WikiLeaks Inform Voters

Naomi Klein’s remarks. ” how dangerous it is for media organizations to be taking such a highly political approach to this election, because they so clearly don’t want Trump to get elected, so they’re engaging in what you’ve described as journalistic fraud, right?”

Julian Assange talking:

I think it’s a bit rich for Naomi Klein, who’s a very wealthy woman, sitting up there in Canada, to be accusing a political prisoner, who’s been detained for the last seven years without charge, in violation of two U.N. rulings, without getting her facts straight.

So, what is WikiLeaks to do? Sit on and suppress evidence of interference in the DNC process? Wait until after the DNC congress to publish that information? That would be deeply unethical for this organization. I would argue it would be deeply unethical for any media organization. But for this organization, it would be deeply unethical. We have a commitment to the public that we will not suppress information like that. And we have a commitment to sources who come forward, taking risks to give us information, that we will publish it in a timely fashion, once we have verified that it is completely accurate. Now, do we wish that we had more money and could process information faster? Of course we do. But we did manage to get that publication out before the DNC, and I think that was very important, so that people involved in that process could understand who it was that they were choosing to go for.

Now, let’s be realistic. Naomi has a particular issue, a very important issue, and I agree it’s an important issue, which is climate change. And so, she was willing to attack anyone in her campaign to make sure Hillary Clinton was elected, because she perceived that Hillary Clinton would do better on climate change. And I agree it’s a very serious issue. But in relation to WikiLeaks, we are an organization that has a commitment to the public to publish true information and not suppress it, and to make sure that as many people read it as possible. Is it true that the way that we staged our publishing process increased the engagement of people in reading our material, going through it, etc., etc.? Of course it is. Did we do a good job—did we do a good job in getting people, enticing people, to read and report on our material? Yes, we did. And we will do that for any source, any whistleblower, that comes to us and gives us information. We will try and maximize the amount of readers that come as a result of the risks that those people take. That’s our promise to the public, to our readers and to our sources.

Allan Nairn talking:

Do you know that Russia didn’t give you the leaks through an intermediary?

I’m not going to be playing 20 questions on our sources. I’m sure you understand, Allan, as a source protection organization, we’re not going to be inscribing circles around who our sources are, how we communicate with them, any properties that might be used to arrest them or criticize them in some future process. I’m simply not going to comment on it.

– Trump would be less dangerous than Clinton.

it’s fine for you to say that, but you should understand that, no, we didn’t. In fact, I was asked that question directly on Democracy Now! at the time about what my position was, asked which one I preferred. And my response is, being asked this question is being asked: Do I prefer cholera, or do I prefer gonorrhea?

one can go into historical revisionism. And Clinton historical revisionism is occurring. And you understand why it is occurring. Because the Democratic Party had—I think it’s—I think it’s lost now, but the Democratic Party had a moment for very important internal reform after its epic loss to Donald Trump. The two—a very disliked candidate as far as the polling is concerned. So, the Democratic Party had an epic loss. Who was responsible for that epic loss?

he Democratic Party was, and its various structures, its institutions, etc. Now who was not responsible for that epic loss was those people telling the public the truth. Those people are not responsible. People take the truth, and they absorb it, and they think about it, and they do what they want with it. And the reality is, the American people so disliked what was being offered to them by the Democratic Party that they decided that they preferred to blow it all up rather than have Hillary Clinton. They decided they would throw the Trump grenade.

up until very recently—and I guess we still have to see how it goes—I’ve been delighted by the conflict that has been occurring between the incoming administration and between the security services, etc. Why is that? Because it has shed light on both. It is resulting in the courts throwing nooses around the power of the presidency and tying him down. And, I mean, that’s something that I predicted would happen, and it is happening very rapidly.

The problem for party politics in the United States is that the Democrats have been in collapse for almost eight years, at the council level, at the state level and at the national level. So, the election of Donald Trump, while he’s an unusual person psychologically, and Hillary Clinton was a particularly bad candidate, is actually part of something that’s much bigger. And it’s very interesting to think what that is, because any solution in terms of party politics has to understand why it is that the Democratic machinery has seemingly been in inexorable collapse over the last eight years. And you can perhaps say it’s to do with gross economic factors, perhaps the professionalization of the Democratic class, where you have a revolving door of contractors and so on. So you can see this in our DNC leaks, that you have educated, professionalized Democrats, who have lifted off the working-class base and who are then involved in a revolving-door system, becoming lobbyists, going back into the DNC, etc. If you read the emails we’ve published about John Podesta, you can see this is not just simply something that happens. This is an expectation within that community. And anyone who doesn’t engage in that expectation, anyone who doesn’t go into private industry and get a $400,000-a-year consulting contract as a local or foreign agent, is viewed to be as a fool. And so, you can only keep up that game for so long, and it starts to turn people off, and you start to lose the base. And that’s what happened in this particular run.

