Forward: I am not trying to discredit any of the work that Wikileaks or Assange has done, in the past. I fully respect, and honor these people. I am just concerned that we must determine whether or not WL has been compromised, and if a new route should be taken for future leaks. We do not want whistleblowers to leak information to controlled opposition, and if need be, we need to build up a new platform for whistleblowing.

I think it is high time that we address the elephant in the room. I am not saying to stop what we are doing, but we need to band together and get wikileaks to prove themselves, or we need to take everything we read as "partial" information. I'm not saying that we are getting fakes. I am suggesting that the leaks are being scrutinized, and certain emails are being withheld (Why did we see the FBI dump a lot of information as to the 7th Floor, but we don't see a whole lot about them in the Podesta emails?) Wikileaks just has not been the same since the silencing of Assange, in October.

They created a PGP key for the very purpose of validating their authenticity, and have yet to sign a press release since this election fiasco...

Who has changed the feel of wikileaks? Was it the 7th floor? Was is Ecuador? Was is Russia? Was it the new administrator of the wikileaks twitter? There is no denying that wikileaks has changed...but if a trusted member of wikileaks is in charge, then they should be able to provide proof.

.

.

The Deadman's Switch

October 16, 2016: The official @Wikileaks twitter account posted a series of cryptic tweets:

pre-commitment 1: John Kerry 4bb96075acadc3d80b5ac872874c3037a386f4f595fe99e687439aabd0219809

pre-commitment 2: Ecuador eae5c9b064ed649ba468f0800abf8b56ae5cfe355b93b1ce90a1b92a48a9ab72: ecuador

pre-commitment 3: UK FCO f33a6de5c627e3270ed3e02f62cd0c857467a780cf6123d2172d80d02a072f74

This is something that Wikileaks has not had a history of doing. People have interpreted this as an encryption commitment scheme, and that these are SHA256 hashes, but none of the files on the wikileaks site, nor do the files in the wikileaks insurance torrent, check with any of these hashes.

The other speculation is that these are the actually keys or passwords to the encrypted files within the wikileaks insurance files. This however, is also false.

I think that the hash itself is a signature to the tweets that can be verified by WL partners who see the messages. I think that it is possible that precommitment is being used, in this sense, as a deterrent to a retaliation from an opponent (See Wikipedia/Precommitment)

It is possible that Assange had intercepted communications between Kerry and Ecuador. Or that he had caught wind that Kerry was going to leverage the FCO against Ecuador to extradite/give-up Assange. These tweets could have been the message for help. Was everyone who could have interpreted these messages also compromised? Is that why we have no official statement from the new controller of the WL twitter? No explanation except: Julian Assange's internet link has been intentionally severed by a state party. We have activated the appropriate contingency plans. They pretty much acknowlege a deadman's switch...but there seems to be more that we weren't told.

.

.

The Second Switch, Censored Tweet A /pol thread indicated that a second "deadman's" tweet may have been censored. A link to the archived reddit conversation below.

http://archive.is/pMEmC

.

.

John Kerry, the coup, and the Guantanamo Express

It is highly coincidental that the cryptic tweets talk about John Kerry. The Secretary of State just happened to be in Londan, near the time of the cryptic tweets. He was supposedly there in an effort to renow Syrian peace efforts. Any news on any treaties from that day? Nah...Kerry wasn't there for that. He was organizing a coup on Wikileaks.

Supporters responded to the dead man switch by meeting at the Ecuadorian embassy. One of the supporters setup a periscope live stream that had thousands of live viewers, when suddenly the stream was cut, and there were rumors that an "unnamed crew" entered the embassy during the outage.

Wikileaks even tweeted this photo...a few days later: PHOTO: Heavily armed 'police' appear outside Ecuadorian Embassy in London where Julian Assange has political asylum (photo, Tuesday morning)

I had come across several other tweets and articles indicating that other people in the area had been met by armed SWAT that confiscated their phones, and barred entrance into the streets neighboring the embassy. If someone can find links, I would appreciate this.

Subsequent to the deadman tweets, and the rumors of a heavily armed extraction team, we have a jet that mysteriously takes off from London and speeds off to the United States.

/u/JasperPennybottom posted a detailed explanation of the jet that mysteriously left London around the time that Assange was least heard from.

It looks as if a jet, that has ties to the CIA, had been tracked from Assange's location to Raleigh, NC. Raleigh is a stone's throw from several detention facilities known to be used for court-martials, war crimes, and other spook related stuff. The post by /u/JasperPennybottom has server good links, that give serious credibility to this theory.

Wikileaks tweeted:

BREAKING: Multiple US sources tell us John Kerry asked Ecuador to stop Assange from publishing Clinton docs during FARC peace negotiations.

The John Kerry private meeting with Ecuador was made on the sidelines of the negotiations which took place pricipally on Sep 26 in Colombia.

in regards to a meeting that Kerry supposedly had with Ecuador to turn off Assange's internet.

Was it just the internet getting turned off, or was Assange in custody?

What sources does wikileaks have for this? I'm feeling like this was high up enough to where it was on a need-to-know.

.

.

Pamela Anderson and the last meal So, how does Pamela Anderson fit in to all of this? She apparently visited Assange relatively close to time of Assange's disappearance. Some people are speculating that she was sent there to make the conspiracy folks look way out there. https://twitter.com/pamfoundation/status/787351204288430082

.

.

