self-determination for the Sahrawis, enabling them to choose for themselves whether they wanted Spanish Sahara to turn into an independent state, or to be annexed to Morocco or Mauritania. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polisario_Front https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahrawi_people Morocco 99% Muslim Sunni majority at:  67% Official languages:  Arabic & Berber  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morocco Algeria 99% Muslim Majority Sunni - Maliki tradition EXTRACTS Morocco has blocked the opening of Ikea’s first store in the kingdom In Retaliation Of Sweden’s Plans to:  recognise a republic sought by the Polisario Front in the Western Sahara. SADR is recognized by a number of states and is a member of the African Union, no Western country has formally recognized it, and activists have accused a number of states – including France and Spain – of backing Morocco in the dispute. United Nations recently renewed a peacekeeping force that’s been there since 1991. Morocco claims Western Sahara, which is rich in offshore fishing, phosphates and potentially large reserves of crude oil, as its territory and has controlled most the sparsely populated stretch of desert since 1975. By Jack Phillips on Oct 03, 2015 http://www.jewocity.com/blog/morocco-blocks-ikea-store-opening-in-retaliation-of-sweden-s-plans-to/88017 Western Sahara: The Historical Commitment Sweden Should Remember Friday 2 October 2015 - 18:51 EXTRACT Sweden among the signatories of the Treaty of Algeciras Yet there exists a solid historical and legal argument that has to be brandished in the face of the Swedish government to show them that by siding with the Polisario, they fail to respect the commitment they made over a century ago with regards to Moroccan territorial integrity. This argument will demonstrate to Swedish politicians and its public opinion that their position on the conflict over the years is based on a false historical assumption. Not only did the SADR not exist before 1976, but Sweden signed an international treaty with respect to Morocco in which it committed along with all Western powers to preserve Moroccan territorial integrity. By virtue of the Treaty of Algeciras of April 7, 1906, all Western powers, including Sweden, committed to preserving Moroccan territorial integrity. Was the so-called Western Sahara part of Moroccan sovereignty at the time? The answers is yes. The spirit of the Treaty of Algeciras was based on the international agreements signed between Morocco and some Western powers, mainly the United Kingdom, which recognized that this territory was an integral part of Morocco. According to Frank E. Trout, author of the book Moroccan Saharan Frontier, in accordance with the agreement signed between Morocco and the UK in March 1895, the British government recognized that the territory between Cap Juby (the area near Tarfaya) and Cap Bojador (present day so-called Western Sahara), belonged to Morocco. Since then until 1904, when the UK signed an agreement with France, the British, as well as the French and Spanish recognized that this territory was under Moroccan sovereignty. The premise on which the Swedish government bases its position is that the so-called Western Sahara never belonged to Morocco before 1975, and as such Morocco can lay no claim of sovereignty over this territory. However, this premise itself is false. Contrary to common belief in the West, Spanish occupation of the territory was in total violation of international law at the time. When the British government accepted the principle of a French and Spanish protectorate over Morocco, it clearly insisted in article 3 of the secret accord signed between Paris and London in April 1904 that Spain could not undertake any action that would alienate the sovereignty of territory of its sphere of influence. This British position was based on the understanding that the so-called Western Sahara belonged to Morocco and was not to be alienated by any Western power. However, in accordance with the French-Spanish accord of October 1904, Spain was given possession, but not sphere of influence, of the disputed territory, without informing Morocco or seeking the approval of the British, who had signed an agreement recognizing Morocco’s sovereignty over the territory. The arrangements made between Western powers were carried out without consulting with Morocco, which was the main party in interest in the agreements signed between France and Spain on the one hand and the France and the UK on the other hand. Without a renunciation of the agreement signed between the UK and Morocco in 1895, the agreement signed between Western powers in 1904 by virtue of which they defined their spheres of influence in Morocco contravened international law. According to Frank E. Trout, even in the event London gave its formal approval and recognition that Seguia El Hamra (present-day so-called Western Sahara) was to become Spanish territory outside of the limits of Spanish sphere of influence in Southern Morocco, ”it would have meant a unilateral — and presumably secret — renunciation of the agreement signed with Morocco in 1859, [which would have been meaningless since Morocco was not informed of the renunciation.” Additionally, Spain was given possession of the Sahara based on a secret accord of which neither Morocco nor the