Category: Turkey

TAYYIP VE TRUMPT ILISKISI VE FETO NASIL GELISMEKDE .. VE ARKA PLANDA KIMLER VAR ……..AMERIKADAN GOZUKEN
Michael Rubin: Trump Team’s First Ethics Scandal

By Michael Rubin On 11/16/16 at 12:10 AM

This article first appeared on the American Enterprise Institute site.

It’s only been a few days, but already it seems Donald Trump’s presumptive foreign policy and national security team could be weathering its first scandal.

I have written about General Michael Flynn, the former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and an important Trump adviser, and his sudden about-face on Turkey in both his assessment of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s helpfulness in the war against terror and with regard to exiled Islamic theologian Fethullah Gülen. Gülen is a onetime ally of Erdogan’s whose exile and perhaps execution the Turkish president now demands.

Former Defense Intelligence Agency Director and Donald Trump adviser Michael Flynn testifies before the House Intelligence Committee on “Worldwide Threats” on February 4, 2014. Michael Rubin writes that he sees a ethics scandal regarding Flynn and his sudden about-face on Turkey in both his assessment of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s helpfulness in the war against terror and with regard to exiled Islamic theologian Fethullah Gülen, whose exile and perhaps execution Erdogan now demands. Gary Cameron/reuters

What raised so many eyebrows was how sharply the op-ed diverged from Flynn’s previous positions and how it appeared to be in complete conformity with the Turkish government’s positions.

Now it appears there is more to the story. From The Daily Caller:

An intelligence consulting firm founded by retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, Donald Trump’s top military adviser, was recently hired as a lobbyist by an obscure Dutch company with ties to Turkey’s government and its president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan….

The piece does not include a disclosure that Flynn Intel Group, the consulting firm that Flynn founded in Oct. 2014, just after leaving DIA, was recently hired to lobby Congress by a Dutch company called Inovo BV that was founded by a Turkish businessman who holds a top position on Turkey’s Foreign Economic Relations Board.

A review of Dutch records shows that the company was founded by Ekim Alptekin, an ally of Erdogan’s who is director of the Turkey-U.S. Business Council, a non-profit arm of Turkey’s Foreign Economic Relations Board.

Members of the Foreign Economic Relations Board are chosen by Turkey’s general assembly and its minister of economy. In the role, Alptekin helped coordinate Erdogan’s visit to the U.S. earlier this year.

Certainly, any sort of disclosure means an ethics omission. This comes on top of Flynn’s attendance at the RT gala in Moscow and his leading chants of “Lock her up” at the Republican National Convention. All should raise broader questions about his judgment.

Michael Rubin is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. A former Pentagon official, his major research areas are the Middle East, Turkey, Iran and diplomacy.

Related Stories
- Turkey Continues Purge by Suspending 370 Organizations
- What Next For U.S.-Turkey Relations Under Trump?
- Trump Aide: U.S. Must Extradite Gulen to Turkey
- Michael Rubin: Western Journos Afraid to Report Turkey
November 17, 2016
Russia’s Involvement in the 2016 Election Is Growing by the Day

Russia’s Involvement in the 2016 Election Is Growing by the Day

Now the NSA director admits Russia used Wikileaks to meddle in the campaign.

This Story Should Dominate the News Until Trump Is Sworn In

Getty

By Charles P. Pierce

It’s shoveling sand against the tide to ask this question again, but why isn’t the fact that Russia played monkey-mischief with the recent presidential election—and the fact that we have no freaking idea how much the president-elect may owe to various financial institutions with connection to that kleptocratic regime—a much bigger story than it has been? Now, we’ve got the director of the National Security Agency chiming it. Via Quartz:

In response to a question, Michael S. Rogers, a Naval officer and NSA director since 2014, said on stage at a Wall Street Journal conference that Wikileaks was furthering a nation-state’s goals by publishing hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and Clinton’s presidential campaign weeks ahead of the election. “There shouldn’t be any doubt in anybody’s minds, this was not something that was done casually, this was not something that was done by chance, this was not a target that was selected purely arbitrarily. This was a conscious effort by a nation-state to attempt to achieve a specific effect,” he said.

I am no fan of NSA shenanigans, and I am eternally grateful to Edward Snowden for letting us all know about at least some of the shenanigans in question. But I’m hard-pressed to see an ulterior motive for Rogers here. The budget and mission—for good and ill—of the intelligence community are a couple of the things in the American government that can safely be said not to be under existential threat from the incoming administration. Rogers isn’t protecting his turf or his budget because nobody’s coming after them.

