Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

761–770 of 1001 posts

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#761

Post by vectorjohn »

angry-hacker wrote: post #707
xenadu02 wrote: post #679

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1. The Goldman Sachs speeches, showing that Hillary has a "public and private position", is still against gay marriage, wants open borders, wants to enact gun bans, and wants to establish a hemispheric common market. With the exception of a common market I must strongly disagree with your assessments. I'll also point out that everyone has public and private positions and everyone except the most socially inept trie…

That's not the point. Is it only left or right in America? Both candidates are rubbish and if you support Hillary you're no better than your average Trump's redneck.

So, wild exaggerated claims are made, they get trivially refuted as bs, and your comment is that's not the point? Really? Get some perspective. Neither candidate is flawless but let's not pretend they're equally so. One is a dangerous megalomaniac, and the other is pretty much a regular standard ass politician.

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#762

Post by gaius »

tptacek wrote: post #602
gaius wrote: post #588

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Wikileaks is definitely anti-Clinton but it's a stretch to say they're pro-Trump.

People keep saying that. It is the single most common rebuttal given to this argument. But I can't understand how it makes any sense at all. It's a two-person race. It's zero-sum. To materially oppose one candidate is to materially support the other. That is, i assume, why Trump's campaign keeps claiming they coordinate directly with Assange through an intermediary. Can someone (calmly) explain why anyone should take…

As a non-American, I don't really care about US domestic politics, but I do care a very great deal about there not being a shooting war with Russia. Hillary wants to force the Russians out of Syria. So it's perfectly possible to simultaneously believe that Trump will be a terrible President, but that that's better for everyone outside the US than Hillary.

We all wanted Bernie, but he sold out :-(

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#763

Post by linkregister »

grandalf wrote: post #730
linkregister wrote: post #723

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The NYT is the publication that originated the story about the HRC external email server during her tenure at the State Department. The NYT frequently publishes articles critical of Hillary Clinton. Here are several hundred: https://www.reddit.com/search?q=subreddit%3Athe_donald+site%... I'm using this example as an internet community that curates information critical to Hillary Clinton and Democratic Party campaigns…

Many of these are old and do not address the content of the emails. There are perhaps 100 significant stories that could have been written based on the information leaked in the past 10 days. We got zero. The paper has also declined to collaborate with Assange to release stories about many other leaks. The NYT is America's Pravda. By the establishment and for the establishment... the definition of conservative. To th…

I see two sentences of substance in your bizarre response.

> Many of these are old and do not address the content of the emails. There are perhaps 100 significant stories that could have been written based on the information leaked in the past 10 days. We got zero.

I found this after 1 second of internet searching: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/10/us/politics/hillary-clinto....

> Too much competition from buzzfeed seems to have left the paper toothless and officious.

Buzzfeed has a substantial investigative reporting arm; its depth has been lauded frequently on HN: https://www.buzzfeed.com/news

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#764

Post by evgen »

evgen wrote: post #63

Aaaaaand like all of Wikileaks' dumps, this one turns out to be completely overblown BS. Boots on the ground confirm that absolutely NOTHING is happening at the embassy, no one is breaking in and the report out of London is the standard Monday morning complaint about the morning rain and the annoying signal failure on the Central line that is messing with commutes. If Assange did lose internet access it is because th…

With confirmation from the Ecuadorians that they cut off his internet access I am going to take this moment to simply say "I told you so."

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#765

Post by spaceheeder »

ElComradio wrote: post #729
spaceheeder wrote: post #672

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wikileaks announced for weeks when they were releasing the emails. It was a pre-planned event that the entire world was waiting for. Was it actually week(s) plural? I thought they only came out about a week late. > The Trump tape, which had obviously been saved for a rainy day, was trotted out to distract from the pre-announced Wikileaks release. I think this is a little much. Some cast and crew from The Apprentice…

I find it preposterous that it took this long to hear that Trump bus tape as well as the Stern recordings. If you were connected to either of these shows, wouldn't the first thing you did when Trump started to become a story was go looking through the material you had on him? It's simply not credible that they "just found" the bus tape. Was it lost behind a toilet somewhere? That they had this for a while now and wer…

Some of the Stern recordings were getting play during the primaries, but they weren't slowing Trump down since his opposition was split among so many different candidates.

