Support NeoGAF

[pigeon]

Their support for the Saudi government for example is pretty much the biggest reason for not advancing democracy in the region.

This...seems false? How exactly do you see democracy advancing in the Middle East if we don't have military bases in Saudi Arabia? I'm not saying our alliance with Saudi Arabia is super awesome but this claim seems pretty suspect.

The US has never really supported advancing democracy, it has more often destroyed democracies then creating them. Just ask the people in South- or Middle America.

The existence of specific situations where we engaged in antidemocratic coups, which I agree were clearly bad, doesn't mean we've never contributed to the worldwide advance of democracy. I think this is mostly false. And again, as I said in the other Wikileaks thread, I'm not saying the CIA didn't do a bunch of bad stuff in the past. Clearly they did! They are an arm of American military power, and we had a bunch of bad wars in the past too, just like every other country in the world. Those are bad and we should try to prevent them. But it's not clear to me that they're doing a bunch of bad stuff right now, so I'm not sure what you want me to prevent.

 

[Gunblade47]

Wikileaks is that gun...

Don't agree on this.

I agree that Wikileaks is clearly on the side of Russia at this point. But the information they release provide us with insight as to how these agencies are overreaching what they have.

If government institutes are allowed to act without any fear of accountability for their actions then I see nothing but a dystopia for the many at the benefit of the few.

Always remain critical of your sources and their motives but don't outright destroy channels of information out of fear. You'll ultimately be left at the mercy of governments that will do what ever the hell they can.

If my views seem a bit out there on this matter then please understand that I'm from a country where the state heavily regulated information and ultimately used this illusion of safety to oppress millions of citizens simply based on race. So withholding information from the people is not something I will ever be comfortable with.

If people were only able to look at the information they receive critically then the world wouldn't be as angry and scared of it as they are today.

Wikileaks in it's current form is clearly working in favor of Russia tho. I won't deny it but to me this case isn't as clear cut as good vs evil.

 

[Nafai1123]

Nice scapegoating. That Hillary lost was the fault of the Democrats. It is nice to have other people to blame, but any other candidate would have won against Trump. People do not even know who Snowden is and they should care about some leaks from the DNC most people did not even understand.

LMAO, she lost due to like 40k votes across several states. With that margin it's literally impossible for you to say that Russia didn't have a tangible impact on the election, regardless of mistakes she and her campaign made.

 

[Jenov]

Whataboutism eats away at yet another thread.

 

[Mahonay]

Whataboutism eats away at yet another thread.

I can't even muster the energy to respond to those kinds of posts anymore.

 

[Trokil]

This...seems false? How exactly do you see democracy advancing in the Middle East if we don't have military bases in Saudi Arabia? I'm not saying our alliance with Saudi Arabia is super awesome but this claim seems pretty suspect.

Well for one during the Arab spring the Saudi government actively intervened in other countries to stop pro democratic movements. This would have never been possible without the silent support of the US government. The Saudi government has that much power and shut down reforms because of the American support.

The existence of specific situations where we engaged in antidemocratic coups, which I agree were clearly bad, doesn't mean we've never contributed to the worldwide advance of democracy. I think this is mostly false. And again, as I said in the other Wikileaks thread, I'm not saying the CIA didn't do a bunch of bad stuff in the past. Clearly they did! They are an arm of American military power, and we had a bunch of bad wars in the past too, just like every other country in the world. Those are bad and we should try to prevent them. But it's not clear to me that they're doing a bunch of bad stuff right now, so I'm not sure what you want me to prevent.

Look at the links I have provided by using such tactics of information gathering and keeping those exploits open and attacking encryption programs the CIA and the NSA make the Internet worse for everybody.

 

[Tranqueris]

There is no alternative to Wikileaks.
No mainstream news organization would have released this, don't act like MSNBC owned by Comcast would have.
Wikileaks remains vital at keeping people informed.

Sweet Jesus... Yep, there's no way MSNBC would have reported on this if say, The Guardian or the New York Times broke this story. Nope. They've been reporting on leaked Trump Russia ties, leaked government assessments about how the Muslim ban is worthless, the inner workings of the FISA court and a bunch of other stuff but they would never report on the fact that the CIA has new surveillance techniques that people didn't know about.

