• 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.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Julian Assange: Wikileaks emails were not from Russia

Status
Not open for further replies.

GaimeGuy

Volunteer Deputy Campaign Director, Obama for America '16
Jun 18, 2004
49,321
0
1,710
They were from the Trump campaign
 

studyguy

Member
Jun 10, 2013
20,605
0
0
Interesting that they had plenty of time to edit their releases to conceal Russian wrongdoing.

No you don't understand innocent Joe Blow's social security or credit card info being released was critical to keeping with transparency because reasons.
 
Dec 14, 2008
34,074
2,811
1,515
Yes I forgot, their efforts would have been completely undermined had they censored citizens' credit card info.

Lol


But no you seemingly don't understand the concerns as you said a world where 100% freedom of information is bad is a "dark and twisted" place. I didn't say 99%. I said 100%.

I stand by what I said and if you think your credit card information is private right now then I don't know what to tell you. You should probably realize that hackers could harvest the credit card information of every customer from any major bank right now and you wouldn't even know it happened. The only reason you haven't had your credit information stolen right now is that it's not valuable enough for anyone to care.

So lets bury our heads in the sand and think there is anything private for individual citizens in the world anymore. Or we could accept the reality that our secrets are all public knowledge and maybe the secrets of world governments should be too. Wikileaks is just as flawed as any other human organization but they are out there releasing things no one else dares to. And sometimes it steps on the toes of people with power and then the people with power aren't happy, which is why Assange is currently holed up in an embassy instead of breathing free air.
 

Meguro

Banned
Oct 14, 2014
1,164
0
0
2016, where even the left can fall for russian state actors.
Why would anyone trust the word of a rapist who fled to avoid his trial?
 

studyguy

Member
Jun 10, 2013
20,605
0
0
I stand by what I said and if you think your credit card information is private right now then I don't know what to tell you. You should probably realize that hackers could harvest the credit card information of every customer from any major bank right now and you wouldn't even know it happened. The only reason you haven't had your credit information stolen right now is that it's not valuable enough for anyone to care.

So lets bury our heads in the sand and think there is anything private for individual citizens in the world anymore. Or we could accept the reality that our secrets are all public knowledge and maybe the secrets of world governments should be too. Wikileaks is just as flawed as any other human organization but they are out there releasing things no one else dares to. And sometimes it steps on the toes of people with power and then the people in the power aren't happy, which is why Assange is currently holed up in an embassy instead of breathing free air.

Feel free to post your info here anytime if it's so inconsequential. You're just blowing smoke up people's asses at this point.
 

Psychoward

Banned
Aug 17, 2011
22,257
1
0
I stand by what I said and if you think your credit card information is private right now then I don't know what to tell you. You should probably realize that hackers could harvest the credit card information of every customer from any major bank right now and you wouldn't even know it happened. The only reason you haven't had your credit information stolen right now is that it's not valuable enough for anyone to care.
okay and all foreign agents compromised because of Wikileaks were easily accessible info too right?

This is some next level mental gymnastics.

I eagerly await you posting further in this thread while ignoring pjgeon's post about the hypocrisy related to wikileaks. Where censoring private citizen's isn't needed but censoring Russian wrongdoing is.
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Jun 6, 2004
20,904
1
0
I stand by what I said and if you think your credit card information is private right now then I don't know what to tell you. You should probably realize that hackers could harvest the credit card information of every customer from any major bank right now and you wouldn't even know it happened. The only reason you haven't had your credit information stolen right now is that it's not valuable enough for anyone to care.

So lets bury our heads in the sand and think there is anything private for individual citizens in the world anymore. Or we could accept the reality that our secrets are all public knowledge and maybe the secrets of world governments should be too. Wikileaks is just as flawed as any other human organization but they are out there releasing things no one else dares to. And sometimes it steps on the toes of people with power and then the people with power aren't happy, which is why Assange is currently holed up in an embassy instead of breathing free air.

Holy shit, you are fucking hilarious.

