641–650 of 1001 posts
Wikileaks was about sharing facts. Wikileaks today is about curating facts, interpretation and using facts towards an end. The "fact" state actor w/o proof is another step away from the roots.
Now it isn't.
Wikileaks is bad.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Is there something really damaging in Wikileak emails? That's my main problem with all these arguments «false equivalency» in their pursuit of seeming and sounding fair, balanced and impartial, they resort to equate all the horrendous things that Trump said or did with these harmless details that Hillary or her chief of staff said behind closed doors or in private emails. It's just not right and unfair for Hillary…
These are completely different things. What's in those emails is FAR more damming than some foul-mouthed quips. Gross FCC violations, for one.
We're in the middle of some crazy propaganda war right now, and it's been this way for quite a while. It became completely transparent when the Podesta e-mails were released mere minutes after Trump's videos regarding possible sexual assault were released. Ever since the DNC leaks and the subsequent accusations against Russia, it became clear to me that, at some point, the attempts to tarnish Wikileaks's name was to…
The magnitude of the falseness of this equivalence tells you everything you need to know about Wikileaks role in this election. Implied in it is the idea that the Clinton campaign had an obligation to release their opposition research on Trump as soon as they had it. But of course, they have no such obligation: they're not journalists! On the other hand, Wikileaks clearly is structuring their releases to draw out the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's pretty well known that Assange has a vendetta against Hillary Clinton. Just searching for Assange Clinton on Google brings up lots of articles on the subject.
No, it's pretty well known that Assange claims to have a vendetta against HRC. The details of that vendetta don't make much sense. It's clearly easier for him and his supporters to claim that they're acting out of enmity towards Clinton --- a minor figure in virtually all of Assange's dealings with the US --- than to simply cop to the fact that they are aggressively and overly supporting Donald Trump. Nerddom and the…
>http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/08/26/assange-trumps-ever...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sarcasm aside. There is a caveat to the legality of classified materials, usually you must have been "entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of". Which alludes to the fact that you would first have to have been read in, or taken the material that you knew was classified. There is also a "requirement" to "knowingly" cause harm. I put these in quotes because the wording and the enforcement of that requir…
Insert meme about protection from DD214 blanket... Jokes aside, I found myself on the site for the first time ever last week... Didn't want to fuck with that shit during my service or while holding a clearance. But question... While I no longer have a clearance, I am still eligible for a clearance if I need it within the next few years... Should I be concerned?
We're in the middle of some crazy propaganda war right now, and it's been this way for quite a while. It became completely transparent when the Podesta e-mails were released mere minutes after Trump's videos regarding possible sexual assault were released. Ever since the DNC leaks and the subsequent accusations against Russia, it became clear to me that, at some point, the attempts to tarnish Wikileaks's name was to…
Is there something really damaging in Wikileak emails? Even on Fox News they are not able to mention anything that is at the level of Trump tapes. Sure, there is some amusing stuff and quipes by aggressive campaign staff about opponents but nothing that can points to big corruption directly on Clinton's part. The media coverage is unexpectedly very low but I can see why media will want to put these rather boring emai…
Is evidence of financial ties of Clinton and foundation aides to Russian oligarchy damaging? Depends on whether you think being financially tied to Putin and claiming Trump is in Putin's pocket in the same time is something bad to do or a clever game?
Is evidence of pay-for-play arrangements between State Dept., Clinton foundation and foreign investors - including same persons working for both at the same time - damaging or just a successful charity that nobody has to be ashamed of?
Is revelation that the president knew what he claimed to have no knowledge of damaging or just a clever tactic to defeat attacks?
Is revelation that Supreme Court was (successfully) pressured into making certain decisions by threatening to make it a campaign issue otherwise damaging or just a successful management?
Is calling your voters "needy latinos"[2] and Catholics "amazing bastardization of the faith"[3] damaging or just funny banter?
Is telling "we've all been quite content to demean government, drop civics and in general conspire to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry"[4] and complaining "compliance is obviously fading rapidly" damaging or accurate assessment of their electoral strategy?
It all depends on your point of view, I guess.
[1] https://theintercept.com/2016/10/09/exclusive-new-email-leak...
[2] https://theintercept.com/2016/10/09/exclusive-new-email-leak...
[3] http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/12/hillary-clinto...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
State actors can jam the spectrum and make wireless communication impossible.
Don't Hamm operators have a low speed data protocol? Also, I bet some industrious hackers could hack together a microcontroller, photodiodes, and cheap lasers for a line of sight connection as a bridge.
But based on where the embassy is, it's probably easier to stand near a window and get on the WiFi from Pret a Manger next door.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. Only the raw video matters. They should publish all the raw video. Otherwise, everything in the video is just fake.
I worked for years as a film professional, including screenwriting and editing. It is very easy to lie with footage. The craft of editing is to make the edits disappear so that changes in camera angles and content appear natural and seamless. We employ misdirection to exploit a phenomenon in the brain known as suture, which creates the illusion of continuity. As a simple example, in a narrative film I'll cut from ang…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there something really damaging in Wikileak emails? Even on Fox News they are not able to mention anything that is at the level of Trump tapes. Sure, there is some amusing stuff and quipes by aggressive campaign staff about opponents but nothing that can points to big corruption directly on Clinton's part. The media coverage is unexpectedly very low but I can see why media will want to put these rather boring emai…
> Is there something really damaging in Wikileak emails? That's my main problem with all these arguments «false equivalency» in their pursuit of seeming and sounding fair, balanced and impartial, they resort to equate all the horrendous things that Trump said or did with these harmless details that Hillary or her chief of staff said behind closed doors or in private emails. It's just not right and unfair for Hillary…
Wow.
Trump is a buffoon; I'm sure you can scour the public record for innumerous idiotic things he's said over the years. What do you expect from the guy?
Clinton, on the other hand, is a career politician and public servant. I think those behind-the-scenes dealings are far more dangerous.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Directly related to what you are saying, DNC consultants and execs caught on tape explaining how they plant fake Trump supporters at rallies to disrupt them or get negative media coverage. It is pretty interesting from: 1/ a partisan PoV, 2/ a methodological PoV; you are right there is a war for information that is being waged. [1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IuJGHuIkzY
How's this thing incriminating or considered wrongdoing? This is like in football (soccer) where it's against the rules to grab your opponent inside the box when they're taking a free kick on your goal but everyone is doing it anyway, it becomes pointless to complain and moan about it. The same goes for hand-checking in basketball and I'm sure you could find analogies in American football as well.
Of course, everyone knows that in a presidential race, things get pretty heated up. However, the violence of the conflict between the two campaigns goes well beyond the violence I anticipated. It seems that everything is now fair game.
More importantly, it is clear that there is a huge collusion between the mediatic and political sphere. Again, on a magnitude that goes well beyond what was suspected. Finally, it is quite disturbing - again, from a contemplative PoV - that high-ranking party officials and a candidate themself actually take an active role in this. Before watching this, I would have expected some shady consulting firm running through an ocean of intermediaries and headed by a "special advisor" to some high-ranking DNC official. No, in fact the hierarchy height is much smaller.