?

Log in

Previous 10

Nov. 12th, 2016

tiger

madman101

Julian Assange Issues Statement On The US Election Day

By Julian Assange - November 8, 2016

In recent months, WikiLeaks and I personally have come under enormous pressure to stop publishing what the Clinton campaign says about itself to itself. That pressure has come from the campaign’s allies, including the Obama administration, and from liberals who are anxious about who will be elected US President.

On the eve of the election, it is important to restate why we have published what we have.

The right to receive and impart true information is the guiding principle of WikiLeaks – an organization that has a staff and organizational mission far beyond myself. Our organization defends the public’s right to be informed.

This is why, irrespective of the outcome of the 2016 US Presidential election, the real victor is the US public which is better informed as a result of our work.

The US public has thoroughly engaged with WikiLeaks’ election related publications which number more than one hundred thousand documents. Millions of Americans have poured over the leaks and passed on their citations to each other and to us. It is an open model of journalism that gatekeepers are uncomfortable with, but which is perfectly harmonious with the First Amendment.

We publish material given to us if it is of political, diplomatic, historical or ethical importance and which has not been published elsewhere. When we have material that fulfills this criteria, we publish. We had information that fit our editorial criteria which related to the Sanders and Clinton campaign (DNC Leaks) and the Clinton political campaign and Foundation (Podesta Emails). No-one disputes the public importance of these publications. It would be unconscionable for WikiLeaks to withhold such an archive from the public during an election.

At the same time, we cannot publish what we do not have. To date, we have not received information on Donald Trump’s campaign, or Jill Stein’s campaign, or Gary Johnson’s campaign or any of the other candidates that fulfills our stated editorial criteria. As a result of publishing Clinton’s cables and indexing her emails we are seen as domain experts on Clinton archives. So it is natural that Clinton sources come to us.

We publish as fast as our resources will allow and as fast as the public can absorb it.

That is our commitment to ourselves, to our sources, and to the public.

This is not due to a personal desire to influence the outcome of the election. The Democratic and Republican candidates have both expressed hostility towards whistleblowers. I spoke at the launch of the campaign for Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate, because her platform addresses the need to protect them. This is an issue that is close to my heart because of the Obama administration’s inhuman and degrading treatment of one of our alleged sources, Chelsea Manning. But WikiLeaks publications are not an attempt to get Jill Stein elected or to take revenge over Ms Manning’s treatment either.

Publishing is what we do. To withhold the publication of such information until after the election would have been to favour one of the candidates above the public’s right to know.

This is after all what happened when the New York Times withheld evidence of illegal mass surveillance of the US population for a year until after the 2004 election, denying the public a critical understanding of the incumbent president George W Bush, which probably secured his re election. The current editor of the New York Times has distanced himself from that decision and rightly so.

The US public defends free speech more passionately, but the First Amendment only truly lives through its repeated exercise. The First Amendment explicitly prevents the executive from attempting to restrict anyone’s ability to speak and publish freely. The First Amendment does not privilege old media, with its corporate advertisers and dependencies on incumbent power factions, over WikiLeaks’ model of scientific journalism or an individual’s decision to inform their friends on social media. The First Amendment unapologetically nurtures the democratization of knowledge. With the Internet, it has reached its full potential.

Yet, some weeks ago, in a tactic reminiscent of Senator McCarthy and the red scare, Wikileaks, Green Party candidate Stein, Glenn Greenwald and Clinton’s main opponent were painted with a broad, red brush. The Clinton campaign, when they were not spreading obvious untruths, pointed to unnamed sources or to speculative and vague statements from the intelligence community to suggest a nefarious allegiance with Russia. The campaign was unable to invoke evidence about our publications—because none exists.

In the end, those who have attempted to malign our groundbreaking work over the past four months seek to inhibit public understanding perhaps because it is embarrassing to them – a reason for censorship the First Amendment cannot tolerate. Only unsuccessfully do they try to claim that our publications are inaccurate.

WikiLeaks’ decade-long pristine record for authentication remains. Our key publications this round have even been proven through the cryptographic signatures of the companies they passed through, such as Google. It is not every day you can mathematically prove that your publications are perfect but this day is one of them.

We have endured intense criticism, primarily from Clinton supporters, for our publications. Many long-term supporters have been frustrated because we have not addressed this criticism in a systematic way or responded to a number of false narratives about Wikileaks’ motivation or sources. Ultimately, however, if WL reacted to every false claim, we would have to divert resources from our primary work.

