Who is saying it's only one or the other?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Julian Assange: Wikileaks emails were not from Russia
- Thread starter Unknown Soldier
- Start date
- Status
Because Putin told him so.
Ah yes, the good 'ole WMD talking point straight from r/the_donald.
No, just a useful idiot. Russia would've found (and actually did) other avenues to publish the data they've obtained. I mean, Gawker published the DNC's oppo research on Trump that was sent to them by Guccifer 2.0 and Russia is believed to have set up DCLeaks.com and other faketivist websites itself.
It would've gotten out regardless but WikiLeaks obviously had a wide reach already, was longing for new 'explosive' material to publish and, you know, likes to take your donation to fight The Man.
It's an attack on US institutions by a foreign nation.
No, don't conflate previous leaks from whistleblowers with state-sponsored hacking.
No, we have the US Intelligence Community -- 17 US intelligence agencies (FBI, CIA, NSA ...) -- saying it was Russia.
They're accused of withholding "evidence of €2 billion transfer from Syria to Russia" by the hackers that sent the Syria Files to WikiLeaks.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
tiredheadcrab
Member
People in this thread do realize that the CIA WMD thing was mostly the Bush administration wrong doing right? Do I need to explain the Valarie Plame story to prove my point?
To those same people, you realize that Assange had a talk show on Russia Today. Which is run by the Russian Government. Which is an oligarchy under an Ex KGB agent. The only thing thats changed in Russia since the SU fell was the people had to adobt to a capitalist system. Russia is still being run by a dictator who is currently bombing woman and children in Syria.
To those same people, you realize that Assange had a talk show on Russia Today. Which is run by the Russian Government. Which is an oligarchy under an Ex KGB agent. The only thing thats changed in Russia since the SU fell was the people had to adobt to a capitalist system. Russia is still being run by a dictator who is currently bombing woman and children in Syria.
SerAardvark
Member
Not just from that - Russia Today and Sputniknews were also posting anti-EU stuff throughout the buildup to Brexit as well - http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/06/08/why-putin-is-meddling-in-britain-s-brexit-vote.html - and there were pointed denials about involvement after the vote that actually are pretty similar to current ones (or, for that matter, the denials about having invaded Crimea)
In general it's tied to Russia's policy of supporting populist and nationalist parties/individuals in Europe (and also the United States, it seems!) to undermine opposition - supporting people like Le Pen, releasing documents to support Trump, etc,
http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/02/23/why-europe-is-right-to-fear-putins-useful-idiots/
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...t-is-wooing-and-funding-populist-9883052.html
Even Californian and Texan separatists are hosted in Russia: http://abcnews.go.com/International...tend-pro-kremlin-conference/story?id=42395066
As for Wikileaks - they also tried to make money by selling anti-Clinton stuff in their store, tweeted using the anti-Semitic triple parentheses ((source), tweeted conspiracy theories from The_Donald, attacked the Panama Papers leaks as an unfair attack on Putin, stupid tweets about Podesta/spirit healing, etc. They pretty clearly have an agenda, and the reason opinions on Wikileaks have changed isn't solely due to which "team" it is supporting but also due to increased concerns about what Wikileaks decides is worth leaking and how it goes about curating the information it does get.
Baron Aloha
A Shining Example
No, but they are parroting people who do - and those are the people to whom I was referring. And if you really want to go down the rabbit hole you could argue that everyone bears some responsibility since they are the ones who put those people in power.
Again, I'll go with the simplest explanation - which is a Bernie-or-buster.
And what I'm saying is that the question of the origin of the documents is what's really irrelevant here. It doesn't matter what the source is if the information being presented can be independently verified.
We do that shit all the time. Again, I'm not happy with the idea (assuming it was Russia) - but seriously... the outrage of our leaders is really something to behold. I mean pot meet kettle? If they should be surprised by anything it should be that it wasn't done sooner.
NSA has lied too (surveillance).
That doesn't refute my point. Again - what they have released has been accurate. Whether or not they release everything they are given is a separate discussion. I never said they were impartial... just that when they release something its (afawk) always on the nose.
TheBahaBlast
Member
It wasn't Assange, but wikileaks Twitter that links to the Donald which links to 4chan: https://mobile.twitter.com/wikileaks/status/794247777756860417
The 4chan poll threads that are now 404 went into the pizza crap. It's all bullshit that can be debunked in 5 min of smart Google searching, save yourself the headache.
Vincent Alexander
Member
This fucker is all kinds of sad and grumpy that he doesn't get same respect as Snowden.
Roland_Gunner
Member
You're consistently handwaving away the analysis provided by both US national security agencies and private internet security firms that show the DNC hack was done from Russia because it doesn't fit with your preferred theory. Occam's razor isn't an excuse to ignore all contradictory evidence.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Thanks for the links. Yep, Putin's tentacles have horrifyingly far reach.
Oh wow. I knew about the Panama papers thing but I didn't know about the triple parenthesis tweet (that they deleted because "oops! we're outed as racist!" I guess) and I didn't know they had tweeted about the pizzagate and spirit cooking conspiracy theories.
Fuck Wikileaks for real, man.
Gross.
Is it unfair to hold Assange responsible for what Wikileaks tweets? He might not be the one in charge of that twitter account but surely he tacitly endorses them to a certain extent?
underrated post
TheBahaBlast
Member
Now that is the real question. I'd say it's completely fair.