Hackers can already get to credit card information! No need to redact it!

How on earth does your brain work that you think this is OK?

Anything to defend a Clinton-hater Comrade eh?

You really outdid yourself with that post.

Feel free to post your info here anytime if it's so inconsequential. You're just blowing smoke up people's asses at this point.

Bwhaha, seriously. If it's so easy to get to, you should have no problem posting it here.
 
Dec 14, 2008
34,074
2,811
1,515
okay and all foreign agents compromised because of Wikileaks were easily accessible info too right?

This is some next level mental gymnastics.

You didn't even pretend to address my point, which is that if they start censoring anything, they will have defeated the purpose of their existence. But it's clear you have no intention of doing this.
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Jun 6, 2004
20,904
1
0
You didn't even pretend to address my point, which is that if they start censoring anything, they will have defeated the purpose of their existence. But it's clear you have no intention of doing this.

So, you going to post your credit card info?
 

Psychoward

Banned
Aug 17, 2011
22,257
1
0
You didn't even pretend to address my point, which is that if they start censoring anything, they will have defeated the purpose of their existence. But it's clear you have no intention of doing this.
They have censored stuff before though.

And I did directly address it by saying the rationale that they need to leak people's credit card info to stay credible is absurd. Firstly that's completely unrelated to the actual juicy bits that people care about. You know, the whole government wrongdoing. Secondly, if 100% transparency was their goal then they would be more transparent about their own fucking organization. They don't believe in full freedom of information but you bought their catchphrase hook, line and sinker.

It's amazing how you managed to derail your own thread in to an argument that's arguably harder to defend. Bravo.
 
Dec 14, 2008
34,074
2,811
1,515
They have censored stuff before though.

And I did directly address it by saying the rationale that they need to leak people's credit card info to stay credible is absurd.

It's amazing how you managed to derail your own thread in to an argument that's arguably harder to defend. Bravo.

I'm happy to post in my own threads when people challenge me instead of post-and-run. You seem to think that actively participating in my thread, even if the topic shifts from the OP, is a derailment. I thought we were having a discussion here but I guess I was wrong. Maybe from now on I'll just post OPs and leave since that's not a derailment.
 

Dopus

Banned
Nov 6, 2013
1,801
0
0
It's possible.

The preponderance of the evidence is against it.

Also, I mean, he's presumptively a rapist, since if he were innocent I suspect he would not hide in an embassy for three years to avoid facing trial. So why would you believe anything he says?

Perhaps extradition to the United States might be a big one?

Assange had always maintained the same position since the accusation and invited Swedish officials and prosecutors to the UK to conduct their interview. Neither Sweden nor the United States would make any assurances on the possibility for or against extradition. Sweden wanted a statement from him and only recently did they come and take it.
 

Psychoward

Banned
Aug 17, 2011
22,257
1
0
I'm happy to post in my own threads when people challenge me instead of post-and-run. You seem to think that actively participating in my thread, even if the topic shifts from the OP, is a derailment. I thought we were having a discussion here but I guess I was wrong. Maybe from now on I'll just post OPs and leave since that's not a derailment.
Ok are you going to address my point (which I just edited for more clarity)
 
Dec 14, 2008
34,074
2,811
1,515
Ok are you going to address my point (which I just edited for more clarity)



I never said they need to leak people's credit card information, and I also said

Wikileaks is just as flawed as any other human organization

so it's not as if I'm pretending they are this amazing and perfect group. I also completely failed to defend the release of unnecessary and unrelated personal information, because I didn't find it defensible either.

So are we agreeing here, or what?
 

Psychoward

Banned
Aug 17, 2011
22,257
1
0
I never said they need to leak people's credit card information, and I also said



so it's not as if I'm pretending they are this amazing and perfect group. I also completely failed to defend the release of unnecessary and unrelated personal information, because I didn't find it defensible either.

So are we agreeing here, or what?
Really, because just a page back you said we should have 100% freedom of information and censoring their info would undermine WikiLeak's efforts and then outlined why their leaking of personal information actually wasn't that bad.
 