WikiLeaks, like all publishers, is ultimately accountable to its funders. Those funders are you. Our resources are entirely made up of contributions from the public and our book sales. This allows us to be principled, independent and free in a way no other influential media organization is. But it also means that we do not have the resources of CNN, MSNBC or the Clinton campaign to constantly rebuff criticism.

Yet if the press obeys considerations above informing the public, we are no longer talking about a free press, and we are no longer talking about an informed public.

Wikileaks remains committed to publishing information that informs the public, even if many, especially those in power, would prefer not to see it. WikiLeaks must publish. It must publish and be damned.

Source: zerohedge.com

Oct. 24th, 2016

xmas /eek /crazy - psycho xmas duck

madman101

WHO DONE IT?

Although it is clear that Wikileaks has not been known to release false documents, the DNC and Clinton campaign, along with cooperative media, threw up a smokescreen, claiming that Russia was responsible for the leaks, (and so the hacks into the DNC). Since Russia has been painted as evil for the past several years, and is known to do nasty spy stuff, (just like our government does), then the Wikileaks documents could not be trusted as being true. (That reminds me of when the Sanders campaign was blamed for a casual breach into the DNC computers which mainly harmed the Sanders campaign).

As soon as the DNC hacks and leaks were made public, the head of the Clinton campaign was on NPR, talking like a reporter, over and over claiming that the Russians did it. "Experts say the Russians did it!"

Still, now, even the upper levels of military intelligence are trying to convey the idea that, "Russia did it," when they have no evidence to support their duplicitous words. (See article linked below). So, the media speaks in the same regard. And so, Wall Street rises on the prospect of Ms. Clinton being elected - (by the powers that be).

So - who, really, is responsible for the leaks? Wikipedia is just a messenger - handing off the information - as a middle-man, (and for that, Ecuador cut off Assange's internet, necessary to his free speech journalism). I find it rather odd, that in all of this cloud of media and blame, it has never occurred to anyone that Hillary Clinton, herself, was responsible for the leaks. Why?

Remember all the news about Clinton mixing her personal and private servers, exposing classified government information to possible hackers? Um. That's exactly what happened.

I don't know how many of you feel as disturbed as I do, over the games that are being played here, which are consistent with games going years into the past, but considering that Clinton represents the global corporate establishment, garnering money from prominent Republicans, etc., while pretending to be Bernie Sanders, I feel that she is the last person this country needs to be president. But, I am ahead of myself. What I am presenting for you here is a not-so-heavy look at the whole hacking controversy, and why we all need computer privacy. As far as WHO DONE WHAT - there are a few links exploring that topic.

There are some good leads for you, as far as finding ways to strengthen your own security on the internet...

Dear Clinton Team: We Noticed You Might Need Some Email Security Tips


Read more HERECollapse )

OK - Besides wikileaks.org, and DCleaks, and Guccifer2.0, here is one more link for you: The Electronic Freedom Foundation. And - don't forget: Be sure you have a strong firewall, and customise it in a very anal fashion. My firewall was made in Russia - just like LiveJournal! (lol)

Oct. 19th, 2016

galaxy

madman101

"The Most Important Conspiracy Book in Decades"

Shell Game by Scott BennettText of Review HERE, includes good links...Collapse )

Oct. 18th, 2016

galaxy

madman101

Man your internets!

After Ecuador cutting Assange's internet, there may have been a raid on the Embassy, with Assange subsequently being flown to Smithfield Airforce Base in the USA.  (We all know of Obama's vendetta against whistleblowers).  So, check out what is going on - (I have to go to bed).  Some sources: Reddit, Anonymous, Clyde Lewis "Ground Zero," - & wikileaks.org?  After all the blaming of Russia, and Russia preparing for nuclear war, things are getting hot and may spin out of control.  (Also see my previous post on Assange).  Debate tommorrow night.  I hope it all comes down.

Oct. 17th, 2016

abe boombox

madman101

Assange is Dead?! - Walking into war...

These rumours come up: Paul McCartney, Hillary Clinton, God. That's right - there was an internet rumour, about two weeks ago, that Hillary Clinton was dead, and using a basketful of body-doubles to fill in for her. So, I know to steer clear of these things. But now, there is a rumour that Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, which has been leaking the DNC, Clinton and Podesta emails, is dead - because certain "deadman codes" were released, (see article).