Surprised no one has yet commented on Julian Assange's AMA on Reddit a month or two ago. That AMA didn't really give me the impression that Wikileaks was NOT influenced by Russia, that's for sure. I'll believe it when WL actually releases something that is directly damaging to Putin or one of his cronies, including Trump.

I mean, at this point you can draw a somewhat clear line from Russia to Wikileaks from the side of the Trump campaign to see why Wikileaks steered clear of Trump and Russia during the election. Russian Ambassador -> Trump campaign -> Roger Stone (the moron admitted communicating with Assange on twitter) -> Assange.

I think I've gone from "how did Russia manage to do this?!" To "I can't believe so many people love to make excuses for this fucking corrupt dictatorship, no wonder they were able to do this."

 

[pigeon]

Don't agree on this.

I agree that Wikileaks is clearly on the side of Russia at this point. But the information they release provide us with insight as to how these agencies are overreaching what they have.

If government institutes are allowed to act without any fear of accountability for their actions then I see nothing but a dystopia for the many at the benefit of the few.

What's wrong with conventional media as an outlet for whistleblowers, coupled with eventual declassification and FOIA?

One thing people should notice about the current situation is that it's pretty obviously really easy for the intelligence community to leak all kinds of things the executive doesn't want them to reveal, and the media will happily publish and report out those leaks even if the executive asks them not to. Why can't whistleblowers just do that, like they're doing...right now?

 

[Armaros]

Sweet Jesus... Yep, there's no way MSNBC would have reported on this if say, The Guardian or the New York Times broke this story. Nope. They've been reporting on leaked Trump Russia ties, leaked government assessments about how the Muslim ban is worthless, the inner workings of the FISA court and a bunch of other stuff but they would never report on the fact that the CIA has new surveillance techniques that people didn't know about.



I mean, at this point you can draw a somewhat clear line from Russia to Wikileaks from the side of the Trump campaign to see why Wikileaks steered clear of Trump and Russia during the election. Russian Ambassador -> Trump campaign -> Roger Stone (the moron admitted communicating with Assange on twitter) -> Assange.

I think I've gone from "how did Russia manage to do this?!" To "I can't believe so many people love to make excuses for this fucking corrupt dictatorship, no wonder they were able to do this."

Also people are acting like Snowden used Wikileaks to reveal the NSA surveillance scandal. When he specifically avoided them.

I guess that stuff never went public because conventional media refused to cover it right?

 

[Trokil]

LMAO, she lost due to like 40k votes across several states. With that margin it's literally impossible for you to say that Russia didn't have a tangible impact on the election, regardless of mistakes she and her campaign made.

So you just said it is impossible to say. So if I would say the wikileaks had no influence and you would state it was very important, there would be no way to say who is right?

 

[Armaros]

So you just said it is impossible to say. So if I would say the wikileaks had no influence and you would state it was very important, there would be no way to say who is right?

So thus you make so many excuses for Russia and Wikileaks? And downplay what they did?

 

[excelsiorlef]

So you just said it is impossible to say. So if I would say the wikileaks had no influence and you would state it was very important, there would be no way to say who is right?

So you believe the hacked e-mails which were talked about almost daily just miraculously had zero impact

Still waiting for you to answer my question btw

 

[KHarvey16]

So you just said it is impossible to say. So if I would say the wikileaks had no influence and you would state it was very important, there would be no way to say who is right?

It's obviously important for a lot of reasons (which isn't the same as saying it definitely lost her the election). Its specific impact on the race can't really be known. You saying it had no impact is completely unjustifiable.

 

[EatinOlives]

So you just said it is impossible to say. So if I would say the wikileaks had no influence and you would state it was very important, there would be no way to say who is right?

Is this your admission that your claim that "it was only Hillary's fault!" was BS? Because his claim and yours are not on the equivalent ends of the spectrum.

 

[Trokil]

So you believe the hacked e-mails which were talked about almost daily just miraculously had zero impact

Still waiting for you to answer my question btw

Way less then other factors I guess. Just because you think something is important does not mean everybody think that is important. Look at Brexit as well.

And I will still give you the same answer. Most people on this planet don't care who is supporting their dictator or killing them from the air.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Way less then other factors I guess. Just because you think something is important does not mean everybody think that is important. Look at Brexit as well.