KRod-57

Banned
Dec 9, 2015
821
0
0
Wikileaks doesn't represent every publish made on hacked information, even if they themselves didn't get any information from the Russian government, there are still publishes made by other organizations that probably did.
 
Dec 14, 2008
34,074
2,811
1,515
Really, because just a page back you said we should have 100% freedom of information and censoring their info would undermine WikiLeak's efforts and then outlined why their leaking of personal information actually wasn't that bad.

I never said it was good either. I acknowledge that it happened and maybe that sort of information isn't strictly necessary to achieve Wikileaks' goals but that I respect their attempts at maintaining a lack of censorship when releasing secret information. I also believe that Wikileaks serves a public good and has done so continuously during it's existence. This opinion doesn't change no matter how much people shout at me about Russians and Putin and credit cards and whatever.
 

Spoit

Member
Nov 11, 2007
2,884
0
0
Can somebody link me to this? Also why are we saying Wikileaks is doctored now? Afaik the stuff they leak is legitimate. Thats not to say they aren't puppets, but I think to disregard everything they have released as false is a little much. Let's not forget he released a ton of damning stuff about the bush administration.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/01/world/europe/wikileaks-julian-assange-russia.html?_r=0 About their response to the panama papers

And

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/wikileaks-...e-nearly-2bn-transferred-syria-russia-1580619 deliberately avoiding mention of the russian interests in the recent leaks about Syria.
 

pigeon

Banned
Feb 14, 2011
19,361
1
0
I'm happy to post in my own threads when people challenge me instead of post-and-run. You seem to think that actively participating in my thread, even if the topic shifts from the OP, is a derailment. I thought we were having a discussion here but I guess I was wrong. Maybe from now on I'll just post OPs and leave since that's not a derailment.

I think you could probably do even better than that.
 
Jul 8, 2009
1,245
0
0
The crazy part is, the Russian end game is most likely confusion and disarray and, at least in that, they are very successful so far. Who knows what the hell to believe anymore?
 
Dec 14, 2008
34,074
2,811
1,515
The crazy part is, the Russian end game is most likely confusion and disarray and, at least in that, they are very successful so far. Who knows what the hell to believe anymore?

No one, which is why everyone being so sure that I'm absolutely wrong and they are absolutely right is so amusing. Especially since the same people in this thread who are so absolutely sure they are right about Wikileaks, Assange, and Russia were also absolutely sure that Hillary would be elected President in a landslide.
 

KingBroly

Banned
Mar 18, 2015
23,759
1
0
It would make sense if his Russian handlers are telling him to start throwing up misinformation because the CIA is about to expose him.

He's said in multiple interviews before the election that it wasn't Russia. There's also that ex-UK Ambassador to Uzbekestan that said it wasn't Russia either.
 

Psychoward

Banned
Aug 17, 2011
22,257
1
0
No one, which is why everyone being so sure that I'm absolutely wrong and they are absolutely right is so amusing. Especially since the same people in this thread who are so absolutely sure they are right about Wikileaks, Assange, and Russia were also absolutely sure that Hillary would be elected President in a landslide.

Are you saying that predictions of a future outcome deserve the same level of scrutiny as something that has already happened and is working to be proven beyond reasonable doubt? Really?
 

jorma

is now taking requests
Jun 4, 2007
11,892
0
1,265
Sweden
What you think about who their possible sources are doesn't change the authenticity of the material they have released. And if you can't even bring yourself to believe that it's actually possible that Assange isn't anyone's puppet but has been acting of his own free will against someone who he believes wants him tried on false rape charges then I don't think it's possible to continue this discussion any further.

There are no false rape charges because there's no rape charge - and the girl in question does not think she was raped, has no interest in participating in these proceedings and never did participate. Swedish government are abusing her for their own ends and it's not pretty.

Anyone calling him a rapist is making a fool of himself.
 
