61–70 of 143 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you elaborate? Specifically who 'we' are and how Sanders and Trump were helped.
Even I was able to identify the sarcasm on first sight.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> lack of respect for women Is there any evidence that he lacks respect for women? I have not yet seen any. He was accused of something which in Sweden is called "rape" but in the US would be called "consensual sex". Is that what you are referring to?
> In Sweden is called "rape" but in the US would be called "consensual sex" If you have sex with someone and tell them you will use a condom and don't, that isn't consensual.
I read through about 1/2 of the AKP "leaks", it was a tremendous waste of time for anything but improving comprehension of Türkçe. At a point in time, I truly believed Assange's goals were justice and transparency, now I am beginning to feel like he has his own political agenda, and is making sophomoric attempts to affect political change. In 2016 Wikileaks's agenda seems to be: - Anti-Hillary - Anti-Hillary - Pro-Tr…
So a spammy email in one of the thousands leaked happened to contained malware? And this is newsworthy why? People here are using this to question Wikileaks integrity but it seems like a minor mistake given the contents of the dump. This has happened before in hacker dumps on a number of occasions but this one isn't even malicious (targeting wikileaks users). I don't open random zips from spam emails on my machine an…
> So a spammy email in one of the thousands leaked happened to contained malware? And this is newsworthy why? Because it's another example of the unconscionable lack of attention to detail that Wikileaks pays when putting out these dumps. Not quite at the level of outing gay Saudis and rape victims (putting them at risk of death), but still just very amateurish.
Especially considering how long they've been releasing these data dumps.
I read through about 1/2 of the AKP "leaks", it was a tremendous waste of time for anything but improving comprehension of Türkçe. At a point in time, I truly believed Assange's goals were justice and transparency, now I am beginning to feel like he has his own political agenda, and is making sophomoric attempts to affect political change. In 2016 Wikileaks's agenda seems to be: - Anti-Hillary - Anti-Hillary - Pro-Tr…
Could the anti-Hillary agenda simply be that he has leaks on her? The DNC stuff was damning, as was the reaction. (Bad actor resigns, gets immediately hired without reprimand?) He's said negative Trump stuff - how has he been positive there? If someone brought internal Trump emails, do you think WL wouldn't publish them? If this had been flipped, and he had only published anti-Trump stuff, would you be making the sam…
On one hand, I have daughters, and don't want misogynistic defenders of rape-culture having any power over them.
On the other hand, I care about fairness and justice.
On my third hand (yay radiation!), Clinton is an evil sociopath who is bound to be largely ineffective as your president thanks to a republican legislature. Trump, however, is an incompetent demagogue who I think will cause a massive amount of un-needed suffering in this world.
So my honest answer is, I don't know. It probably depends on if I'd taken my meds that day and how emotional I was feeling.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wikileaks' actions this year have done nothing but prove to me that Wikileaks is just another arm of the alt-right. When you add in Julian Assange's antisemitism and lack of respect for women, it all makes sense.
Claiming someone is alt-right is starting to have the feel of McCarthy era claims of communism. We are supposed to associate that label (and thus the person) with the deeply unsavory, without looking at their actual, specific positions and actions.
I don't know what they stand for. But I visit generally progressive-leaning places on the internet and know I'm supposed to hate them.
I still haven't even figured out who the "reactionaries" are or what they believe in. I think what happened is some people used the wrong word when talking about "contrarians" and through a game of telephone turned created a new political boogieman.
Is the conservative side of the (American) political spectrum really going through this much ideological turmoil and restructuring? I haven't heard about it in any of the mainstream news when I glace at it, nor from the conservatives I talk politics with at work. It looks like a way for the left to shill hate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So a spammy email in one of the thousands leaked happened to contained malware? And this is newsworthy why? Because it's another example of the unconscionable lack of attention to detail that Wikileaks pays when putting out these dumps. Not quite at the level of outing gay Saudis and rape victims (putting them at risk of death), but still just very amateurish.
> still just very amateurish. Especially considering how long they've been releasing these data dumps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I am beginning to feel like he has his own political agenda This is the position of some of the people/groups he's embarrassed. As if to say "Yes, I've been caught, but the person who helped catch me has it out for me, let's just ignore this". Also, as the US Army intelligence service underscored a few years ago, Wikileaks is ripe for propaganda use, since information can be provided to WL to suit political goals,…
The first 1/2 of your argument: CIA. Let me be clear, I don't support Clinton, Trump, or anybody else, I feel you have to be an evil sociopath to even want to be a world leader. I think he is just playing sides. Trump doesn't give a crap, but Hillary knows he's after her. Putin has shown an eager willingness to give asylum to Snowden, him, and anybody else. I just think he's a sociopathic narcissist who watched too m…
Is this due to Assange? Or due to the war on whistleblowers? Given the resource constraints of WL, Assange must choose between publishing unredacted information and not publishing at all.
If Assange had not reached out to the worldwide mainstream press, I'd fault him for releasing unredacted material. But the press (and shamefully, the NY Times in particular) has rebuffed Assange and been unwilling to produce investigative stories handed to them on a platter by Assange (via leaked info).
To understand this we must turn to the basic power relationship and realize that major news outlets are largely state propaganda outlets, or at least prefer to act in this role most of the time. Assange did not likely expect this. I certainly didn't, as it seems too cynical a view... of course the NY Times would want to publish details revealing corruption or lies committed by our most trusted officials...
It's easy to vilify Assange and to assume an emotional motive for everything he publishes. Assange's goal is the legitimization of Wikileaks and its maturation into a respected news institution. He cannot get there (especially given his resource constraints) by playing politics. While he does occasionally make a divisive comment, he generally lets the leaked documents speak (unredacted) for themselves.
> His character assaults against Clinton
Are you arguing that the information revealed by the DNC emails is not a reflection of very significant character flaws in Clinton?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The content of his leaks is irrelevant. What matters is the intent behind releasing them. Assange being alt-right and the fact that he is going out of his way to leak material that improves the chances of the standard-bearer of the alt-right, Donald Trump, becoming head of state of the most powerful country on Earth are absolutely 100% linked together, and those links should be investigated. Some information should n…
I would say the exact opposite. Politically motivated speculation about someone's motives are irrelevant, it is the content of the leaks that matter.