other Western powers were informed. Based on the foregoing, it is evident that the Swedish government is taking a stance against Morocco, without taking cognizance of the historical fact that it was among the signatories of the Treaty of Algeciras, which committed those signatory countries to preserving Morocco’s territorial integrity. Instead, as a signatory of the treaty, the Swedish government should seek to help Morocco secure its historical and legal rights over the territory. That the predominant narrative on the conflict omits mention of this fact gives no license to the Swedish to dismiss the fact that they have failed to fulfill their commitment to preserving Moroccan territorial integrity. Morocco was the victim of Western colonialism and Moroccans have paid a costly price to regain the independence of their country and restore its territorial integrity. By going down this path, Sweden deepens the wound and turns its back on the commitment it made to the Moroccan people over a century ago. On the other hand, the Swedish government should not disregard the growing consensus among both diplomats and scholars in recent years that the concept of self-determination as it was perceived in the 1960’s is not a one-size fit-it all approach that can be applied to every territorial conflict, and that the UN settlement plan of 1991 has proved to be unworkable. Sweden’s Erik Jensen, who served as Head of MINURSO between 1994-1998 said in his book that the 1991 settlement plan has showed its limits, and there is a need to find an alternative likely to help the parties to reach a settlement. According to Jensen, Javier Pérez de Cuellar and Boutros Ghali, the two former UN Secretary Generals, were intimately convinced that the settlement plan was unworkable, and called on the Security Council to explore other ways. “Perez De Cuellar’s memoirs show that he had doubts about certain aspects of the settlement plan, and Boutros Ghali repeatedly hinted to the Security Council that it might consider an alternative way forward,” said Jensen. Therefore, rather than taking sides with one of the parties, it would be wiser for Sweden to help the parties explore the possibility of working out a middle ground solution where none of the parties would come out as loser. Samir Bennis     Samir Bennis is a political analyst. He received a Ph.D. in international relations from the University of Provence in France. He also holds a Master’s degree in political science from the University of Toulouse I, a Master’s degree in Iberian studies  EXTRACT source http://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2015/10/169343/western-sahara-the-historical-commitment-sweden-should-remember/ Morocco weighs boycott of Swedish firms REUTERS RABAT Morocco said it was considering a boycott of Swedish companies operating in the North African kingdom because of Sweden's position on the conflict over Western Sahara. The territory has been disputed since a war two decades ago. The government said Sweden has been campaigning to boycott products from Western Sahara and international companies with a presence there. Morocco has controlled most of Western Sahara since 1975 and claims the sparsely populated stretch of desert, which has offshore fishing, phosphate reserves and oilfield potential, as its own. However, the Algeria-backed Polisario Front seeks independence, and a United Nations mission was formed more than 20 years ago anticipating a referendum, which has never taken place, on Western Sahara's political future. Sweden and other Scandinavian countries have backed Western Saharan self-determination, while France and Spain have been accused by activists and human rights organisations of supporting the Moroccan line. Moroccan authorities have already blocked the opening of IKEA's first store this week, citing a lack of permits. source http://www.dailysabah.com/money/2015/10/03/morocco-weighs-boycott-of-swedish-firms United Nations Current strength (30 June 2015) 210 total uniformed personnel: 26 troops 6 police officers 178  military observers 84 international civilian personnel* 162 local civilian staff* 12 United Nations Volunteers Fatalities 5 troops 1 police 1 military observer 3 international civilian personnel 5 local civilian personnel _____ 15 total  Approved budget (07/2014– 12/2014): $55,990,080 source http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/missions/minurso/facts.shtml ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT A United Nations 'mission' was formed over 20 years ago, on the basis that a referendum would take place ... but it hasn't. Why not? It looks like there's been a UN 20-year military presence and, apparently, the parties are no closer to resolving this dispute. Check out what is spent on interfering in the Western Sahara region.  