1) This interview with George Galloway on Julian Assange is well worth a read. Here's a key extract:
"He is the most important publisher in the world today and over the last decade. Not a single story WikiLeaks has ever published has turned out to be wrong, and had to be retracted or significantly corrected. That is a record that neither the New York Times or any other mainstream publisher could ever dream of claiming. I think that the publishing activities of WikiLeaks have changed the world, certainly the world of journalism. Assange is not charged with hacking; he is not a hacker. He is a post box where whistleblowers can bring material which is then investigated so thoroughly that they have never got a story wrong. Then they publish it. Then the New York Times puts it on their front page and the Guardian puts it on theirs. Talk about hypocrisy! These people won prizes for running stories stories given to them by Julian Assange! And yet they have virtually danced on what they imagine to be his grave. That is what is difficult to take. WikiLeak's model of publishing was revolutionary and that is why they are in trouble." (Former British parliamentarian George Galloway speaks out on the violent criminalization of Julian Assange, Dennis J. Bernstein & Randy Credico, covertactionmagazine.com, 2/7/19)
2) Here's an interesting extract on Assange from the recent book by Vicky Ward, Kushner Inc. Greed. Power. Corruption. The Extraordinary Story of Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump, 2019. (Note my square bracketed insertions.):
"In June, [Alexander] Nix [CEO of Cambridge Analytica} reached out to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange because he had read that WikiLeaks planned to publish a trove of emails related to Hillary Clinton, the Democrats' presidential candidate. Those emails had been [allegedly] stolen - hacked - by Russian intelligence from the account of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta and from the Democratic National Committee. (In July 2016, the FBI started an investigation into the [alleged] thefts.) Nix, not one to be troubled by ethics, wanted to know if Assange would share the [allegedly] stolen material with him. More than a year later, The Wall Street Journal would report that Assange's answer was no." (p 82)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Would those "hacked" DNC computers be the ones that the FBI never touched, leaving it to a company, Cloudstrike, with connections to Clinton to examine. The Mueller report was based, in part, on a redacted draft report by Cloudstrike:
https://theduran.com/us-govts-entire-russia-dnc-hacking-narrative-based-on-redacted-draft-of-crowdstrike-report/
Quote:
"Now, thanks to a new court filing by longtime Trump adviser Roger Stone requesting the full Crowdstrike analysis, we find out that the US government was given a redacted version of the report marked “Draft,” as reported by the Conservative Treehouse.
"What makes the whole thing even more hokey is a footnote admitting that “counsel for the DNC and DCCC informed the government that they are the last version of the report produced.”"
Cambridge Analytica - the "real Russians":
https://www.businessinsider.com.au/cambridge-analytica-boasts-won-trump-election-facebook-data-2018-3?r=US&IR=T
They did some clever, efficient, and effective targeting of a relatively few people in certain carefully selected states to move them to vote for Trump.
Post a Comment