The bus tape was archival footage. If you're suggesting that every hour of archival audio and video of Mr. Trump should have been sought after as soon as he became the nominee, then, again, you're underestimating just how volatile and fickle the news cycle is.

The plausibility of "the official story" (to reiterate: that the footage became an object of interest for NBC after former cast and crew from The Apprentice came forward to disclose his ill manner on the set of that show) seems pretty plain to me. Occam's razor defeats your conspiratorial thinking without breaking a sweat.

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#766

Post by nitrogen »

artursapek wrote: post #747
angry-hacker wrote: post #707

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not the point. Is it only left or right in America? Both candidates are rubbish and if you support Hillary you're no better than your average Trump's redneck.

I'm seeing a lot of people deciding who to vote for by deciding which candidate they dislike less - not which they like more. Is that normal in US presidential elections? This is the first one I've followed.

Sadly yes; it's unusual for an election to have a majority of people voting for rather than against someone for president, but it does sometimes happen.

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#767

Post by tomp »

pavlov wrote: post #423
tomp wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hillary => no change. Trump => change. Positive or negative? Who knows...

What do you mean, "who knows"? Seriously, I have no idea how you can listen to anything Trump says and come away with the idea that he represents positive change. Granted, most of Trump's output is not even properly formed sentences, so maybe he's doing a malformed data denial-of-service attack on voters' senses?

He seems to be interested more in internal issues. Less wars abroad and de-escalation of tensions with Russia.

He also seems to be quite anti-globalization, anti-TPP etc. Slapping Wall St banks would be cherry on top.

In any case a change of "elites" (if not economical, at least political) would be welcome. Probably won't be less corruption, but different corruption instead.

Re: Trump's speeches - mostly non-sensical, yes, but at least he's not pretending to be truthful. Personally, I don't have any trust in what Hillary says either - even though her lies are much more sophisticated and eloquent.

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#768

Post by dingbat »

pdx wrote: post #554
anthony_romeo wrote: post #237

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…

To further what you're saying. Wikileaks announced for weeks when they were releasing the emails. It was a pre-planned event that the entire world was waiting for. The Trump tape, which had obviously been saved for a rainy day, was trotted out to distract from the pre-announced Wikileaks release. This level of premeditated collusion with the media is not even up for debate at this point, since the very emails they ar…

> I have to wonder how many years (decades?) this has been occurring.

another way in which Trump is a political tsunami... to paraphrase Warren Buffett: when the tide goes out, you can see who's been swimming naked

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#769

Post by wmil »

awacs wrote: post #715
javajosh wrote: post #666

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It saddens me greatly to hear this sentiment reflected here at Hacker News. To reject the entire institution of journalism is a radical position, and not justified by fact. Manipulating the timing of release is a common tool used by literally every public figure and institution. To characterize timing manipulation as collusion and to imply that it means no-one can be trusted is a critical mistake. Given my position,…

I concur with this view. I don't necessarily think the Wikileaks are not valid, but from my point of view, Wikileaks lost all credibility being 100% anti-Hillary, with zero anti-Trump information released. Somehow I don't think the RNC would have much different internal e-mails floating around at this point. That being said, I read the Goldman transcripts and other things that were supposed to be so damaging, and the…

The RNC was fairly openly anti-Trump during the primaries, there won't be any evidence of them cheating on his behalf.

Also there's no real need to take anti-Trump info to Wikileaks. The NYT was willing to publish one of Trump's tax returns from the 90s and those are legally protected. You can take anti-trump documents to any major newspaper.

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#770

Post by [deleted] »

anthony_romeo wrote: post #237

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…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN