William Binney on Flashpoints (12/28/2017)

Supplemental document for: "Theory that Roger Stone's back channel to Wikileaks was Randy Credico", link: https://wakelet.com/wake/2d352ae9-febe-44a1-a7bb-51674a2e4bf5

William Binney on "Flashpoints". Broadcast date: December 28, 2017. Excerpt runs from 0:52 to 34:15.

File link: http://www.mediafire.com/file/19og3k2vhdjmo6y/NSA%20Whistle%20blower%2C%20William%20Binney%20o.mp3

DENNIS BERNSTEIN
And we are delighted to be joined by William Binney, William Binney is the former technical director at the National Security Agency. You could call him a very courageous whistleblower, who told the truth about what's happening behind the scenes at that agency, that affects, really, all of us. It is a delight to have you with us, we've been wanting to talk to you, William Binney, for a long time, so welcome to Flashpoints.

WILLIAM BINNEY
Well, thanks for having me.

BERNSTEIN
Well...I would like you to begin by talking a little bit about your own background. I want people to understand where you are, as they say, coming from. Say a little bit about your background at the NSA and how you got there.

BINNEY
Well, I- originally, I was in the United States Army, from 1965 to 1976. And they put me in the Army Security Agency, which is the SIGINT branch of the mili- Army, and it's really NSA-CSS, which means it combines security services, CSS - that means Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines - components of SIGINT, it's all under NSA, but that's how I got affiliated with NSA. And after that, I saw a few things here and there, [laughs] and they kinda liked that, so they wanted me on a priority hire in 1970, which is when I started with them. And I was there for about thirty two years, mostly working against the Soviet Union, and the Warsaw Pact, solving- you know- those- wizard puzzles, at- they call the puzzle palace [sic], NSA, it's called the puzzle palace. By some people anyway [name of the book by James Bamford, long considered the definitive history of the agency, and one of the few accounts for decades, of the agency; amazon link: https://www.amazon.ca/Puzzle-Palace-Americas-Intelligence-Organization/dp/0140067485/ ]. And uh I had to solve code systems, and work on cipher systems, and data syst- work to solve some data systems, and things like that, to be able to figure out what was going on, and predict in advance the kinds of things that they're supposed to do, intentions and capabilities, of adversaries, or potential adversaries.

BERNSTEIN
And at a certain point, I think you ran...amiss of your supervisors. What is it that you did, and understood and tried to tell the people that got you in some dutch with your supervisors?

BINNEY
Well, I was trying to solve the digital age problems, which we basically did, in 1998 and 1999. And that was a- that was a- basically, created a problem for the Director and everybody, because they were lobbying Congress for $3.8 billion dollars to do the same thing that we'd just succeeded at. And they started that lobby in 1999, and for a separate program called "Trailblazer", which failed, miserably, in 2005 and '06. But, you know, it went against the drive to get money for the agency. Because Congress was coming back, saying, "Look, you've already solved these kinds of things." Because Congress was supporting us, and giving us money to do this, so we were briefing them according to the regulations, we had to, they'd request briefings and we'd give to them, where we were progressing, how far we got, and when we actually solved things. So...but that ran contrary to the bid downtown, for $3.8 billion, up front, which was a first cut of money, by the way, [laughs] not the last. But uh that caused the problem for them, it's hard for them to argue that they have a problem that Congress knows has already been solved internally. So...that meant that they were...Congress was telling, "Why do you need the $3.8 billion?" And so [laughs], so that created a problem for us internally. And so, eventually, in-between- and we learned, by the way, from some of the staff members down in Congress, that some of the corporations that were surrounding NSA and getting contracts from NSA, were downtown lobbying against our program internally in Congress. You know, this is kindof the military industrial complex in action. And then, that lobby who was supported by the NSA management, because they all wanted the money, contractors wanted to feed on the money, and NSA just wanted the money to build a bigger empire. But Cheney, who is behind all of this-

BERNSTEIN
That's Dick Cheney, former Defense Secretary-

BINNEY
Vice President, yes, Cheney-

BERNSTEIN
Vice President, as well, yes. Many things. [laughs]

BINNEY
I refer to him as "Darth Cheney", because he went to the dark side. Okay? So, he's Darth Cheney, in my mind - well, he was behind all this, he wanted it because he grew up under Nixon, Nixon wanted to know what his political enemies were thinking and planning and doing. And this kind of approach, bulk acquisition of everything, was capable once you remove certain segments of our software. That's what they did, they removed them and used it against the entire digital world, and took in everything on everybody. And that's what Cheney wanted, he wanted to know what his political enemies were, or at least have data about them, anytime he had a question that was available for him to look at. So. So, for two reasons, one, NSA wanted the money to build a bigger empire and contractors and so on, they wanted it, the money to feed on. And Cheney wanted the- the- the data, to know everything about people he wanted to know about. So.

BERNSTEIN
Alright, I wanna ask you, I want to tap your expertise on a lot of different levels, and then I want to talk about what you've been up to. You just got back from overseas. But, let's start with Russia and what some people refer to as Russia-gate, and the great hack. Your expertise was in the Soviet Union, and this was what you've been focusing on, you understand the history, the relationship of bugging, how I guess both countries went about bugging each other. Could you share a little bit of your thoughts on Russia-gate, do you believe- what are your thoughts, in terms of, did Russia hack and undermine, is it- is Russia the reason why we have Trump as president? What's your understanding of hack versus leak, and all that stuff. I know you've been thinking about it.

BINNEY
Well, we...we've actually published- VIPS, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity published an article on 24 July, talking about this, and saying, you know, this basically, for several reasons [sic]. One, right up front, if any of these data went anywhere, in the world, across the fiber optic network, the net web, NSA has, you know, just inside the United States, NSA has over a hundred tap points, on the fiber lines. Taking in everything. Mark Klein exposed some of this in the San Francisco facility for AT&T ["Stumbling Into A Spy Scandal" link: https://www.wired.com/2006/05/stumbling-into-a-spy-scandal/ ], where they had a Narus device there, and that Narus device takes everything off the fiber line. They could take everything- the insight device [NarusInsight] can take everything on a sixty four fiber line [sic]. Or ten gigabit line. So, it could take everything off there, essentially, and give to NSA to store. And that's fundamentally what they're doing at over a hundred tap points. Inside the United States. This is not for foreigners, by the way. This is for targeting U.S. citizens. If they wanted only foreigners, then all they had to do was look at the trans-oceanic cables and where they surface. On the coast of the United States. Tap those, and they've got all the foreigners who are transferring into or- data going out of the U.S. to the foreigners, or transmitting across, transmitting across the U.S. to Asia, for example. From Europe. All of that data is right there. If that's what they were after, that's where they would be. But they're not there, they're distributed with the U.S. population. Which tells you that the target is the U.S. population, not foreigners.

BERNSTEIN
So you would, so you would say to, just to clarify, if in fact the Russians were tapping into, say, the Democratic headquarters or any agency in the U.S. government, the NSA would absolutely know.

BINNEY
Yes. And they'd also have trace routes on all the packets, where they went, specifically, in Russia and anywhere else. Because if you look, if you remember three or four years ago, something like that, the Chinese hacked into someone in the United States, and the government came out and said, "Yes, it was the Chinese, and they did it from that building in Shanghai." And they pointed to the building. Which was a military facility. So, that shows you the extent of what they can do. That was just a glimpse into it. I mean, they have these packets stored and everything. So they know routing, and all of that, it- there are tr- there are programs that will help you do that, your audience listening can look them up on the web, it's called trace route programs, and trace watch programs, and those are programs that are set up to be used by people anywhere, to be able to see who's coming into your computer and where- you can trace the route of data coming to you, from anywhere in the world. Using those programs. And so, they have these programs embedded- trace route programs by the hundreds across the U.S. and all around the world. So they know where all the packets are going. By the billions. Every day. So...it's not a matter of...it's not a matter of them now knowing, they should know, we certainly paid enough money for this. So. [laughs] That was just the first reason, okay? The second-

BERNSTEIN
Go on.

