“Outrageously, Berlet categorizes progressive intellectuals such as Peter Dale Scott, Michael Parenti, David Ray Griffin, Michel Chossudovsky, and by innuendo the two of us, as dangerous conspiracists. He uses a straw person technique by positing former LaRouche analyst Webster Tarpley, and the Church of God Evangelistic Association founder David J. Smith in the same category as the progressive intellectuals listed above.” A Response to Chip Berlet

1. Nothing Wikileaks has leaked or will leak is or will be a threat to them. (ie they control what is leaked)

2. Somehow they’ll benefit from it.

You don’t draw attention to something you don’t want people to see! That’s logic and common sense. If Wikileaks were a threat, they’d ignore it like 9/11 truth! Wikileaks appears to be a CIA front designed to catch whistleblows; a conduit by which they can release information they want released (all of which will prop up the official story of 9/11 etc) Yet have their ‘hands off’ of it. Plausible deniablity.

Tarpley, Meyssan and Madsen. All attacking the left and professional nonsense advocates. How coincidental.

Julian Assange has some very obvious reasons to steer clear of association with this movement. And yet, in fairness, I’d guess he wouldn’t work to suppress any documents he found that might help this movement. I think Wikileaks is an important asset and concept in general. I wouldn’t want the worst of this movement easily associated with it.

And that’s exactly what Cosgrove is doing by posting this article.

It’s interesting how Webster Tarpley, who tried to drive a wedge between the truth movement and the peace movement with his Kennebunkport Warning nonsense is claiming that Julian Assange (who is very popular with the peace movement) is a “paid CIA agent”.

And from 911blogger:

“Tarpley… even accused Assange of being a paid CIA agent”

Webster Tarpley has a long history of making false accusations against people, including myself and Cindy Sheehan. I don’t know what’s up with Julian Assange, but Tarpley clearly has no solid evidence upon which to make this accusation. It’s helpful to remember that Tarpley is the guy who called Cindy Sheehan a “wretched individual”. Also see: Synthetic Error: The meltdown of Webster G. Tarpley.

I’m not endorsing Assange, just pointing out the history of one of his attackers.

I’d be interested to hear why Michael Cosgrove thinks this is news. He appears to have done a google search for “Assange” and “9/11 truth”, found three examples of something that satisfied his opinion of the movement, and written about it like anyone should care to hear his opinion. Or should I call it gossip?

It’s news from the swamp. No thank you.

The basic question is, who do you look for if you have an honest question or interest in something? Do you look for the people who seem more or less reasonable? I’m guessing Cosgrove is not all that interested. He seems to have already made up his mind.