Nearly $56-million in a mere 6-months was approved. If that's chewed up in 6-months, imagine how much money's gone down the tubes since 1991. Taxpayer funds of these countries are being spent on this: Image Source  |  Wikipedia ꕤ COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. Twenty-four years of taxpayer funds being blown on this, why? So it's austerity for European taxpayers, while taxpayer funds are funnelled to futile UN projects. Article Detailing The Involvement Of The Un In Western Sahara And Morocco. EXTRACT (United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara) The UN operation in Western Sahara between 1991 and 1997 was so ineffectual that it became one of the main symbols of UN waste and inefficiency for a hostile US Congress. It cost more than five million dollars a month yet did little useful work. UN staff were paid inflated salaries due to the 'hardship' conditions. It is claimed that some UN staff would overstay their tour of duty by a day so as to qualify for a second tranche of 'hardship' money. source http://newint.org/features/1997/12/05/un/ Clinton Foundation is reportedly getting cash from 'one of the world's most controversial mining companies' Colin Campbell May 8, 2015, 1:19 AM Another one of the Clinton Foundation’s major donors is drawing new scrutiny amid former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. A joint investigation by ABC News and Yahoo published Wednesday accuses the Clinton Foundation’s Global Initiative of “being hosted this week at a five-star luxury hotel in Morocco by one of the world’s most controversial mining companies.” According to the report, the Moroccan government-owned mining company Office Cherifien des Phosphates (OCP) has been criticised for “serious human rights violations” by the Robert F. Kennedy Center for Justice. The company reportedly operates in Western Sahara, disputed territory the Moroccan government seized after Spain withdrew in 1975. The Washington Post reported that both human rights activists and US lawmakers have slammed OCP’s mining operation because it “does not have the consent of the indigenous population there.” ABC reported that OCP is “criticised for removing the resources without adequately compensating the impoverished people who live there.” David McKean, a Kennedy Center official, said the inhabitants of Western Sahara are being “systematically suppressed.” “OCP’s operations in Western Sahara are only appropriate under international law if they are acting in the best interests of the people of Western Sahara, and right now they are not,” McKeon told The Post. “The fact that OCP carries out its operations in Western Sahara so publicly seems intended to send the message that they feel they can do so with impunity.” Accordingly, OCP’s financial support for the Clinton Foundation raises questions about whether it is trying to curry favour with the US government. Rep. Joe Pitts (R-Pennsylvania) called the arrangement a “blatant conflict of interest.” “Morocco would like nothing more than having a possible future First Family condone its illegal exploitation of natural resources,” Pitt told The Post. Indeed, according to ABC, OCP has has “sharply accelerated its lobbying of US government officials in recent years — more than quadrupling its spending — as the Moroccan government was pressing its case for sovereignty over Western Sahara.” For its part, OCP defended both its operations in West Africa and its support for the Clinton Foundation. The firm told ABC that, despite its critics’ claims, it actually reinvests money into Western Sahara. OCP executives also reportedly said “their involvement in the Clinton Foundation was intended to help make phosphate-based fertiliser available to needy farmers in Africa — work the foundation has helped make possible.” “We have good spots and bad spots, and when we have a bad spot we try and improve it as much as we can,” said the company’s spokesman. “That’s all I can say, I guess.” The foundation also defended its connections to OCP by touting the nonprofit’s projects around the world. “Our sponsors made it possible for hundreds of CGI members to come together in Morocco to launch new programs designed to help hundreds of thousands of people,” a foundation spokesman told ABC. OCP is just the latest in a series of controversies related to the Clinton Foundation, some of which were spurred by a new book by conservative author Peter Schweizer, “Clinton Cash.” Schweizer accuses Hillary Clinton of trading State Department favours for money to her family foundation. Her campaign has aggressively dismissed Schweizer’s work as a unsubstantiated partisan smear. However, as Schweizer himself likes to point out, a number of mainstream news organisations have investigated the foundation based on information in his book. Notably, The New York Times published an in-depth story linking undisclosed donations to the Clinton Foundation to the sale of US uranium production to a Russian government agency. source http://www.businessinsider.com.au/clinton-foundation-funded-by-controversial-mining-company-2015-5 ꕤ

Assange - What Wikileaks Teaches Us About How the US Operates - Book: The WikiLeaks Files | Article Extracts-Summary - Part II

