Julian Assange: Is He and Forbes Credible? (WikiLeaks)

The latest news coming from WikiLeaks involves its CEO, Julian Assange, andForbes magazine that lends Assange credibility. He states in his interview withForbes that WikiLeaks will soon release tens of thousands of documents from a major U.S. financial firm in early 2011. Assange wouldn't say exactly what date, what bank, or what documents, but he compared the coming release to the emails that emerged in the Enron trial, that provided a comprehensive look at a corporation's crimes.



"It will give a true and representative insight into how banks behave at the executive level in a way that will stimulate investigations and reforms, I presume," he told Forbes.



Forbes, you may recall from previous Horowitz and Kane articles, employed David Rockefeller's ally, Benjamin Fulford. This Canadian propagandist, working in Japan, forged the last writing of Rockefeller nemesis, Christopher Story (a.k.a., Edward Harle). Fulford threatened journalist Story's death according to Story, the world's leading financial industry whistleblower. Story was murdered last July. Then Fulford, collaborating with CIA agent-provocateur, Greg Szmansky (a.k.a., Eric Samuelson), attached a forged "Knights of Malta" list to Story's last article, libeling Dr. Horowitz in the process, and implicating him in Story's murder.



In the Forbes interview, Assange was asked, "So do you have very high impact corporate stuff to release then?" Assange replied, "Yes, but maybe not as high impact, I mean, it could take down a bank or two."



There is talk that Bank of America, whose stock dropped more than 3% last week, may be one of the financial institutions that WikiLeaks is referencing, because In an October, 2009, interview with Computer World , Assange said, "At the moment, for example, we are sitting on five gigabytes from Bank of America, one of the executive's hard drives," he said. "Now how do we present that? It's a difficult problem. We could just dump it all into one giant Zip file, but we know for a fact that has limited impact. To have impact, it needs to be easy for people to dive in and search it and get something out of it."



Assange the Fugitive or Instrument of the Hegelian Dialectic?



Assange, we are told, is currently a fugitive, wanted by Interpol, allegedly for two sex crimes against women. In one case, he was reluctant to wear a condom during consensual sex.



The "fugitive" label now given to Assange works best for the Hegelian dialectic--the main method of mind-manipulation--challenging newsmakers' and whistleblowers' credibility,generating mass confusion.



This Hegelian, "mix-it-all-up," strategy evidences a CIA-COINTELPRO double agency: Assange, supposedly working for the good guys, appears discredited, yet assigned to operate as controlled opposition, a news maker that takes the heat of condemnation, a general distraction, only to be cleared later of wrongdoing in weakly evidenced cases.



Assange describes himself as an "information activist." He says, "The fundamental human struggle is between individuals and powerful institutions."



Increasingly, legitimate activists think Assange is "controlled opposition"--a shill for the "powerful institutions" he indicts. The bad guys have names that Assange neglects to mention.



Surely the gravity of America's economic collapse is sufficient to warrantForbes's and Assange's full disclosure. Failure to do so is treasonous and genocidal given millions of lives are risked by their censorship and conducting their "business a usual."



Many people now see Assange as a "wolf in sheep's clothing." Thierry Meyssan, who made himself an enemy of the U.S. by declaring in his book that 9/11 was orchestrated by George Bush, is one of many activists that may have once supported Assange. His mind, along with many others, changed when Assange disparaged the 9/11 Truth Movement. Assange reported, "I am constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud."



Real conspiracies for war? What the heck was 9/11? Follow the money from the Partnership for New York City's profits and losses from 9/11 to Las Vegas's latest attraction called the "City Center." There's your "smoking gun." The equity investors' in "City Center" feature the 9/11 Memorial--two leaning Veer Towers--sufficient to indict Assange, Larry Silverstein, David Rockefeller, Rupert Murdoch, and Lloyd Blankfein of Goldman Sachs, for treason and mass murder.



Let's pin the tale on the right donkey. Meyssan has denounced Assange as being part of the American government "political diversion." But the first "diversion" is thinking the American government, not the Rockefeller and Rothschild League of Bankers, is the root cause of chaos benefitting the NWO.



Assange, Ellsberg and Rand Corporation Propaganda



Now here's a shocker--history is repeating from the pre-WikiLeaks era. . . .



Assange is being promoted, and endorsed, by Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked the Pentagon papers that, like Assange's leaks, neglected Rockefeller family and CIA involvements in the profitable Vietnam War.



Ellsberg was employed by the Rand Corporation, a major propaganda contractor for the military investment community, especially the Illuminati.



Today, Ellsberg and Assange are heavily involved in public persuasion and distraction, strongly suggesting Rand Corporation's involvements in engineering this publicity campaign that could bring down the banks.



In 1971, Ellsberg generated worldwide attention by releasing copies of the 7000-page top-secret Pentagon document on the Vietnam War. He is a master in economics and developed the "decision theory," now known as the "Ellsberg Paradox," related to "game theory, " used in war making decisions. With his intelligence background, and globalist connections, there is little doubt Ellsberg and Assange are hiding more than they're telling about their bosses' NWO plans.



Assange's squealing in the media, in harmony with Ellsberg, foreshadowing social unrest, martial law, and foreign and domestic military operations, is obviously self-incriminating in lieu of Ellsberg's connections and endorsements of Assange.



In counterintelligence operations, two agents are better than one, especially when mutual admiration among "controlled-opposition leaders" leads to mass persuasion and deadly profitable distractions.