Dec 14, 2008
34,074
2,811
1,515
Are you saying that predictions of a future outcome deserve the same level of scrutiny as something that has already happened and is working to be proven beyond reasonable doubt? Really?

Not at all, but you already know what I meant by that comment so it needs no further clarification as I'm assuming you asked me a rhetorical question.
 

Psychoward

Banned
Aug 17, 2011
22,257
1
0
Not at all, but you already know what I meant by that comment so it needs no further clarification as I'm assuming you asked me a rhetorical question.

No I don't know what you meant by that comment. That's why I asked you the question. You're trying to discredit research done by the DISC by noting that pollsters and the general GAF prediction was that Hillary was going to win in a future event.

Event A (hacking) has unkown factors yes but theoretically they can be pieced together and solved


Event B (election) had unknown factors because it hadn't even happened yet.



tl;dr your dig was crappy
 
Dec 14, 2008
34,074
2,811
1,515
There are no false rape charges because there's no rape charge - and the girl in question does not think she was raped, has no interest in participating in these proceedings and never did participate. Swedish government are abusing her for their own ends and it's not pretty.

Anyone calling him a rapist is making a fool of himself.

More to the point, Assange consented to and even asked to be interviewed while he was at the embassy. The Swedish authorities refused, insisting he must first travel to Sweden. This offer was open for 6 years before an interview finally occurred just last week, and only after 3 of the 4 charges filed had already expired due to statute of limitations.

The Swedish authorities never cared about the rape charge. They just wanted to get him into their custody. No one knows if they had already cut a deal with the Americans to extradite him, but they seemed quite uninterested in pursuing the actual case itself. All they wanted was Assange on their sovereign territory for some strange reason.
 

Easy_D

never left the stone age
Jan 5, 2008
23,619
3
0
If they're false he can go face trial in Sweden and finish it. How anyone buys this bullshit about him running away and hiding because the boogeyman will get him is hilarious to me.

Especially since he only hid himself away in the embassy *after* the crime charges.
If the US or whoever wanted him, they would have grabbed him before that.

I hope this rapist goes away soon, him and his little propaganda site can fuck off.


More to the point, Assange consented to and even asked to be interviewed while he was at the embassy. The Swedish authorities refused, insisting he must first travel to Sweden. This offer was open for 6 years before an interview finally occurred just last week, and only after 3 of the 4 charges filed had already expired due to statute of limitations.

The Swedish authorities never cared about the rape charge. They just wanted to get him into their custody. No one knows if they had already cut a deal with the Americans to extradite him, but they seemed quite uninterested in pursuing the actual case itself. All they wanted was Assange on their sovereign territory for some strange reason.

False. Swedish authorities requested interview and DNA sample on site in London. Authorities in the UK were all "sure fam." Equador blocked it.
 

SentientStone

Member
Jun 6, 2004
3,895
1,326
1,730
Vancouver, BC
We live in a world where truth is subjective, and is but a narrative driven by entities with their own interests. The next stage in intellectual evolution for the masses is to form a new frame that is self-aware of this fact, but still lives harmoniously with a more meta-truth instilled in them. This truth you can call humanity or you can call the nature of existence and the wonder that comes with putting faith in the beauty of the connection of it all.
 
Dec 14, 2008
34,074
2,811
1,515
False. Swedish authorities requested interview and DNA sample on site in London. Authorities in the UK were all "sure fam." Equador blocked it.

The actual scenario is verifiably the opposite of what you stated.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ange-still-inside-the-embassy-of-Ecuador.html

The moment he set foot out of the embassy, the British were prepared to extradite him to Sweden. So he stayed inside. He offered four times to conduct the interview inside the embassy, and was told by the Swedes that would not be an option. Ultimately the Swedes only relented when they saw the clock ticking on the statute of limitations, and then Ecuador who were not amused by the behavior of the Swedes chose to stall on approving it.
 
Feb 15, 2013
8,976
7,754
855
London
Especially since he only hid himself away in the embassy *after* the crime charges.
If the US or whoever wanted him, they would have grabbed him before that.

