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

921–930 of 1001 posts

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

#921

Post by khattam »

bduerst wrote: post #888
x3n0ph3n3 wrote: post #874

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because we haven't seen any collusion between the DNC and the FBI this year...

We haven't, unless you've got some proof I don't know about. That's actually a pretty absurd claim. Are you implying that the DNC intentionally leaked the emails to wikileaks and are colluding with the FBI to blame Russia?

>Are you implying that the DNC intentionally leaked the emails to wikileaks and are colluding with the FBI to blame Russia?

Nope. He's just implying that FBI and DNC are working together.

What is more likely though is: DNC was hacked, Wikileaks is doing what it has done for 10 years i.e. releasing information so that it makes maximum impact and Clintons are trying to damage-control by implying that Russia is involved... all while telling their Russian friends to pretend as if they support Trump (who has never worked with anything Russian ever... unlike the Clintons).

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

#922

Post by grzm »

bandrami wrote: post #180
willvarfar wrote: post #177

It suits Assange's narrative to say its a "state actor", just as it suited Yahoo's board to claim "state actors" as they disclosed their latest breach. Assange's ego really dilutes the wikileaks original goals and its no surprise that the actual doers in the organisation upped and left in 2010.

Ecuador is also a "state actor", and they're sick of this situation.

It probably didn't help that one of the pre-commitment hashes was labeled "Ecuador"

> pre-commitment 2: Ecuador eae5c9b064ed649ba468f0800abf8b56ae5cfe355b93b1ce90a1b92a48a9ab72

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/787781046519693316

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

#923

Post by khattam »

DougN7 wrote: post #187

I am getting so damn sick of all of the corruption we're seeing in governments all around the world, including the US/UK. Makes me want to vote for Trump and take the whole crooked system down (unfortunately, that would cause a LOT of pain for good everyday people).

>unfortunately, that would cause a LOT of pain for good everyday people

Yeah, so many libtards would be triggered... it's hardly worth it.

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

#924

Post by khattam »

ComteDeLaFere wrote: post #486
niftich wrote: post #471

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How could one verify this?

You just proved my point. How does he know it's a "state actor"?

>How does he know it's a "state actor"?

You'd have to ask him that. Unfortunately, he is not allowed to talk.

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

#925

Post by nstj »

dancek wrote: post #700
nstj wrote: post #638

675 comments and no one actually knows what we're talking about. What does "cut" mean? Why can't he just use a hotspot?

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/788099178832420865 So if Ecuador decided to cut his internet access, they may just have confiscated every device Assange has.

Makes perfect sense with that knowledge. Thanks for the heads up.

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

#926

Post by khattam »

rottyguy wrote: post #273
tomp wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe they have no secrets? I mean, the point of the DNC leaks is that they (the party) helped a specific candidate (Hillary) - even before she was elected a nominee - so they in essence acted undemocratically. Unless you're speculating that the GOP was secretly sheming for Trump - something which I find extremely unlikely - then it's more than possible that any GOP leaks would in fact help Trump, as well!

The GOP may be divided on Trump but am sure there is private information that could help the HRC team. It doesn't have to be incriminating as planned strategy could be of value. Unsure how this is different from, say, an (american) football team playbook being revealed to the opponent.

Wikileaks is NOT helping Trump. They're merely releasing information that would make impact in the election. Assange doesn't even support Trump. He supports Jill Stein.

They'd be more than happy to release any information on Trump. Unfortunately, they don't hack the information themselves. Someone else has to send it to them.

Here is what Assange had to say about Trump: "I mean, it’s from a point of view of an investigative journalist organization like WikiLeaks, the problem with the Trump campaign is it’s actually hard for us to publish much more controversial material than what comes out of Donald Trump’s mouth every second day". Source: http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/08/26/assange-trumps-ever...

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

#927

Post by tptacek »

existencebox wrote: post #903
tptacek wrote: post #745

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To believe that's what Assange is trying to do, you'd have to explain away the drip-drip scheduling of the releases and the (often false) editorializing he does with decontextualized snippets from the email leaks. It's not simply that Assange is exclusively leaking stolen emails from Democrats, but the manner in which he's doing it.

That's a fair point, I can't say I'm as tuned into the drama as tightly as I should (or shouldn't, for my mental sanity?) be. I was more addressing the general case of your question; can his local actions of seeming uniformly opposing one party occur out of any incentive other than being in the pocket of that party, and additionally your statement re: zero-sum-game given that being an argument I find frustrating. Tak…

Yeah, I completely agree! that there is a way for a "leak broker" trying to serve the same role as WL to responsibly publish leaked email dumps from Russian hackers, even if those hackers are only sourcing from the Democrats and not the Republicans. It is not my argument that third parties can't publish unfavorable things about Clinton without implicitly supporting Trump!

The problem is that what Wikileaks is doing is much worse than that.

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

#928

Post by bduerst »

khattam wrote: post #921
bduerst wrote: post #888

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We haven't, unless you've got some proof I don't know about. That's actually a pretty absurd claim. Are you implying that the DNC intentionally leaked the emails to wikileaks and are colluding with the FBI to blame Russia?

>Are you implying that the DNC intentionally leaked the emails to wikileaks and are colluding with the FBI to blame Russia? Nope. He's just implying that FBI and DNC are working together. What is more likely though is: DNC was hacked, Wikileaks is doing what it has done for 10 years i.e. releasing information so that it makes maximum impact and Clintons are trying to damage-control by implying that Russia is involved…

Except the FBI cyber crime division, independent of the Clintons or the DNC, is the one accusing the Russians of making the hack. The FBI, whose sole purpose is to protect the U.S. against terrorist and foreign intelligence threats.

> Trump (who has never worked with anything Russian ever... unlike the Clintons)

I can't tell if this is satire. Trump's campaign manager was responsible for installing 2 Pro-Putin dictators [1]. Also considering that Assange works for RT [2] (Russia's international Propos machine [3] which is all pro-Trump ATM), I think it's more likely that the FBI isn't fabricating facts here when they say the hack was related to Russia.

[1] http://www.politifact.com/global-news/article/2016/may/02/pa...

[2] https://www.rt.com/tags/the-julian-assange-show/

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)#Propaganda_and...

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

#929

Post by CreRecombinase »

grandalf wrote: post #699
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,…

How is the NYT trustworthy. The front page contains a dozen or so anti-Trump stories and zero about anything in the email leaks. I want to trust the NYTimes but it's hard to take seriously a paper that ignores something important. The same would be true if it had ignored Trump's leaked tax docs.

This is a false equivalency. The job of the media is not to present the two sides of every story equally.

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

#930

Post by cpncrunch »

khattam wrote: post #920
haberman wrote: post #342

I'm still processing this information, and holding out to form a full opinion until more details become available/confirmed. In the meantime, I'm curious, for people who are angry about this: suppose it is actually true that Assange is working together with Russian hackers in an attempt to influence a US election. Do you believe there is any point at which governments should intervene to protect national sovereignty…

>If WikiLeaks was releasing dirt on both candidates I would feel much differently. Ever wondered if there is no dirt, there is nothing to release? Unlike the mainstream media which takes command from the Clintons, Wikileaks doesn't fabricate their releases... so it is not possible to release dirt on Trump.

Well, clearly there is a lot of dirt on Trump because it has been released. Just not by wikileaks.

>Unlike the mainstream media which takes command from the Clintons

Seriously?

Post reply on HN