BINNEY
Then the other data that came out from Guccifer 2, alleging to be a download from the DNC, and they gave some data for us to work with, the data downloaded, the timestamps at each and every message downloaded. So that we could then calculate the speed of transfer of data, out of the, supposedly the DNC. This is not- we don't know if that's where it came from. But: the point is, that- that speed went as high as forty nine point one megabytes [49.1 MB], not bits, per second. Which is like, four to eight times the- the- one fourth to one eighth the capacity of a- of a- of the network that passed data across the Atlantic. We tried to do that. As VIPS, we set a test to see how quickly we could transfer data from the U.S. to Europe, and the most we got was twelve, a little over twelve mega _bytes_ per second. Which is less than a fourth of a- of that rate, necessary. Based on the calculations from the timestamp data. But then, later on, we found out that the Guccifer 2 data from the date of the fifth of July 2016, and a second batch, dated the 1st of September 2016, actually merged. If you looked only at minutes, seconds, and milliseconds, you could merge the two datasets, into one continuous stream. This told us that Guccifer 2 was playing games with us. So this whole thing has been a charade. The whole thing.

BERNSTEIN
A charade?

BINNEY
Yeah, there's no- there's no factual evidence to back up any hack, into anything here.

BERNSTEIN
And- and- again, just to be clear, you, by the way, [laughs] former technical director, former technical director at the National Security Agency. are saying that the- that this looks like a leak, not a hack, based on a series, and a variety of compelling technical reasons.

BINNEY
Right. Because of the volume, the rate at which the data was downloaded, from the- from the files we were given, that- the Guccifer 2 data had to be a download. Not a transfer across the web. Because the web won't manage that high speed. You can't get it across the Atlantic at that rate, or basically- there's very few places you can get it too, and you have to have high capacity lines dedicated for you to do it.

BERNSTEIN
I see. Alright. Uh- that's very interesting, so, you're with the leak, not hack, community?

BINNEY
Yes.

BERNSTEIN
And we don't know where the leak- does any of your folks, who are working on this stuff, do we have any idea, is there a way to...pin it down, did it come- was it leaked by somebody in a Democratic headquarters? What do we know about that?

BINNEY
Well, we don't- we don't know that for sure, either. I mean, the- all we know is that the- it was a local download. And we- we attribute it, probably going to a USB device, because that rate of download, will...it- it will be managed- it can be managed by a- aaaaaaa- a- uh...thumb drive. Download.

BERNSTEIN
So somebody who could've gone into a, I don't know, the local electronic store, and get a- get a little USB uh device, and download it from Democratic headquarters, as, I guess, as much material as they could download, and then they, what? Have to send it out or...pass it along, however they did.

BINNEY
Yeah, you could physically pass it along, and...

BERNSTEIN
Uh huh. Alright. Well, and let me come at this from the other side. Just as a- a general rule, would you be surprised- what is your knowledge in terms of, has the United States ever tried to hack in or undermine or mess around with the Russian or Soviet operations, in this way?

BINNEY
Oh sure. [laughs] I mean, we probably do it as much as anybody else. You know, look at, look at the- look in the Ukraine, for example, we sponsored regime change there. You know, when the fellow who was elected president by, I dunno, a free election, who was pro-Soviet, we- we- if you remember, that it was leaked, that the- that the Under Secretary of State had said "Yatz is our guy!" and we need to sponsor him [laughs] against, you know, and then Yatz became the uh the succeeding president after the- the coup, they had a small coup there. And got rid of him, in the Ukraine. And then they [laughs] then they moved onto to- to- asked Ukraine, invite Ukraine into NATO. Well, I mean, that was one of the agreements we made with the Russians, that when the Soviet Union empire fell apart, that the Ukraines [sic] would give their nuclear weapons to Russia to manage, and then a part of that, we would agree that we would not move NATO further east, towards Russia. So, when we- and I thought they made a big mistake when they offered- when they asked the Ukraine to join NATO, I thought, well- at the time, if you're going to do that, why don't you also ask Russia to join? That way, we're all-inclusive. You know? We're together, and we're not treating the Russians like an adversary, and if you treat people that way, that's the way they act. And that's the kind of thing you get, from that kind of treatment of people. So, I thought that was very narrow and short-sighted, as most of the administration [line cuts out].