I hope this rapist goes away soon, him and his little propaganda site can fuck off.




False. Swedish authorities requested interview and DNA sample on site in London. Authorities in the UK were all "sure fam." Equador blocked it.

What a load of shit. He will be extradited immediately as soon as he sets foot outside the embassy. He would then likely be imprisoned for decades.

Why would any sane person stay inside for 4 years if there weren't good reason to? I suppose you think the Iraq war was to stop the Nuclear threat to the West as well huh? Some of you guys are so oblivious to what is really going on it's unbelievable.
 

Nivash

Member
Nov 13, 2013
3,212
5
0
The actual scenario is verifiably the opposite of what you stated.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ange-still-inside-the-embassy-of-Ecuador.html

The moment he set foot out of the embassy, the British were prepared to extradite him to Sweden. So he stayed inside. He offered four times to conduct the interview inside the embassy, and was told by the Swedes that would not be an option. Ultimately the Swedes only relented when they saw the clock ticking on the statute of limitations, and then Ecuador who were not amused by the behavior of the Swedes chose to stall on approving it.

Of course the Brits would immediately extradite him. He's a wanted fugitive! Their high court approved his extradition, that's why he went into hiding.

The Swedish authorities refused his "offer" because 1) they don't make a habit of letting fugitives dictate the forms of their own investigations and 2) they weren't so much interested in interviewing him as arresting him, the interview was a formality in order to be able to arrest and charge him.

The only reason they relented is that because, as you say, that Assange had chosen self-imprisonment anyway and showed no signs of ever breaking it. They figured that they might as well be doing the interview there seeing as how it would be probably be the last, part of the investigation they would be allowed to do since Assange is apparently fine with simply waiting for the statute of limitations to kick in.

Oh, and it probably went to shit anyway. Ecuador hijacked the interview by insisting that their own prosecutor be the interviewer - working off prepared questions from the Swedish prosecutors - and for some reason barring Assange's lawyer from attending.

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-...iewed-over-allegations-sexual-assault/8021186

And lastly, fearing extradition to the US is ridiculous. Sweden doesn't extradite either for political crimes or when the death penalty could be in play, both of which apply if the US accuses Assange of espionage. Not to mention that any further extraditions now also require UK court approval because they're responsible for the original extradition!
 

KooopaKid

Banned
Jun 3, 2014
4,978
0
0
Sorry I didn't follow this closely but are the leaks true anyway? If they are, I really don't care from who they come from.
 
Feb 15, 2013
8,976
7,754
855
London
Of course the Brits would immediately extradite him. He's a wanted fugitive! Their high court approved his extradition, that's why he went into hiding.

The Swedish authorities refused his "offer" because 1) they don't make a habit of letting fugitives dictate the forms of their own investigations and 2) they weren't so much interested in interviewing him as arresting him, the interview was a formality in order to be able to arrest and charge him.

The only reason they relented is that because, as you say, that Assange had chosen self-imprisonment anyway and showed no signs of ever breaking it. They figured that they might as well be doing the interview there seeing as how it would be probably be the last, part of the investigation they would be allowed to do since Assange is apparently fine with simply waiting for the statute of limitations to kick in.

Oh, and it probably went to shit anyway. Ecuador hijacked the interview by insisting that their own prosecutor be the interviewer - working off prepared questions from the Swedish prosecutors - and for some reason barring Assange's lawyer from attending.

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-...iewed-over-allegations-sexual-assault/8021186

And lastly, fearing extradition to the US is ridiculous. Sweden doesn't extradite either for political crimes or when the death penalty could be in play, both of which apply if the US accuses Assange of espionage. Not to mention that any further extraditions now also require UK court approval because they're responsible for the original extradition!

You just proved you don't know what you are talking about with that sentence. Bradley Manning is not facing the death penalty.

Sweden has accepted the last 15 out of 15 extradition requests from the USA.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.