EXTRACTS | SUMMARY [For quotation purposes, confirm original article] PART II RE: Book The WikiLeaks Files: The World According to U.S. Empire (Verso, 2015) ---- SOURCE Assange: What WikiLeaks Teaches Us About How the U.S. Operates By Julian Assange 8/28/15 http://www.newsweek.com/emb-midnight-827-assange-what-wikileaks-teaches-us-about-how-us-operates-366364 ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- National Security Religiosity  & the International Studies Association large body of literature exists re: structural or realpolitik analysis of key institutions of US power such approaches alone, lack explanatory power, given: range of ritualistic & even quasi-religious phenomena surrounding the national security sector in USA Rituals, familiar: flag-folding veneration of orders elaborate genuflection to rank [grovelling / servility / on bended knee | fm Lat. genu (knee) flectere (to bend) - here] ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- National Security Sector |  Priestly Class WikiLeaks published documents bear: classification markings type of national-security 'holy seal' Reaction to WikiLeaks publication of documents = two parallel campaigns: One downplaying diverting attention reframing Two internal campaign (digestion / processing of event) When documents bearing classification seal are made public = documents transmuted by US DoS into forbidden objects As 'forbidden objects' public/published classified US DoS docs = become 'toxic' to the 'state within a state' Over 5.1 million Americans (as of 2014) = US 'state within a state' - ie those with active security clearances As 'forbidden objects' published classified US DoS docs = also 'toxic' to extended periphery who aspire to USG economic or social patronage Upon WikiLeaks disclosures: =  hysteria and non-corporeality {and unreality?} religions & cults imbue their priestly class with additional scarcity value by keeping their religious texts secret from the public or the lower orders of the devoted technique also permits priestly class to adopt different psychological strategies for different levels of indoctrination national security sector ways embraced by those who have become sufficiently indoctrinated = laughable to: public; or lower levels of 'clearance;' What is laughable, hypocritical, or Machiavellian =   embraced by those sufficiently indoctrinated or co-opted by those whose economic or social advantage lies in accepting that which they would normally reject ꕤ Profaned Object - 'Contamination' False USG Claim Publicly, USG claimed falsely: = that anyone without a USG security clearance distributing “classified” documents is violating the Espionage Act of 1917 (USA) USG FALSE claims = work in the opposite direction: "orders the very people it publicly claims are the only ones who can legally read classified documents to refrain from reading documents" ... lest they be 'contaminated' by them Exact documents: may be read by cleared staff when issued from classified USG repositories are, however, forbidden to same staff when exact documents emerge from a public source US DoS mandates that: cleared employees of the national security state are: to self-report any public domain contact with the newly 'profaned' object; and  to destroy all traces of it; US Irrational Response classified cables (+ other docs) published by WikiLeaks (& associated media) = completely identical to the original versions (ie they are electronic copies) By implication 'Holy' US DoS classified docs  acquire non-physical property / that is a 'magical' property  and this 'holy,' 'magical' property received upon USG classification: is EXTINGUISHED by making document PUBLIC Devotees of National Security State do not consider docs made public to be merely: devoid of 'magical' property (bestowed by classification 'holy' seal); or  rendered a mundane object on publication Devotees of National Security State consider documents made public as having become = inhabited by another non-physical property: an evil one Such religious thinking consequences: excuse used by USG to block millions of people working for the 'state within a state' from reading: = over 30 different WikiLeaks domains = other outlets publishing WikiLeaks materials: The New York Times Guardian Der Spiegel Le Monde El País 2011 | USG Sent 'WikiLeaks Fatwa' to every: federal govt agency every federal govt employee every federal govt security contractor Declaration of Official 'Enemy' - Proclaiming WikiLeaks disclosures caused damage to national security Declaration of 'Forbidden Object' - Proclaiming classified information 'remains classified' irrespective of availability on public websites & availability via media disclosure Proclamation | 'Confession' contractors "shall report its existence immediately" Proclamation | 'Cleansing' Companies are: "to delete the offending material" & to clear even the "internet browser cache" ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- ACADEMIA INTERNATIONAL & PUBLIC RELATIONS Columbia University School of International & Public Affairs following US DoS contact warned students: “not post links to these documents nor make comments on social media sites ..." Consequence invoked (leverage) that accompanied warning: "Engaging in these activities would call into question your ability to deal with confidential information, which is part of most positions with the federal government." An array of govt depts & other entities, incl Library of Congress blocked internet access to WikiLeaks US National Archives = even blocked searches of its own database for “WikiLeaks” Pentagon prosecutors re Manning trial (alleged source Cablegate cables) = unable to receive important emails from judge & defence Rather than remove filter, Pentagon implemented clumsy new procedure: check the filter daily for blocked WikiLeaks-related emails set-up of alternate, special e-mail addresses for prosecution US National Security Sector Religious Hysteria = laughable to those outside the US national security sector US National Security Sector Religious Hysteria INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS = serious poverty of analysis of WikiLeaks publications in US in international relations journals OTHER SCHOLARS scholars in disciplines eg law, linguistics, applied statistics, health & economics = not deterred eg - Entropy statistics journal DeDeo et al. (US or UK nationals) write that: WikiLeaks   |   Afghan War Diary  “is likely to become a standard set for both the analysis of human conflict and the study of empirical methods for the analysis of complex, multi-modal data.” [entropy = (Communications & Information) a measure of the efficiency of a system, such as a code or language, in transmitting information - fm. Gk - here] COURTS & INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS extensive use of WikiLeaks materials esp. cables in courts, incl. domestic courts from UK to Pakistan INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS extensive use of WikiLeaks materials from: European Court of Human Rights to International Criminal Tribunal CONTRAST POVERTY OF COVERAGE IN USA INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS JOURNALS in light of 1,000s of citations in the courts & in other academic areas = poverty of coverage, not merely odd = suspicious Such international relations journals DOMINATE study of international relations GLOBALLY =  should be natural home for analysis of WikiLeaks 2-billion word diplomatic corpus US-based International Studies Quarterly (ISQ) major international relations journal = adopted a policy against accepting manuscripts based on WikiLeaks material *even where it consists of quotes* *or derived analysis* ISQ = acknowledged it's currently: in an untenable position until such time as there is a change in policy by International Studies Association (ISA) International Studies Association (ISA) = over 6,500 members worldwide = dominant scholarly association in the field = publishes: Foreign Policy Analysis International Political Sociology International Interactions International Studies Review International Studies Perspectives ISA = almost HALF of 56 members on its governing council:  professors 'international service' type academic USA university departments  *Such university departments: = feeder schools for the US DoS and other internationally-oriented areas of govt ISA President (2014-15) = Prof Amitav Acharya School of International Service American University in Washington, DC ISA = banned single most significant US foreign policy archive from appearing in its academic papers = otherwise, presumably, against its institutional & academic ambitions ISA ban = calls into question its entire output = undermines an output that has influenced how the world understands role of US in international order Type of Academic Fraud = closing of ranks within the scholar class around the interests of Pentagon & DoS = exclusion of primary sources for non-academic reasons is to lie by omission = distortion of the field of international relations (& related disciplines) by proximity of its academic structures to the US govt = such close-proximity academic structures lack even even have the independence of the frequently deferential New York Times Distortion of Study of International Relations & Censorship of WikiLeaks = significant opportunity: to present an analysis of international relations free of censorship of classified materials ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- Other Fatwa =  "an Islamic religious ruling, a scholarly opinion on a matter of Islamic law. A fatwa is issued by a recognized religious authority in Islam."  |  here ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT Not sure what is meant by 'non-corporeality' ... some kind of disembodied hysteria?  lol Or, maybe something immaterial and therefore invalid? Not sure if I'm on the right track.  Going with unreality re 'non-corporeality' mentioned in article (as follows): "hysteria and non-corporeality" Article's a good read. ꕤ

Assange - What Wikileaks Teaches Us About How the US Operates - Book: The WikiLeaks Files | Article Extracts-Summary - Part I

EXTRACTS | SUMMARY [For quotation purposes, confirm original article] PART I RE: Book The WikiLeaks Files: The World According to U.S. Empire (Verso, 2015) ---- SOURCE Assange: What Wikileaks Teaches Us About How the U.S. Operates By Julian Assange 8/28/15 http://www.newsweek.com/emb-midnight-827-assange-what-wikileaks-teaches-us-about-how-us-operates-366364 ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- Leaked US docs lifted veil on imperialist nature of USA foreign policy ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- Communication Early empires Stone transmission of compressed institutional rules to be safely communicated into future Early methods did not allow for: rapidly unfolding events official nuance or discretion gaps addressed by: oral medium other: eg papyrus light and fast to create, but fragile easy to construct and transport, unifying occupied regions = rapid information flow | could: = feed reactive central management = integrate incoming streams of intelligence = swiftly project outgoing decisions {but with tendencies toward short-termism & micromanagement} ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- Absolute boundary to existence of empire: = ability to project an empire’s: desires structure knowledge across space across time ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- Hallmark of empire = structured attempt at managing an extended cultural; and economic system using communications ---------------------- ꕤ ----------------------  USG DoS Empire Communications | Vulnerable to Dissection records of these communications ( never intended to be dissected / especially vulnerable to dissection) form the basis for understanding nature of world’s sole remaining “empire.” ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- Anatomy of US Empire Where is it? 191 countries 276 fortified buildings 169 embassies & other missions of USG 71,000 people across those countries 27 different US govt ('USG') agencies 27 other USG departments ('depts') & agencies incl: Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) National Security Agency (NSA) Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) US military (various branches) ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- Embassy Components Ambassador = usually close to domestic US political; business; or intelligence power Career Diplomats = specialize in politics; economy; and public diplomacy [propaganda]; of their host state. Others: managers researchers military attachés spies under foreign-service cover personnel from other USG agencies *some embassies:  may have overt armed military; or  covert special ops forces Caretakers | Services contractors security personnel technicians locally hired translators cleaners other service personnel ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- USG empire communication means: radio satellite some communication USG mainland: receive; or disgorge diplomatic and CIA cables some relay the communications of US military ships & planes others = NSA mass-intercept of mobile phones other wireless traffic of host population ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- USG Diplomatic Service History Dates back to the American Revolution  1765 - 1783 | here Modern US DoS came into being: post WWII 1973 - appointment of Henry Kissinger as secretary of state concurrent appointed of Henry Kissinger as: national security advisor facilitated tighter integration b/w following arms of USG: foreign relations military intelligence 1973 - cables transmitted in bulk, electronically *for first time* US Department of State ('DoS') UNIQUE - Among USA Bureaucracies Other USG agencies = one function admin US DoS = represents / houses = all major elements of US national power = cover for CIA = buildings for NSA mass-interception equipment = office space & communications facilities for: FBI military other USG agencies & staff to act as sales agents & political advisors for largest US corporations   ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- Understanding US DoS diplomatic apparatus cannot properly understood from outside US DoS = directly involved in putting a friendly face on empire = ie concealing US DoS underlying mechanics 'public diplomacy' = outward propaganda $1 billion p.a. is budgeted by USA for outward propaganda ('public diplomacy') USG DoS propaganda ('public diplomacy') aims to influence: 1) journalists; and 2) civil society; so that they serve as *conduits* for US DoS messaging ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- USG DoS | Released Info | National Archives national archives = impressive collections of internal state communications BUT - material intentionally withheld (or made difficult to access) for DECADES aim: to strip info of potency reason: potential 'blowback' ie.  timely, accessible archives of international significance *would produce 'blowback' in the form of: withdrawn funding; or termination of officials ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- Potency of Secret Communications Revealed | The Naked Empire publication = vivisection of a living empire = (showing what substance flowed from which state organ & when) = internal communications by-product of activities of US DoS = not produced in order to manipulate public = cables aimed at elements of rest of US state apparatus = therefore relatively free from distorting influence of public relations = reading US DoS cables (internal communications, stripped of propaganda / external influence intent) |  = much more effective way of understanding an institution like US DoS than reading reports by journalist (fed to them by likes of Hillary Clinton & Jen Psaki) ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- Note however: cables / internal communications  of US DoS officials = must match their pens to the latest DC orthodoxies = elements of political correctness = noteworthy & visible to outsiders who are not sufficiently indoctrinated Cables show how US DoS (& agencies that inter-operate with cable system) = understand their place in the world KEY to understanding: Only by approaching this corpus holistically (above localised atrocity & individual abuses): does the true human cost of empire heave into view ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT Above extracts/summary are my way of distilling what is key (to me).  Best to read the article itself, in case there's gaps in my understanding. Following not clear to me: serve as *conduits* for US DoS messaging Is that the journalists & members of civil society to serve as conduits of US DoS messaging, as result of US DoS 'public diplomacy' propaganda?  That's what I assumed. ꕤ