BERNSTEIN
Was the U.S. involved in meddling in the national elections that brought Yeltsin to power [sic - a reference presumably to 1996 elections; Yeltsin was already president of Russia]?

BINNEY
Yes, I believe they were, but I don't know- turns- you can go around and look at the U.S. involvement around the world, from the- installing the Shah in Iran, and- and- and trying to get rid of Bibi Netanyahu in Israel, and- you know, all countries try to leverage things like this, to influence- people's opinions and- and votes around the world. That- you know, I- no one is alone in doing that, I mean, every country tries to influence things through diplomatic ways and means, and- and also, you know, things like Radio Free Europe, and things like that, and- of course, they try to get their message out any way they can, to as many people as possible. And that's- We've been doing that for decades. You know?

BERNSTEIN
Alright, you're listening to "Flashpoints" on Pacifica Radio, that's the voice of William Binney, as we said, he's a former technical director at the National Security Agency, and a whistleblower, and he's a member, I believe, of a group called Veterans [sic - Bernstein is not familiar with the group, given the way he says this] Intelligence Professionals for Sanity [laughs], and they've been trying to call attention to all kinds of ridiculous things that have been going on, undermining Americans, and people all over the world. Their privacy, of their right to communicate, with brothers and sisters and friends and relatives, in a way in which the whole world is not listening [sic]. And I guess, I would like to talk to you a little bit about what you were- you're just back from overseas, and you've been working with a group of folks to try and help protect the security of our communications. You wanna talk a little bit about what you're up to, and the U.S. government's response?

BINNEY
Sure. I mean, Kirk Wiebe and I are- have joined forces with some, some other members of the Brunel Corporation, in Amsterdam, in the Netherlands, and we're forming a new split off, smaller company, subsidiary, called Pretty Good Knowledge. And the whole idea there, is, we want to- to do the kinds of programs we wanted to do in the 1990s, to get people's privacy and security at the same time, and also, to be able to do analysis, effective analysis, of massive amounts of data. And get results out of it. Automatically. It's not just possible. So...that company, that just formed up here, you know, a couple months ago, [laughs] and we've been working over there, half [inaudible] half the time, and we're in Europe. And then back. And then...we go back and forth, every other month. And so, it seems to me, we're progressing quite well, and we also have some influence with the European Union, and Vice President of the Union, of the Parliament there, in the European Union there. We've been discussing privacy and security with them, and how we could do that, and also we discussed that with a number of other parliaments in Europe. In fact, the latest one we went to was in Vienna, with the Austrians who were voting last year on a bulk acquisition data system, like they did with the IP bill in England, and like we had here, but nobody's talking about it. Here, as well as they did in England, but...and, as a result of our discussion of the failure of this approach, and total miserable failure all around the world, people get killed, and nobody- nothing can stop any of these attacks, so...plus the fact that everybody loses privacy in the process. And...so, as part of that, the result came out, later on, and we were happy to be able to contribute to it, the...Austrian Supreme Court ruled the entire bulk acquisition unconstitutional. And the- the Austrian parliament, every one except the...the conservatives voted the, that bill down. So it's failed and Austria's doing- this is the first country in Europe starting to do the right thing.

BERNSTEIN
So you- what do you mean by "bulk acquisition"?

BINNEY
It's what NSA is doing, GCHQ, and the Five Eyes, plus about eight or nine- eight or nine other countries in the world, who are assisting them in this process. It means- it means you put the [inaudible] on the fiber optic line, then you re-construct everything passing across the fibers, everywhere in the world, as much as you can, and then...share all that data amongst each other, and store it. So, it's all stored, so all this data - emails, you know, financial transactions, phone calls, all this kind of material, transactions between people, stored and...and could be interrogated retroactively.