I caution Allan strongly. I have a lot of respect for his work, but I caution him strongly to not to get swept up into what is an attempt by the Democratic Party in this particular case, but by the two parties, to polarize the population into party politics. There’s lots of interesting things that can come out of this Trump administration. We’re seeing great horrors, of course. But we are seeing these horrors.

we’re seeing the conflict with the security services, the deep state. Now, I’ve been writing—well, I’ve been writing about the deep state for a decade, using that word. Now, Turkish academics have been writing about the equivalent in Turkey. Some Hungarian investigative journalists, the same within Hungary. And finally, this word is now something in U.S. politics. It’s not a new concept. It’s, you know, essentially the military-industrial complex plus lobbyists, plus contractors, plus people in the Senate Intelligence Committee, etc.

Julian Assange
founder and editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks.
Allan Nairn
longtime investigative journalist and activist.

— source

WikiLeaks releases Marble source code, used by the CIA

WikiLeaks publishes the third installment of its Vault 7 CIA leaks. We’ve already had the Year Zero files which revealed a number of exploits for popular hardware and software, and the Dark Matter batch which focused on Mac and iPhone exploits. A collection of 676 source code files, the Marble cache reveals details of the CIA’s Marble Framework tool, used to hide the true source of CIA malware, and sometimes going as far as appearing to originate from countries other than the US. The source code for Marble Framework is tiny — WikiLeaks has provided it in a zip file that’s only around 0.5MB. WikiLeaks explains that the tool is used by the CIA to hide the fact that it is behind malware attacks that are unleashed on targets

— source

Cisco learned from Wikileaks that the CIA had hacked its systems

When WikiLeaks disclosed earlier this month that his anti-secrecy group had obtained CIA tools for hacking into technology products made by U.S. companies, security engineers at Cisco Systems swung into action. The Wikileaks documents described how the Central Intelligence Agency had learned more than a year ago how to exploit flaws in Cisco’s widely used Internet switches, which direct electronic traffic, to enable eavesdropping.

— source

CIA Masks Hacks to Blame Foreign Countries

The latest drop from whistleblower organization WikiLeaks has revealed the details of a CIA hacking program known as “Marble.” According to the files, the secret framework allows the U.S. intelligence agency to disguise its hacking activities. The 676 files from Wikileaks Vault 7 “Marble,” released Friday, show how the framework can hamper forensic investigators by using foreign languages to mask viruses, trojans and hacking attacks, making it more difficult for them to be tracked to the CIA. Foreign languages including Russian, Arabic, Korean, Chinese and Farsi were added to algorithms to confuse and mislead those investigating hackings and can also hide fake error messages.

— source

Latest WikiLeak Dump Shows CIA Hacking iPhones Since 2008

On the tails of its damning CIA hacking bombshell, WikiLeaks on Thursday published another trove of documents outlining how the spy agency has been uploading secret software to Apple devices dating back to 2008. Named ‘Dark Matter,’ the latest release shows that that CIA has been infecting iPhones since shortly after the product’s launch in June 2007, and in some cases “interdicted mail orders and other shipments” to open, infect, and resend devices leaving the United States.

— source

its better not to buy american company products.

Apple, Microsoft and Google must fix CIA exploits within 90 days

WIKILEAKS’ PROMISE to give tech firms access to exploits in their systems before making them public have hit a snag after the organisation added a demand that they must be fixed within 90 days. But now, according to reports, when Assange finally contacted Apple, Microsoft and Google about disclosing security flaws in their operating systems before Wikileaks publishes documents in future, he made a series of demands that the companies are now mulling over.

— source

Assange chastises companies that haven’t responded to CIA vulnerability offers

WikiLeaks head Julian Assange is slamming companies for not taking the site up on its offer to share security flaws the CIA exploited in their products. In a screen-shot statement tweeted on Saturday, WikiLeaks noted that “Organizations such as Mozilla” have responded to the site’s emails offering to publish unreleased security vulnerabilities from leaked CIA files. “Google and other companies” have not.

— source