Baron Aloha
A Shining Example
And what is my preferred theory? I'm skeptical - that's all. I think a little skepticism is healthy at this point. All of the information that's been presented has come from 2 anonymous sources - and they don't even agree with each other on everything. The analysis that's been done does not have any conclusive evidence to back it up.
I've said this in other threads, but if they have evidence then I'm ready to accept it and say "OK - so now what?" But they don't. I'm not even saying they should show us the evidence - but they should at the very least show congress.
tiredheadcrab
Member
See I keep seeing the whole "Where is the proof?" question come up. While that is a valid question the answer is so complex and if given proof it could reveal details about sources who put their lives on the line, tactics we use to trace the hackers and patterns we look for when investigating the hacks. So in short you may never get your evidence and you will be disappointed in the end. However the skepticism is exactly what Russia wants to have. They dont want you to have too much faith in the IA's because that stops Putin from doing what he wants to do to accomplish his goal. Russia does this in other countries through their media empire like RT and Sputnik. It was briefly mentioned in a book I am reading called "Nothing is True and Everything is Possible".
Baron Aloha
A Shining Example
That's why I said to show congress. Surely they can show the folks on the intelligence committee and not put anyone at risk?
If I'm skeptical its because of things our own government has done/said. Russia really has nothing to do with it. I have no doubt that Russia wants this skepticism but then our agencies should have thought about that before lying to us time and time again.
I'll research the book - I'm always looking for stuff to read.
excelsiorlef
Member
This Congress?
FireBeaver
Banned
Baron Aloha
A Shining Example
I was mainly thinking of the select committee on intelligence, which is the senate, but yes. Do you have any alternatives? Obviously I'd like them to share it with us but I don't expect that to happen. But its kind of a moot point because again, they don't even have any evidence to show at this point.
Yeah, the same Congress has such a hate-boner for Hillary that they creamed their pants immediately on Twitter after receiving Comey's letter. What could possibly go wrong?
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Yeah, that's how I feel too, but I don't know how much, if at all, he has distanced himself from the Wikileaks twitter. Unless he disavows the garbage the WL twitter account spews, I hold him responsible.
Can we please stop with these kinds of idiotic statements? You're falling for the exact thing Putin wants you to.
Not to mention that the US is not 'my' government anyway.
For the umpteenth time, all 17 US intelligence agencies agree it was the Russian government.
It doesn't concern you at all they're potentially actively withholding information, in this case information that might be damaging to, of all countries, Russia? That concerns me greatly, especially for an organization that has no issue dumping bucketloads of personal, irrelevant information otherwise.
We know hacks of the White House, the State Department, the DNC, the RNC, John Podesta, Democrat and Republican politicians (including Russia hawk Lindsey Graham), the German parliament, NATO, a French TV station, the World Anti-Doping Agency, Bellingcat and others were attempted and in some cases successfully carried out by two groups: Fancy Bear and Cozy Bear, both believed to be of Russian origin (not least because of their targets).
Look no further than Wikipedia to find a comprehensive list:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fancy_Bear
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cozy_Bear
Documents from the WH and the State Dept. surfaced on DCLeaks.com, documents from the DNC, John Podesta and the German parliament surfaced on WikiLeaks, documents from the WADA surfaced on Fancy Bears's website, ...
Was that all a Bernie-or-Buster, too? A coincidence? Come on.
Here's what we, the public, don't know: We don't know if these groups, Fancy Bear and Cozy Bear, are tied to the Russian government as the US intelligence agencies assess or if they just happen to be bored 400lb teenagers from Russia.
Baron Aloha
A Shining Example
Oh, odd, I was going by the timeline as presented by one of the more reputable newspapers. I guess I read it wrong? Or they got it wrong? Or an intern did the timeline?
I'm going with option #3 in that case
Unknown Soldier
Member
There's a lot of misinformation going on regarding Assange and there has been for a long time. The rape charges are blatantly false and trumped up and the Swedes have been incredibly dishonest about their true intentions. It's a good thing Ecuador seems to like him a lot and have been sheltering him or he would have either ended up behind bars like Bradley/Chelsea Manning or hiding in Russia like Snowden.
Guileless
Temp Banned for Remedial Purposes
It's a good thing for Trump voters and FSB agents.
Don't worry comrade, Russia has your back.
MisterFalcon
Member
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ange-still-inside-the-embassy-of-Ecuador.html
I've still not seen any decent explanation why the US did not grab him when he was in a UK jail from the people who claim such a thing will 10000% certainly happen when he leaves the embassy. Except for the obvious one that Assange is not in fact Public Enemy No. 1.
I don't think the network a person is being interviewed on should necessarily discredit or legitimize them. Even liberals and left-leaning folks find an outlet in Fox News interviews.
You should, however, judge folks by their actual incriminating behavior. Because Assange has been aligning with the right for years. He identifies with "American libertarianism" and is a believer in the mythical free market. Meaning he'll more than likely side with the deregulating forces of Republicans and Trump than the dire necessity of anything but.
I like what the Intercept said about him and WikiLeaks recently,
Rebel Leader
THE POWER OF BUTTERSCOTCH BOTTOMS
There was a report of russia in October. It didn't just appear out of nowhere.
- Status