BERNSTEIN
So this phone call, this discussion we're having, could be stored and- and used, in for- for interrogation, or whatever?

BINNEY
Yes. Oh yeah.

BERNSTEIN
And I imagine they are always very interested in what you're doing, Mr. Binney, because you have a...incredible knowledge, and what would you say your overall goal is, in terms of creating these structures - to defend people's privacy, and their right to communicate privately? What's the goal here?

BINNEY
Actually, it is two. One is to- to- to defend privacy, but also follow the law, and the Constitution. And the Constitution is, of course, the ultimate law. And that hits into privacy. You know, right now, there's- there's still violating the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments to the Constitution in various ways, the FBI's doing it...Mueller did it, Comey did it, all of these people were involved in this violation of the Constitution. And...the other reason, the other approach was the one I had originally, back in the 1990s, was the reason why I started to look at the digital world, and figure out how to make sense out of all the data. And that was to make our analysts effective, so they could see threats coming, before they happened, and actually alert people to maybe take action to stop it, so people- people's lives would be saved. You know? That's- that was the- Those are the two basic objectives. Follow the law, do it right, target approach, a disciplined professional approach, and actually succeed at predicting things in advance without, you know, without first- right now, first what happens now is the people go out and kill someone, and then NSA, the FBI, and- they all go into the database, start looking at them, so it's all a forensics activity, a policing job after the crime is committed. Intelligence is supposed to tell you, in advance, when a crime is coming, so that you can do something, to stop it. They've lost that perspective.

BERNSTEIN
Hmmmm...and what was the U.S. government- what has been the U.S. government's response to the work that you're doing, overseas, trying to protect people, and this county and around the world?

BINNEY
Well, they haven't said anything yet, [laughs] I don't know, I'm not- I don't know how much they've been focusing on that. But I'm sure they- they- they're gonna start- I'm sure they're looking at it, probably to try to gain intellectual capital and perhaps apply it.

BERNSTEIN
I guess they have all the information they need to know about what you all are doing, because they're bugging you all.

BINNEY
Yeah, but we don't put everything in electronic form.

BERNSTEIN
[laughs] I see. Alright. And-

BINNEY
You know your enemy, right?

BERNSTEIN
[laughs] Alright. That's very interesting. Again, we're speaking with William Binney, who knows a great deal about what happens in intelligence in terms of technological intelligence. He's the former director [sic] at the National Security Agency. A whistleblower, and a very important person to those of us who feel that we have the right to know, we have the right, the real right to privacy, and not to be bugged, and not to have every one of our conversations - we are talking about every single one, right?

BINNEY
Yes we are.

BERNSTEIN
Every single one. That is- It's, you know- the human mind wasn't traditionally capable of imagining how you could contain all that information, but now, you can contain it, move it, study it, do whatever you want with it.

BINNEY
Basically, most of the process is done by machines, so it doesn't cost human energy, you know, so it's now achievable, that's the whole point.

BERNSTEIN
Wow. I want to come back to the United States, and ask you about there- there- there seems to be sortof a new McCarthy-ite operation taking place, around the Russian investigation. Particularly about the House and Senate, but all the aspects of the "Russia did it" administration, is turning into sortof a broad sweep, it does appear that it's a way to...try and justify the idea that Clinton lost because the Russians hacked and undermined the election. You don't believe that, right?

BINNEY
No. And I've- I've seen no evidence at all from anybody, even the intelligence community, originally the seventeen- it was really just three. But even those three, it was selected people, from those three, not the general analysts doing the job, if the general analysts doing the job said something, I might believe that. But when you have handpicked people, I mean, you get a- you get a tailored output that is, by design, intended to satisfy management. So, in that way, in that sense, I just uh- I just- I mean, if you look at their ICA, Intelligence Community Assessment, thirteen and a half page report, that they put out? On the front page, they said "it is our judgement, that we have high confidence that the Russians did this." But then if you go down to the bottom of page thirteen, or toward the bottom, page thirteen, they say, "you should understand that what we mean by the term 'judgement'-" "judgement is not intended to imply that we have evidence that makes something clearly known to be a fact." [this is the only report I am aware of that has been made public from the Director of the National Intelligence - "Background to “Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections”: The Analytic Process and Cyber Incident Attribution" On page 7 is this point, related to high confidence: "We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in  2016 aimed at the US presidential election. Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump. We have high confidence in these judgments." I can find nothing on page thirteen related to what Binney speaks of, or anything in the report close to what he says here - quote marks are there because Binney implies he's quoting a report, though these quotes appear nowhere in this report. Link: https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf ] [laughs] Which means, they're negating everything in their report.