And I will still give you the same answer. Most people on this planet don't care who is supporting their dictator or killing them from the air.

That's not an answer...

I mean E-mails were literally when you look at word bubbles based o this election the largest one on Clinton's side and the DNC and Podesta hack were a huge part of that. It was fuel for Trump's campaign frequently.

 

[KHarvey16]

Way less then other factors I guess. Just because you think something is important does not mean everybody think that is important. Look at Brexit as well.

And I will still give you the same answer. Most people on this planet don't care who is supporting their dictator or killing them from the air.

Cowardly deflection.

 

[Trokil]

It's obviously important for a lot of reasons (which isn't the same as saying it definitely lost her the election). Its specific impact on the race can't really be known. You saying it had no impact is completely unjustifiable.

You can not measure the impact. After the murder of Jo Cox in Britain people thought Brexit was never going to happen. Everybody was talking about it.

 

[Mahonay]

Way less then other factors I guess. Just because you think something is important does not mean everybody think that is important. Look at Brexit as well.

And I will still give you the same answer. Most people on this planet don't care who is supporting their dictator or killing them from the air.

 

[pigeon]

Look at the links I have provided by using such tactics of information gathering and keeping those exploits open and attacking encryption programs the CIA and the NSA make the Internet worse for everybody.

Finding vulnerabilities in systems and not revealing them is, again, the whole job of the intelligence community. They are supposed to find ways to hack systems and keep them secret so that they can hack people. That is what I want them to do. I would like to be sure they do it with care and not unnecessarily or inappropriately, but that's a separate issue.

Attacking encryption programs is...something that everybody in crypto does? That's how encryption works! You offer a proof that an encryption system is bad, and then people stop using it, or they don't. They just produced a SHA-1 collision, and it wasn't a government agency, it was Google. Are you furious at Google for attacking SHA-1? They're literally going to release the code as open source for other hackers to use!

Like, I read this as saying "the CIA and NSA want to hack people!" Well, duh, they do. So do the intelligence agencies of other countries, and so do bad non-state actors. It's not clear to me why I should want the CIA and NSA to cede the field to its competitors.

 

[KHarvey16]

You can not measure the impact. After the murder of Jo Cox in Britain people thought Brexit was never going to happen. Everybody was talking about it.

And if it cannot be measured we therefore cannot say it is none. And by we I mean you.

 

[Armaros]

Way less then other factors I guess. Just because you think something is important does not mean everybody think that is important. Look at Brexit as well.

And I will still give you the same answer. Most people on this planet don't care who is supporting their dictator or killing them from the air.

You can not measure the impact. After the murder of Jo Cox in Britain people thought Brexit was never going to happen. Everybody was talking about it.

You are still deflecting.

You declared unconditionally that it was all Hillary's fault and Wikileaks and Russia had nothing to do with it.

YES OR NO COULD OF IT HAVE HAD AN EFFECT?

 

[Nafai1123]

Way less then other factors I guess. Just because you think something is important does not mean everybody think that is important. Look at Brexit as well.

And I will still give you the same answer. Most people on this planet don't care who is supporting their dictator or killing them from the air.

If someone ran a billion dollar social media blitz against you while leaking your private conversations online I'm willing to guess you'd think it's important for how people perceive you.

 

[cdyhybrid]

Trolkil will never answer that question. One glance at his post history will tell you that.

 

[Trokil]

And if it cannot be measured we therefore cannot say it is none. And by we I mean you.

But that is circular reasoning.

YES OR NO COULD OF IT HAVE HAD AN EFFECT?

Again according to the Jo Cox murder and Brexit still happening it could have no effect at all.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

No,you are 'just' using classic Russian propaganda of whataboutAmerica to excuse wikileaks

Apparently the ends DOES justify the means with regards to wikileaks.

What.

You could say exactly the same about the people who vehemently defend the US here:

No,you are 'just' using classic US propaganda of whataboutRussia to excuse the CIA

Apparently the ends DOES justify the means with regards to CIA.

Why do some people here want to paint the other side in a worse light? Does your world view only work when there is one good and one bad side? Is it because you live in the US?

It won't work. We can't really objectively determine which side is worse, it is a waste of time. They both do evil shit. And to say that is not whataboutism and absolutely not an excuse for either side to continue. It just means to me, that both sides suck and can fuck off.

 

[Mahonay]

edit.

never mind.

 

[Calm waterfall]

If you have a paid TV show on Russia's state propaganda network, you're an agent.

Their timing on information releases and behavior is clearly coordinated with Russian state actors, not to mention that they're one of the most blatantly anti-Semitic organizations I've ever seen.

Lol, no he is not an agent.

These incidents don’t prove, as some have alleged, that Assange is some kind of paid Russian agent, or that WikiLeaks is a Russian front organization. But they do show that WikiLeaks, an organization purportedly devoted to transparency, is at a minimum okay with helping out the world’s most aggressively authoritarian leader.

http://www.vox.com/world/2017/1/6/14179240/wikileaks-russia-ties
They say many times that he is not a Russian and there is no evidence for that. He has the same interest as the Russian now, that does not make him an agent. That makes him an ally for the time being.

 

[KHarvey16]

But that is circular reasoning.

No it isn't.

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

Why should people care who is killing them or is supporting their dictator. Do you think a gay person in Saudi Arabia is happier, that the US is helping their government?

lol this is a hilariously ignorant post given what Russia actually does to gay people in their own culture

 

[M0nochromatic]

Assholes with agendas investigate assholes with agendas. I don't know why anyone would want to side with or defend either of them.

 

[Kthulhu]

Look at the links I have provided by using such tactics of information gathering and keeping those exploits open and attacking encryption programs the CIA and the NSA make the Internet worse for everybody.

For accuracy's sake, the CIA used keyloggers to subvert end to end encryption, they haven't breached any encryption as far as we know.

 

[Wenger'sBakedBaguettes]

US hegemony exists to maintain the global order, prevent unnecessary wars, and advance democracy, so.

To be clear, before you throw up your hands and walk away, I'm not saying everything we do is great! The US did all kinds of terrible stuff! It's still doing bad stuff! But I'm also saying that ultimately, the goal of the American military and intelligence forces is to promote the welfare of America, and the easiest way to do that is by just being mostly friendly to other countries and avoiding making them angry. Diplomacy is very efficient!

If you want to see what a bad actor looks like, you can actually do that. It's Russia! They've deployed their military and intelligence forces aggressively and scared and hurt other countries, and now they're being heavily sanctioned, their economy is cratering, and they're diplomatically isolated. That is what happens when everybody hates you because you're fucking with them too much! But that isn't happening with America. Even our enemies want to trade with us!

America is a big and very powerful country. But the world is full of power blocs that exist to help provide counterweights to powerful countries. If we were constantly stomping on everybody else, people would organize sanctions against us. If you think that isn't possible, just wait and see what happens after four years of Trump.

The fact that people instead look to us for military and economic support and want to get along with us, allow Americans to travel to their countries and do business there, etc., should be taken as pretty strong evidence that American hegemony is...mostly okay with everybody? Not literally everybody. Obviously there are some places we need to keep working on, in some cases because they think we're bad actors, in some cases because they're bad actors. But I think people really don't seem to grasp what would happen if America really was an international pariah. Nor do they understand what the Pax Americana actually prevented, or why it was put in place. I'll give you a hint: because there were two huge world wars, a massive genocide, and also everybody has nuclear weapons now.

Keeping the peace in Europe is not a minor accomplishment. It's historically uncommon, very challenging, and quite important to the general welfare most everybody in this thread enjoys. You can thank American hegemony for that! Or you can just wait and see what happens without it. I warn you, it's going to be a rerun.

You support despots, have undermined democracy in various countries and support Islamic terrorists (most recently in Syria). Aside from your own state-sanctioned killing across the world you're arguably the biggest supporters of state-sponsored Sunni terrorism and a strong supporter of apartheid. That's not even mentioning the number of war crimes you've been responsible for on a global stage the past seven decades or so. Did you also believe you'd be greeted as liberators in Iraq? Should we talk about the amazing democracy you're promoting in Bahrain now? The the one in Eastern Saudi Arabia? The democracy you're currently promoted with cluster bombs and the world's worst famine in Yemen? Should we go into coups you helped creating and supporting in countries that tried nationalizing their oil? Does non-american lives just matter less to you, a fairly common mentality among many Americans? Did the intelligence agencies pay you to write this load of insulting pile of shit?

But you're right. America carries out it's adventures to promote the welfare and interest of America, no doubt. Anyone against it is turned to rubble and their society set back decades. How generous, praise the welfare and interest of the white man!

 

[Gunblade47]

What's wrong with conventional media as an outlet for whistleblowers, coupled with eventual declassification and FOIA?

One thing people should notice about the current situation is that it's pretty obviously really easy for the intelligence community to leak all kinds of things the executive doesn't want them to reveal, and the media will happily publish and report out those leaks even if the executive asks them not to. Why can't whistleblowers just do that, like they're doing...right now?

If conventional media can forevermore promise to unbiased on all matters then I agree fully that I prefer this information to go through them. They are far more professional and far harder to sweep under the rug. I ultimately prefer how Snowden released his information to multiple creditable media outlets instead of dumping it on one source like WL.

I agree with you on this matter. But I don't necessarily believe in only allowing conventional media to hold such information. They can be made to bend in the face of vast oppression or even at a point where they themselves have a personal bias in the matter.

And although I don't fully and fanatically trust the media without atleast giving pause to think of their potential motives I also don't say that they should be shunned and thrown to the side. We need many channels. Not just exclusively the main media and surely not WL.

As for unbiased media even that is already hard to promise with the likes of Fox News constantly only giving one side of the story. If Snowden was to approach them I doubt they'd have treated it with the same seriousness as the other outlets.

On the case of WL I say take in the information if you want but be mindful that at this point their intentions are clearly to move attention from other issues. Smoke and mirrors is the name of the game now.

Edit: If you feel I'm talking in circles then it's because I am very much on the fence on this. Not trully being in favor of either but I can clearly see why people feel strongly for either side of the coin. It's just not a clear case for me and honestly not something I think should be in the center of attention right now. Make no mistake that this is important and should not be forgotten. But I feel energy used on this matter currently could be better suited on more pressing issues for the time being. Issues of hatred of others taking a strong foothold in politics in general.

 

[excelsiorlef]

But that is circular reasoning.



Again according to the Jo Cox murder and Brexit still happening it could have no effect at all.

That was a singular thing, a one time event... This was a sustained attack throughout literally the entire election...

And the Jo Cox Murder might well have made the vote closer than it was...

 

[Trokil]

lol this is a hilariously ignorant post given what Russia actually does to gay people in their own culture

And what is the US doing to its own native people or the black community. Just because the Russian are really bad still does not make the US suddenly good or do people have the desire to have the US as their ally, because it can be just as bad or worse.

 

[Kthulhu]

You support despots, have undermined democracy in various countries and support Islamic terrorists (most recently in Syria). Aside from your own state-sanctioned killing across the world you're arguably the biggest supporters of state-sponsored Sunni terrorism and a strong supporter of apartheid. That's not even mentioning the number of war crimes you've been responsible for on a global stage the past seven decades or so. Did you also believe you'd be greeted as liberators in Iraq? Should we talk about the amazing democracy you're promoting in Bahrain now? The the one in Eastern Saudi Arabia? The democracy you're currently promoted with cluster bombs and the world's worst famine in Yemen? Should we go into coups you helped creating and supporting in countries that tried nationalizing their oil? Does non-american lives just matter less to you, a fairly common mentality among many Americans? Did the intelligence agencies pay you to write this load of insulting pile of shit?

But you're right. America carries out it's adventures to promote the welfare and interest of America, no doubt. Anyone against it is turned to rubble and their society set back decades. How generous, praise the welfare and interest of the white man!

They are trying to say the US is the lesser of two evils when compared to Russia.

 

[Calm waterfall]

Because one side is objectively worse and more dangerous?

You are right. The CIA is way more dangerous than Wikileaks. The CIA kill people, and destroy countries, Wikileaks releases documents.

 

[Trokil]

For accuracy's sake, the CIA used keyloggers to subvert end to end encryption, they haven't breached any encryption as far as we know.

No, but the CIA and the NSA but attacked programs in the sense of groups of people creating encryption programs to stop creating more of those or throwing a wrench in the development.

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

And what is the US doing to its own native people or the black community. Just because the Russian are really bad still does not make the US suddenly good or do people have the desire to have the US as their ally, because it can be just as bad or worse.

Literally whataboutism lol

I never once said the US is exempt from criticism, fwiw

 

[KHarvey16]

You are right. The CIA is way more dangerous than Wikileaks. The CIA kill people, and destroy countries, Wikileaks releases documents.

Disingenuous much?

 

[Armaros]

You are right. The CIA is way more dangerous than Wikileaks. The CIA kill people, and destroy countries, Wikileaks releases documents.

And the State that supports Wikileaks from behind the scenes dont do any of that of course.

 

[excelsiorlef]

You are right. The CIA is way more dangerous than Wikileaks. The CIA kill people, and destroy countries, Wikileaks releases documents.

Wikileaks literally sought to help get Trump elected and if they aren't directly part of the Russian government, they essentially act like one, they have been huge proponents of the alt-right and are incredibly anti-Semitic

They're only goal right now is to essentially destabilize the US which helps basically... Russia.

 

[Kthulhu]

No, but the CIA and the NSA but attacked programs in the sense of groups of people creating encryption programs to stop creating more of those or throwing a wrench in the development.

I have yet to see any verification of these claims. While many of the tools the CIA have in their possession are horrifying. Many of them have been intentionally editorialized by WikiLeaks, which they do with pretty much everything they publish.

 

[Kthulhu]

You are right. The CIA is way more dangerous than Wikileaks. The CIA kill people, and destroy countries, Wikileaks releases documents.

You forget that many of these actions by the CIA were done without the approval of the American people, and occasionally without their knowledge.

 

[Trokil]

Literally whataboutism lol

I never once said the US is exempt from criticism, fwiw

I never said anything about lynching or some old time stories. I compare the countries at the moment. And systemic racism through law maybe even worse. Creating laws which effect a certain group of people more is just as bad as getting beaten up in a Russian street. Yes, it is all very clean and does look all so great, but it destroys lives just as perfectly as any Russian bully with a baseball bat.

Your deflection is awesome and maybe you can ignore all of that, because it will not happen to you. But getting shot because of skin or killed because of sexual orientation is no difference. Yes, the US makes it look more civilized, but in the end, both system are just as ruthless. And still a big part of the US economy is based on slave labor, now they just use the justice system to get things done. Look how many businesses in the US are now influenced by the prison industry and benefit from it.

 

[Trokil]

I have yet to see any verification of these claims. While many of the tools the CIA have in their possession are horrifying. Many of them have been intentionally editorialized by WikiLeaks, which they do with pretty much everything they publish.

I linked articles to that topic.

 

[KHarvey16]

Yes, the US makes it look more civilized, but in the end, both system are just as ruthless.

Oh please. That is completely delusional.

 

[Nafai1123]

Whataboutism is Putins favorite way of deflecting too. It effectively minimizes the perceived differences between a constitutional democracy and a dictatorship. Hell, even our own POTUS is using whataboutism to downplay the differences between the US and Russia nowadays. What, you think the US is so innocent?

The US has a lot of problems, including the way it treats it's own citizens. Wealth inequality, gender/minority disparities, etc all need to be addressed.

But compared to Russia? LMAO. Good luck becoming economically successful in Russia without Putins hand in your pocket. Good luck reporting on the atrocities the country commits without a free press. Good luck running for President against Putin without being murdered or framed.

It's hard, if not impossible to truly compare the US to Russia, because the simple fact is we don't know a lot about what Russia does. Having a stranglehold on the government/economy/press does wonders for not allowing bad stuff to come out. It's one of the reasons why Trump wants to discredit the press and any part of the government that opposes him.

 

[Kthulhu]

I never said anything about lynching. Systemic racism through law maybe even worse. Creating laws which effect a certain group of people more is just as bad as getting beaten up in a Russian street. Yes, it is all very clean and does look all so great, but it destroys lives just as perfectly as any Russian bully with a baseball bat.

Your deflection is awesome and maybe you can ignore all of that, because it will not happen to you. But getting shot because of skin or killed because of sexual orientation is no difference. Yes, the US makes it look more civilized, but in the end, both system are just as ruthless.

That's a massive false equivalentcy.

Ruissa not only has similar laws in place, but the public actively supports them, while here in the US they are actively being fought against.