Related Story

This Story Should Dominate the News Cycle

If he doesn’t trust Vladimir Putin, I don’t blame him. Neither do I, and I will remain an angry skeptic on the subject of an innocent Trump-Putin connection until the president-elect releases enough of his financial documents to convince me that he’s not in hock to the Russian oligarch or his bankers. The fact that Putin has been playing footsie with nationalist movements all over Europe doesn’t fill me with optimism, either. Christ, there’s even one starting up in Ireland now, although its official launch party in Dublin on Wednesday was canceled because the hotel it had booked for the launch bailed on it. From The Irish Times:

The National Party had circulated a short press release earlier this week informing media of an event due to take place at the five-star hotel situated across from Government Buildings at 3pm on Thursday. A spokeswoman for the Merrion said it has now cancelled the booking, but refused to give a reason for why this was done. The National Party claims that it wants to “remind the political elites and the general commentariat… of the extent to which the promise presented by the Proclamation of the Republic remains unfulfilled”. It cited the Irish economy’s “unsustainable debt”, the “unrestricted policy of immigration to the point of population displacement” and “the blood lust of extremist groups to remove the equal right to life of the unborn child” in its release.

How perilous a time this is for the world is only beginning to be understood.

Related Story

How Russian Spies Hacked This Election

November 17, 2016
ARMENIAN ISSUE: Student group at Cal State Northridge boasts of ‘shutting down’ speech by award-winning scholar

The Volokh Conspiracy opinion

Student group at Cal State Northridge boasts of ‘shutting down’ speech by award-winning scholar

By Eugene Volokh November 15 at 8:47 AM

1. From the Armenian Youth Federation, with video (see Nov. 10 post):

Armenian students at California State University Northridge (CSUN) shut down a planned lecture about Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, citing historical evidence Ataturk continued Turkey’s genocidal policies and the event’s purpose to distract from the crisis in Turkey today. The lecture is a part of a series of events around Southern California in celebration of “Ataturk Week” on November 9–13, 2016.

Our presence at these events will send a clear message to the Turkish community that college and university campuses are not incubators for denialists. Treating college campuses as breeding grounds for Turkish nationalist ideology is offensive for the number of Armenian students who attend these colleges.

The Cal State Northridge Sundial reports:

Scholar George Gawrych got through no more than five sentences during his presentation on his book about Turkish army officer Mustafa Kemal Atatürk before students raised their voices in protest Thursday at the Aronstam Library in Manzanita Hall.

Over 20 protesters stood up from their seats, turned their backs on Gawrych and repeatedly chanted “Turkey guilty of genocide” and “genocide denialist.”

Gawrych waited briefly as other attendees voiced their opinions to let him speak, until he began walking up and down the aisle trying to get the protestors to face him.

Two police officers who guarded the entrance escorted Gawrych, a Baylor University Boal Ewing chair of military history, out of the library to sounds of chanting protesters.

CSUN professor Owen Doonan had “invited Gawrych to speak for the Middle Eastern Islamic Studies program.” Prof. George Gawrych’s book, “The Young Ataturk: From Ottoman Soldier to Statesman of Turkey,” won one of the Society for Military History 2014 Distinguished Book Awards. And yet it turns out that even a faculty-invited scholar with impressive credentials isn’t allowed to speak at CSUN. Naturally, no speaker should be shouted down this way, whether he wrote an award-winning book or not — but the stature of Gawrych’s work is just a reminder of how deeply the movement to suppress speech has spread at American universities. (Something similar, by the way, seems to have happened the next day at Chapman University.)

Defenders of free speech often warn of the slippery slope: Once we allow suppression even of foolish, lightweight, uneducated speakers, this will lead to suppression of serious scholars as well. Such slippery slope concerns are often pooh-poohed as a paranoid “parade of horribles.” Well, here’s the latest float in that parade, come to a university near me. And you’re not paranoid if they really are out to get you.

2. The school’s response:

Last week, a talk by visiting Professor George Gawrych was cancelled in the interest of public safety when it was determined that the event could not go on due to the student protest you referenced. Specific information about the conduct giving rise to the need to cancel the event is being gathered, and the need for further action will be determined.