BERNSTEIN
So, to understand, initially it was put out that there was seventeen intelligence agencies, have compelling evidence that the Russians hacked - you're saying, no, it's actually three, and not only was it only three, but it was selected individuals of those three agencies. Is there anything in terms of the...revelations about the FBI agents communicating, and talking about perhaps taking actions [reference to FBI texts selectively released by the DOJ], to prevent Trump from being president, that support the idea that it wasn't seventeen, that it was three, and that it really was cooked up, if you will, intelligence?

BINNEY
Well, I think the general impression I'm getting from what I- I heard on the news, I don't know anything more than that, about- I can only- I don't have the evidence in front of me, to look at, so...but it certainly does seem that it's leaning that way. That- that it was all a frame-up, and that this really is kindof a sad time in our country...for our history. I mean, saying that- our government is working against itself. Internally. You know.

BERNSTEIN
And- and I would assume you- I shouldn't assume this, but- you're not a fan or a partisan of Donald Trump, he's not your favorite guy, right?

BINNEY
Well, I mean, I wouldn't say he's my favorite guy, but I certainly saw him as a- I voted for him. [BERNSTEIN: Uh huh.] Full exposure [sic - presumably, he means "full disclosure"]. I voted for him [BERNSTEIN: Uh huh.] - because I couldn't vote for a Hillary Clinton, because she-, in my mind, was a warmonger. She wanted to have our planes go over there, in Syria, and start shooting down Russian planes. Well, that's- [laughs] You don't- you start wars like that. I mean, she- she abvocated for Qaddafi, getting rid of Qaddafi, in Libya, de-stabilizing that, and also in Syria, getting rid of Assad, and she voted for- for Iraq, I mean, our people have been in wars continuously here for a couple of decades now. I mean, we've got to stop this crap. In a- And so I could never vote for a warmonger. So.

BERNSTEIN
And Hillary Clinton did, in fact, sustain...the coup in Honduras, that was now followed up by another coup [laughs] in Honduras. And turned that country- the capital- it's now called the "murder capital of the world". Hillary Clinton did brag about how it was her work that kept Zelaya [Manuel Zelaya], the president, from coming back into power. She created a structure that went against the Central American- Latin American presidents, that sustained the coup that's now...continuing to create suffering _and_ a mass exodus-

BINNEY
Yeah. [given that he voted for Trump, who will be blocking all such refugees, it doesn't sound like Binney wants to hear about this, or gives a tinker's damn about this]

BERNSTEIN
-into the United States. So these are...I guess these are issues uh that uh you care about, that we care about, in terms of the future of the country, and whether we're ever going to have peace. So, coming back, again to the- you know, that a...radio producer and somebody who's a contributor to this show, "Flashpoints", Randy Credico, has now been singled out. He is, like, the middle man, he is the...the conduit, the person who gave the information, who went between Wikileaks, Julian Assange, and right-wing operative, Reagan supporter...Roger Stone [the public allegation is simply that Credico was the "back channel" that Stone referred to, between himself and Assange, and who gave him information on the forthcoming Wikileaks releases; this information is easily available, and that Bernstein cannot simply say this, instead of coming up with an inflated and manufactured allegation, is due either to Bernstein's negligence or his dishonesty]. He's the one, he's been called to testify before Congress - do you think they got the right person there?

