Day 95 (pt 2): Who’s manipulating whom?

Trump supporters.

Are online Trump supporters really at it?


Not the slightest idea as to what FP is, but it’s Wikileaks that has now placed 3,630 Fillon-related documents on its Twitter site.

Is Wikileaks a Putinesque Russian mouthpiece? Maybe naively, I still find that very difficult to credit at all. Though Wikileaks apparent inability (disinterest? unwillingness?) to produce anything critical of Russia merely adds to suspicion. For me, Wikileaks’ constant reminders of the need for a continuing debate about how ‘our side’ behaves allows me to forgive a lot … even if the Wikipedia-Podesta email dump will have certainly contributed to Trump’s election.

Has this public humiliation of Fillon been organised by ‘their side’? Fillon is, for what little it’s now worth, an articulate and public Putin ‘supporter’. Are ‘they’ now pursuing a strategy of getting Le Pen elected – the favourite candidate by far for under-35 voters with one-third supporting her – so that Armageddon should follow?  The Russian Connection is already well established in relation to the FN’s finances, as is their support for Putin’s political line.


2 thoughts on “Day 95 (pt 2): Who’s manipulating whom?

  1. I’m afraid that my views of Wikileaks are much less benevolent than those expressed in this blog. It’s not just the absence of comments on Russia, it’s also the timing and content of information released, which are clearly targeted at causing maximum damage to whoever is in the firing line. I don’t know what their specific agenda is, but I don’t believe that Wikileaks is at all interested in the ongoing debate on how a government and its agencies should behave.
    We can discuss deep into the night about what exactly ‘our side’ might be, but basically I think that most people are on the same side, and Wikileaks are not. Without being paranoid, there are clearly people and countries who wish us harm in different ways, and they do not play by the same rules.
    Unfortunately there is a difficult balance to be achieved between keeping tabs on how our agencies behave and ensuring that they can perform their duties as efficiently, ethically and hopefully legally as possible, and this can not always be done under the constant glare of public scrutiny, some of which is clearly malevolent. Wikileaks seem to be part of the problem, not the solution.
    There has to be some trust that whatever is happening is for the general good and that we do not unduly hamper the efforts of those who would help us. Although I have reservations about some of the actions taken, and these are just the ones we hear about, I would be a lot more concerned if these were not happening.
    Apologies if this comment has turned into an anti-Wikileaks rant


  2. Governments enjoy and use (and sometimes abuse) secrecy. It is one of the roles of newspapers to help citizens understand what Governments are doing in the name of their people and to reveal illegal (and, yes, immoral) activities. This is especially the case when Governments and their agencies have no legal right to conduct their activities in the way they are being performed. Newspapers also rightly reveal to us what corporations are doing which is illegal.
    You write that there ‘has to be some trust that whatever is happening is for the general good’. Really? ‘Whatever’? I cannot share such Panglossian view.
    Also, you say you would want agencies to ‘perform their duties as … legally as possible’. I disagree whole-heartedly. An action is either legal or illegal: if the latter it must not be performed. That surely is what rightly differentiates us from those who, as you say, play by different rules.
    I am delighted there are individuals courageous enough to be whistle-blowers – and that there are channels (such as newspapers and Wikileaks) which enable those individuals to put in the public domain information that otherwise would remain secret.
    A handful of leaks alone serves to show the importance of Wikileaks: Guantanamo Bay prisoners being off limits to the Red Cross, contrary to US Government statements. Barclays Bank tax evasion. The extraordinary scope of electronic surveillance unapproved by the US/UK legislatures. Trafigura’s toxic dumping in Africa.
    These leaks – and many more in which Wikileaks played a role – enable us to have an infinitely better-informed debate about the sort of world we want to live in. Wikileaks is a conduit for people to be able to provide information about what is happening in our lives.
    I am deeply sad that Trump was elected President. I accept that the leaking of the Podesta emails perhaps played a part in that. Yet it is important for US citizens to have understood the role played by the DNC in Clinton’s nomination. Hopefully, the Democratic Party will take action.
    And now, back to the ‘Journal de Dimanche’.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s