GOING VIRAL=> RUMORS JULIAN ASSANGE IS DEAD — WIKILEAKS POSTS DEADMAN’S KEYS


What do I think is going on? This give me a chance to sing...Collapse )

In the Democratic Echo Chamber, Inconvenient Truths Are Recast as Putin Plots

I will be posting soon about the possibility of war.

Oct. 15th, 2016

canada

madman101

Celebrity News!

Bra-less Pamela Anderson visits WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London...

Note: Ecuador rated as most empathetic country on Earth.

Oct. 13th, 2016

goth - morticia

madman101

The Podesta Emails


Search for yourself, on WIKILEAKS.

Oct. 12th, 2016

crazy /eek - colberto

madman101

Real Conspiracies

Many of these can be researched on Wikipedia, etc.  This list doesn't even mention PRISM.

"List of Confirmed Conspiracies"

(Oh, and leading actress from the Movie, "Snowden," was arrested while protesting the Dakota Access Pipeline. See my own jnl for post).

There have been so many leaks lately, it is hard to keep up - unless one devotes oneself solely to that topic(!) But I will be posting related entries in my own journal, and in communities like this. Feel free to keep us up to date on the latest Wikileaks, like this: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/1802

Sep. 17th, 2016

cheers - smiling flower

madman101

Pardons on Assange - and Snowden - being blocked!

Gettyimages-508571834
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange prepares to speak from the balcony [Feb.5?] of the Ecuadorian embassy, where he's lived since 2012.

Court won't drop Julian Assange rape investigation

CBS: STOCKHOLM -- A Swedish appeals court on Friday upheld a detention order for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, dismissing the latest attempt by the 45-year-old Australian to make prosecutors drop a rape investigation from 2010.

The decision by the Svea Court of Appeal means that the arrest warrant stands for the 45-year-old computer hacker, who has avoided extradition to Sweden by seeking shelter at the Ecuadorean Embassy in London since 2012.

Assange, who denies the rape allegation, has challenged the detention order several times. He says he fears he will be extradited to the United States to face espionage charges if he leaves the embassy.

His Swedish defense lawyer, Per Samuelson, said he would appeal the decision to the Supreme Court.


Read and see more here - Assange; Snowden; Manning; Love, and an Illinois caseCollapse )

Sep. 13th, 2016

abe boombox

madman101

Breaking News - (xpost)

Original newz story - Click here

Julian Assange has confirmed that Bernie Sanders was threatened into pulling out of the Democratic race in July.

During a recent interview with Australian journalist John Pilger, Assange said that Bernie Sanders was forced to drop out of the race due to threats from the Clinton campaign.

Assange’s admission appears to substantiate claims by the Kremlin who revealed they had evidence that Jane Sanders was physically threatened in order to “get Bernie on board” with Hillary’s campaign.

Trueactivist.com reports:

Pilger, who is working on a documentary about Assange, asked:

“Julian, we cut you off earlier when you were talking about what you felt were the most significant emails that you have released. Is there any last one that you’d like to mention? And also, do you have any thoughts on Bernie Sanders? I mean what is your opinion why Bernie Sanders drop out of the race?”

Assange responded:

“Look, I think—you know, we know how politics works in the United States. Whoever—whatever political party gets into government is going to merge with the bureaucracy pretty damn fast. It will be in a position where it has some levers in its hand. And Bernie Sanders was independent candidate trying to get the nomination trough the Democratic Party and if you ask me he did get the nomination, but he was threatened to drop out.”

Again, Assange has promised to release incriminating emails which are sure to result in Clinton’s indictment. He says he has evidence that Hillary made deals with an alleged Islamic state sponsor, as well as damning information about the Clinton Foundation.

The Clinton campaign knows he’s on to her, too, which is why a strategist called for an assassination of Assange on TV.

“Of course, we’re very interested in revealing the truth about any candidate and yes we have some material about Bernie Sanders that will be published,” Assange added.

Source

(While I feel compassion toward the faltering Ms. Clinton, there is also a kind of cruel justice in the world. Karma. And, see this): Human Rights Groups to Launch All-Out ‘Pardon Snowden’… - September 12th, 2016 - Nadia Prupis, staff writer Some of the world’s most prominent human rights organizations are launching a formal campaign on Wednesday calling on President Barack Obama to pardon whistleblower Edward Snowden, a long-awaited effort that will coincide ...

Previous 10

November 2016

S M T W T F S
  12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930   

Syndicate

RSS Atom
Powered by LiveJournal.com