BINNEY
[laughs] Of course not. I mean, that's like, you know, anybody who talks to anybody, like- in a- in- report- reporter, investigative reporter, or someone interviewing people, I mean, you, you did- you did the- you try to interview as many people as you can. Some on all- even terrorists, you get to interview them. Doesn't mean you're a terrorist. Or that you're involved in any way with them, in doing anything. This is absolutely absurd. I mean, any- any reporter in the world could be a- brought under those ch- under that view, I mean, you could- you could- all I'm say [sic] is they produced zero evidence to show anything about Randy Credico. So, again, this is just like Russian hacking. They have produced zero evidence to show any hacking done at all. And so- [laughs] I mean, the only thing they're doing is discrediting themselves as intelligence agencies and police organizations. That's- that's the only thing they're doing. And what they're doing is showing their true colors, about subverting the constitutional rights of everybody in this country. And they're trying to say, you know, as if they're playing a "Wizard of Oz" game, look over here, we have a foreign threat, pay attention to a foreign threat, don't look internally at what we're doing. Look over there. You know? This is- this is the sad part of- of- of- that our country is in, now. I mean, I keep referring to Goethe, a comment from Goethe, years ago?

BERNSTEIN
Yes?

BINNEY
He said, "No one is more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." And that's us.

BERNSTEIN
Hmmmm. Wow. What is your main concern, what do you- what's your biggest fear, on all this, say, the attack, the McCarthy-ite actions of the various committees, the attempt to blame Russia for everything, what do you think- what are the implications for that, and what are your concerns about that?

BINNEY
Well, I mean, it concerns, of course, ultimately, it could lead to an act of war. A hot war. That certainly would be my major concern. We shouldn't go that path, we shouldn't be doing a lot of the things we're doing. So. I mean, we need to get out of these wars. And we're not doing that yet. But- that's- that's my major concern. The other concern is what we're doing to our own democracy. Or supposed democracy. We're actually destroying the foundation, we're ignoring the fundamental foundations of our country, which are the- which are founded in the principles of the constitution. I mean- and we elect people that go to Washington, and the oath of office is to protect and defend the Constitution - for the president, it's _preserve_, protect, and defend, so- the Constitution. What are they- what are they doing to defend the Constitution? They should be- they should be doing that, and stopping all these unconstitutional acts, and then- then- and then the only way to stop it, really, and make sure it doesn't happen again, is start indicting people who were participating in managing these activities, that were clearly unconstitutional. I don't care what anybody says, this is just outright treason against the founding principles of our- of our country. That is my personal view.

BERNSTEIN
Wow. Well, we're gonna leave it there. But we do appreciate, William Binney, taking the time out to speak with us about these incredibly important issues, that real- that have everything to do with whether we're going to remain a free state, or be undermined by intelligence folks who think they're- they're doing the best thing by undermining our right to privacy, our freedoms, our ability to do reporting - journalism. So...we appreciate you taking out the time, the kinds of risks that you took, to tell the folks in this country and around the world, what is really going on. So- oh, and by the way, do you- do you see the- the United States government would like to arrest Julian Assange and try him for treason. I've heard people wanna hang him from the rafters of Congress. What do you- what are your thoughts on that? Is he- Is he a traitor?

BINNEY
Well, I think he's publishing as a reporter would. Data that he thinks the public should- should know, and he's no different than other reporters who- I mean, go back to Jack Anderson, back in 1973, I think it was, when he published the...the- the- the data about the uh what was called "Gamma Gupy", which was the- [laughs] the decrypts of the phone conversations between Soviet leadership and- when they were traveling in limousines, you know, that was quite damaging, and nobody indicted him. So...we're- or try him. You could say the same thing about a lot of other reporters, even today. I mean, they...any time they touch anything that hasn't been, supposedly been classified, they could be charged the same way. So, what's the difference? I- I say that they're doing their job as reporters, and that's- comes under the First Amendment of the Constitution. That's why I keep going back to the Constitution. It's their right to do that.

BERNSTEIN
Alright. William Binney. Thank you for taking out the time. We wish you the best in the new year, and we hope to continue this dialogue with you.

BINNEY
Alright. Thank you.

BERNSTEIN
Alright. Bye bye now.

BINNEY
Bye bye.