CSUN is proud of its strong ties with the Armenian community, which has provided the university with the opportunity and resources to offer a distinguished and respected Armenian Studies program and serve the largest number of Armenian students at any university outside of Armenia. At the same time, and as a higher education institution committed to the values of scholarship, knowledge and the exchange of ideas, it is important for our university to be open to a wide range of visiting speakers and scholars, even those whose ideas we may disagree with.

I asked whether any disciplinary measures were expected for students who shouted down the speaker, and caused the “public safety” danger; the response was, “At this time, information about student conduct is still being gathered.” If you look at the video, you’ll see that police officers were present. I would have expected that the university would have said at least something about how shouting down speakers is bad behavior — but nothing along those lines has come around yet.

3. Before the talk was scheduled, three groups, including the CSUN Armenian Students Association, wrote a letter to the dean of students protesting the talk; in an e-mail responding to my query, the president of ASA said that “members of ASA did join alongside AYF” in the “protest” of the talk that I discussed at the start of this post:

This letter is from the Presidents of the Armenian Students Association, Alpha Gamma Alpha (the Armenian Sorority), and Alpha Epsilon Omega (the Armenian Fraternity) at Cal State University, Northridge. We would like to express our deepest disappointment regarding The Association of Turkish Americans of Southern California (ATASC) scheduled event at CSUN this Thursday, November 10th, 2016. The event entails bringing in a guest speaker, Professor George G. Gawrych, to discuss and celebrate Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, who served as a soldier in the Ottoman Empire and later Prime Minister and President of Turkey from 1920 until 1938. Upon initially hearing about this event and seeing the flyer, we were baffled. As executive members of our respective Armenian organizations, we were confused as to how it was deemed acceptable or appropriate.

Please do not dismiss our concerns as hyperemotional. This issue is about intolerance — both the ATASC and, historically, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk are well-known deniers of the Armenian Genocide and misanthropes towards the Armenian community. If you were not aware, the Armenian Genocide was the systematic killings of 1915 ordered by the Ottoman Empire (present-day Republic of Turkey) towards the Armenian community for the purpose of ethnic cleansing. Men, women, children, and elderly were all either murdered, raped, tortured or starved to death to carry out these actions. Currently, the government of Turkey denies that such an order was ever established and continues to carry an agenda to falsely educate others regarding the historical occurrences during that time.

It is quite bizarre that an event revolving around the ignorance and injustices against humanity is being allowed to take place on campus. This is for two reasons: 1) CSUN is a large proponent of the inclusion and respect of all individuals, regardless of gender, race, and ethnicity, with a zero tolerance policy regarding hatred and 2) Our campus is a well known supporter of the Armenian Community and its cause. It is reported that 10% of the CSUN student body and 125 members of full- and part- time faculty and staff are Armenian. Our university is currently in the process of establishing a study abroad program with the American University of Armenia. The president of CSUN’s Associated Students, Sevag Alexanian, is also Armenian. The Associated Students has passed a resolution to recognize the Armenian Genocide every year on April 24 by honoring the victims with a tradition of the rose ceremony and educating members of AS with the historical events during that time. Our campus also has an Armenian Studies department, where students can minor in Armenian Studies. Around this time last year, it was announced that the the Armenian Studies program was awarded a $250,000 grant from the TF Educational Foundation, the family foundation established by philanthropist Jerry Turpanjian. The funds will provide scholarships for students who have both enrolled in CSUN’s Integrated Teacher Education Program (ITEP) and declared a minor in Armenian Studies.

We would like to add that we are in no way denying ATASC’s right to the freedom of speech. However, for CSUN to give a platform to an organization that glorifies a government killing its own people is not only an atrocious act within itself, but also degrading to this university’s reputation as a world-class public institution. For CSUN, with its large population of Armenian students, faculty members, and donors — not to mention its expanding Armenian Studies Department — this is an embarrassment.

Our wish is that the situation is rectified and that this event is cancelled, to further prevent the spreading of false information and hatred toward our community. On behalf of the Armenian student body, we are deeply offended that an event such as this was over sought by the CSUN administration and we hope that it will never happen again.

So let’s see: The university is supposed to exclude historians who want to speak positively about important historical leaders, based on students’ ideas about which views are not “acceptable or appropriate.” Indeed, the university is not supposed to “allow[]” such a talk “to take place on campus.” That’s not just true of talks that themselves disagree with the position that the Ottoman Empire engaged in genocide; as best I can tell, there was no indication that this was the purpose of Gawrych’s talk. It’s also true of a talk that praises a leader who disagreed with that position (and who did other bad things).

Moreover, the theory goes, the university’s policy of “zero tolerance … regarding hatred” means that scholars who want to express favorable views about such leaders must be excluded. That’s the new suppression ideology in a nutshell.

Thanks to Charles Chapman for the pointer.

Eugene Volokh teaches free speech law, religious freedom law, church-state relations law, a First Amendment Amicus Brief Clinic, and tort law, at UCLA School of Law, where he has also often taught copyright law, criminal law, and a seminar on firearms regulation policy.

Follow @volokhc

November 16, 2016
Armenians Should Reach Out to Trump Through Republican Friends in Congress

An unprecedented U.S. presidential campaign came to an end with the unexpected victory of Donald Trump!

Since the November 8 elections, there has been endless speculation by self-styled Armenian analysts about the President-elect’s business ties with Azerbaijan and Turkey, wrongly concluding that he would side with Armenia’s enemies! Since Trump has made no comments on Armenian issues, no one can really know what his position is likely to be….

Beyond Trump’s sweeping campaign promises to “drain the swamp in Washington,” and “make America great again,” no one can predict what he might do on domestic or foreign policy fronts. In addition, there is no guarantee that he will stick to the positions he assumed during the campaign. In recent months, and particularly since the election, Trump has moderated his views on a number of major issues, such as banning all Muslims from entering the United States, building a wall along the Mexican border, deporting 11 million illegal aliens, and repealing Obamacare. As Pres. Obama explained during his Nov. 14 press conference, Trump is a pragmatist, not an ideologue with fixed opinions.

Consequently, rather than speculating about what Trump may do as President, let’s follow Hillary Clinton’s wise advice to keep “an open mind” and give Donald Trump “a chance to lead!”

Since the President-elect has not yet taken a concrete position on Armenian issues, now is the time for Armenian-Americans to ask friendly Republican members of Congress to convey the community’s vital concerns to Trump and his team. It would be much more difficult to make such contacts once the President is inaugurated in January and has given his marching orders to the new Cabinet. Meanwhile, Turkish and Azeri officials are busy establishing their own contacts with Trump’s transition team and Congress through their high powered lobbyists in Washington! Furthermore, while many heads of state, including those of Armenia and Azerbaijan, have sent congratulatory messages to the President-elect, Turkish President Erdogan personally telephoned Trump, urging closer ties between their countries!

Already there are warning signs that two of Trump’s closest aides, who may be appointed to top positions in the new administration, are rabid Turkophiles:

1) Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has repeatedly declared his admiration for Kemal Ataturk, the father of modern Turkey, viewing him as a hero;

2) Retired Lt. General Michael Flynn wrote an article in The Hill last week, calling on the U.S. government “to adjust our foreign policy to recognize Turkey as a priority. We need to see the world from Turkey’s perspective.”

While Armenian-American ties with the President-elect are practically non-existent, the community has fortunately cultivated excellent relations with many reelected members of Congress, both Democrats and Republicans, who can adopt bills and pass resolutions on issues of importance to Armenia and Armenians.

Over 90% of the Congressional candidates endorsed by the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) were elected on November 8. In the House of Representatives, 117 out of the 122 candidates endorsed by ANCA won their election bids, including Congresswomen Jackie Speier and Anna Eshoo, Armenian-American Democrats from California. Regrettably, Cong. Robert Dold (Republican-Illinois), Co-Chair of the Congressional Armenian Caucus, was not reelected; and candidate Danny Tarkanian (Republican-Nevada) lost his bid for the House.

In the U.S. Senate, 7 of the 11 candidates endorsed by ANCA won their election bids on Nov. 8. Armenian Caucus member Cong. Chris Van Hollen (Democrat-Maryland) was elected to the Senate after defeating Turkish Caucus member Cong. Donna Edwards in the Maryland Primary. Unfortunately, Sen. Mark Kirk (Republican-Illinois), a staunch supporter of Armenian issues, was not reelected.

Significantly, while 11 members of the Congressional Armenian Caucus did not return to the House due to failure to win, retirement, resignation or seeking other office, the Turkish Caucus suffered a greater loss, with 19 of its members not returning to the House, including Co-Chair Ed Whitfield (Republican-Kentucky) who resigned earlier this year due to an ethics probe.

The substantial electoral success, enjoyed by Congressional friends of the Armenian community, bodes well for the pursuit of Armenian issues in the new Congress. Given that the Republican Party will be controlling both Houses of Congress and the White House, it is incumbent upon Republican Armenians to win over more members of the majority party, while Democrat Armenians can build on their long-established ties with the minority party. After all, the Armenian Cause, as a nonpartisan issue, should be supported by both parties!

November 15, 2016
Turkey could put EU talks to a referendum next year: Erdogan

Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan makes a speech during his meeting with mukhtars at the Presidential Palace in Ankara, Turkey, October 26, 2016. Yasin Bulbul/Presidential Palace/Handout via REUTERS

Reuters

Turkey could hold a referendum on whether to continue membership talks with the European Union next year, President Tayyip Erdogan said on Monday, and repeated his warning to Brussels that it needed to “make up its mind” on Turkish accession.

European Union foreign ministers were meeting on Monday to consider shelving membership talks with Turkey over what they see as its lurch away from democracy after a failed coup in July, although there is no consensus for such a move.

In a speech in Ankara broadcast live on television, Erdogan urged Turks to be patient until the end of the year and then said a vote could be held on EU membership.

“Let’s wait until the end of the year and then go to the people. Let’s go to the people since they will make the final call. Even Britain went to the people. Britain said ‘let’s exit’, and they left,” Erdogan said.

He lambasted European Parliament President Martin Schulz, who said this month the detention of opposition politicians and the extent of post-coup purges “call into question the basis for the sustainable relationship between the EU and Turkey”.

“What are you? Since when do you have the authority to decide for Turkey? How can you, who have not taken Turkey into the EU for 53 years, find the authority to make such a decision?” Erdogan said.

“These people makes its own decisions, cuts its own umbilical cord,” he said.

Erdogan also said he would approve reinstating the death penalty – a move that would likely end any hope of Turkish membership in the EU – if parliament passed a law on it, and said that too could be part of a referendum.

Turkey is expected to hold a national vote on constitutional changes next spring, including boosting the powers of Erdogan’s office to create a Turkish version of the presidential system in the United States or France.

(Reporting by Ece Toksabay and Tuvan Gumrukcu; Writing by Nick Tattersall; Editing by Humeyra Pamuk and David Dolan)

November 14, 2016
Julian Assange Releases Statement on U.S. Election
Written by Philip Hodges

Depending on what political party you identify with, you’ll either love WikiLeaks or abhor them. And people’s opinions of the organization changes depending on which political leaders are getting exposed. If the Bush administration is getting exposed, then liberals champion the group and whistleblowers in general, and conservatives decry the group as a terrorist organization and label the whistleblowers “traitors.”

But if WikiLeaks exposes the Obama administration, or the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, it’s the other way around. All of a sudden the liberals who had previously championed the group, hate the group and want Assange “brought to justice” for crimes against humanity. And predictably, conservatives cheer his cause.

A lot of people don’t seem to understand that Assange doesn’t identify with any major U.S. political party. He’s not American. He’s an outsider. His goal has always been to expose top-level corruption, regardless of which countries or political parties are involved. And he’s had to pay a price for that.

As a publishing organization, they don’t hire hackers to steal other people’s computer documents and emails. WikiLeaks is a place for whistleblowers. They publish only what they’re given.

In other words, if someone inside the Trump campaign wanted to expose the campaign’s corruption and send a ton of emails to WikiLeaks, they would have published it. The only reason WikiLeaks published Podesta’s emails and the DNC emails was that someone felt the need to blow the whistle anonymously. So far, no one’s felt the need to do the same thing with the RNC or the Trump campaign. That doesn’t mean that Julian Assange must be pro-Trump. It just means that no one’s come forward seeking to out Trump.

It’s important to keep in mind that if our media networks truly were “fair and balanced” and objective and unbiased, there would be no need for a group like WikiLeaks.

TRENDING ON EAGLE RISING
- Julian Assange Releases Statement on U.S. Election
- WikiLeaks: More Clues That Tie Clintons/Podesta to Child Prostitution Ring
- Hillary’s Last-Minute Pitch: The ‘Most Horrifying’ Thing Trump Said [VIDEO]
- Hillary Campaign: FYI…if WikiLeaks Releases a Last-Minute ‘Whopper,’ it’s ‘Probably a Fake’
Here’s a statement on the U.S. election released by Julian Assange:

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 pored 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 fufills 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 reelection. 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.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com
November 10, 2016