The new feel of the Podesta email leaks, and the new attitude of the WL Twitter

For over a decade, the @Wikileaks twitter was pretty non-opinionated and was almost robotic in the release of leaks. Post deadman keys and "contingency plans", the twitter has re-tweeted bias articles by Politico, and even made veiled threats. It was almost like watching @KimDotCom

The Podesta dumps started to feel like they might be moderated. The dumps started out strong, picking up steam every day. It seemed like every day something BREAKING or SMOKING GUN was getting released. The post deadman releases seemed like...something was missing.

Speaking of missing: /u/Cellseat seems to have found a discrepency day-to-day on the email counts. It seems that a number of the emails get removed or hidden. This seems like someone is moderating the emails, and removing anything of substance.

.

.

The Massive DDOS attacks

Packets have been flying, and breaking the internet, in record proportions.

http://www.welivesecurity.com/2016/10/24/10-things-know-october-21-iot-ddos-attacks/

Were these attempts at silencing the deadman switch and the other private deadman's switches?

Supposedly 4chan is being DDoS'd as we speak: https://np.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/5celwx/4chan_under_ddos_after_finding_link_bw_doj_and/

.

.

The lack of cryptographic verification (PGP Signature)

Wikileaks predominantly displays their PGP Public key on their website and their twitter. Why aren't they using it for validation that Wikileaks has not been compromised? We saw the deadman's switch tweets, we heard the rumors, the leaks became bland, and we are supposed to just take the new twitter user(s) word for it? Why would they even create the PGP key to begin with? This is from Wikileaks' website:

Why not Digitally Sign press releases, volunteer emails etc ? wikileaks.org seems to have forgotten that PGP is not simply about encryption for privacy purposes, but that it also provides a mechanism for Digitally Signing and verifying that, say, unencrypted plaintext wikileaks.org press releases or volunteer list emails have not been tampered with or forged. Surely a project which claims to be trying to be transparent and trustworthy, but which will inevitably come under technical and disinformation attacks by those who fear it, should make use of this cheap yet sophisticated technique?

So...none of the press releases have been signed, should we assume that the author does not have the ability to sign, and validate the authenticity of the posts?

I know there are going to be people who don't know what PGP is, but you can read the wiki. From the Wikipedia page for Pretty Good Privacy section Digital Signature:

PGP supports message authentication and integrity checking. The latter is used to detect whether a message has been altered since it was completed (the message integrity property) and the former to determine whether it was actually sent by the person or entity claimed to be the sender (a digital signature). Because the content is encrypted, any changes in the message will result in failure of the decryption with the appropriate key. The sender uses PGP to create a digital signature for the message with either the RSA or DSA algorithms. To do so, PGP computes a hash (also called a message digest) from the plaintext and then creates the digital signature from that hash using the sender's private key.

Wikileaks had started using cryptographic authentication for the Podesta dump:https://wikileaks.org/DKIM-Verification.html But can't verify one of their own press releases? This sure seems...odd.

Many people have been pressing for a PGP signed statement, and it is continually met with silence. The sole reason they created the PGP key was to verify that they are indeed not compromised. It is far time that they do it. It seems like they may be buying time, while a large cluster of servers chip away at cracking the private key.

.

.

The RT John Pilger Interview and the "Live" phone interview to UMET

Julian gives an interview to John Pilger.

In this video, there is no defining shot to indicate that John Pilger is even the one interviewing Assange.

There is no dialogue on Assange's part that would indicate that this interview even took place after "Julian's internet was disconnected"

Assange said that Trump would not be permitted to win. What? He was, though. Are the powers that be amputating their infected leg (Hillary)?

Video by MaxLiberty raising concerns over odd Pilger interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcG5hjnh8Sw

Julian gives and interview to Confrencia Internacional De Software

This sounds genuine...for the most part. But there are the parts that sound very robotic. His speech does not flow well, and it reminds me of the soundboards we used to use to make prank phone calls. Manipulating audio is not a very technical feat. I don't trust it.

See this post for more details on this UMET phone interview. /u/piaget5stages makes multiple valid points on the validity of this interview.

.

.

The AMA, the lack of proof, and the overall fail

Yesterday, the "Wikileaks team" did an AMA. The proof was a couple of tweets and a failed attempt at uploading a selfie to imgur. The Imgur proof was never updated, and a mod by the name of {mod deleted their accoutn} verified that the image had also been emailed to the moderators of /r/IAMA. I created a dialogue with this mod, and they had told me that Wikileaks had never offered a PGP signature for proof. The mod has since removed all of the comments. This is a /r/IAMA mod, so basically a reddit employee. Another mod /u/orangejulius was leading to believe that WL had provided cryptographic proof, privately, but then backpaddled when I asked him straight out. WL did not provide PGP. Please see:

https://np.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/5c8u9l/we_are_the_wikileaks_staff_despite_our_editor/d9vtmh1/?context=3

Unreddit also seems to 404 on this page...can anyone try to find the deleted comments?

There were lots of unanswered questions, and the AMA basically fell apart. Very unlike the AMAs that Wikileaks had done prior to this one...

Now the mods seem to be re-arranging the top comments of the post; there are parent comments with -11 votes, on the front page of the post. Sort by top, and you will see that the mods are hiding that the OP did not respond to any questions of any consequence. All of the questions they responded to were very bland, and basic answers that any shill could provide.

.

.

.

.

I know there is a lot more. I am traveling, but I wanted to get this going. Mods, please sticky this is an important conversation that needs to be had. I have been notified of subreddit dedicated to this: /r/WhereIsAssange, but we have a whole lot more subscribed critical thinkers, here in /r/conspiracy. We need to get the attention of wikileaks. They need to sign a simple message with their PGP.

Most importantly, the talk of the FBI coup, and other things means that there will potentially be new whistleblowers. We need to make certain that they have a reputable platform to release to.