CIA vs. Wikileaks [video] • Hacker News Board

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#191

Post by boomboomsubban » Tue, Dec 29, 2020, 9:12 PM UTC

kjaftaedi wrote: post #184

dmix wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Wikileaks treats all leaks as equal then I don't see how this argument holds water. Where else are we going to get insight into the globbal power "underworld", which the intelligence community just happens to always have a finger in? Anonymous sources feeding into New York Times? Because that's all we had before and continue to have today otherwise. People just don't like when certain inconvenient information come…

> The fact this sometimes can have an 'agenda' or be exploited by the original sources will never negate the value of a neutral 3rd party.. I agree with your sentiment, but we are all aware of the role WL had in the 2016 election. And in chats Assange was found to have said, “We believe it would be much better for GOP to win,” .. and then he continued to play the Seth Rich conspiracy angle until finally distancing fr…

That's a rather massive elipses there

>We believe it would be much better for GOP to win, Dems + Media + liberals woudl [sic] then form a block to reign in their worst qualities. With Hillary in charge, GOP will be pushing for her worst qualities, Dems + media + neoliberals will be mute.”

Not only is Assange allowed a personal opinion, why would a pro-GOP preference matter? Pro-GOP sites deserve their freedom of the press trampled?

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#192

Post by boomboomsubban » Tue, Dec 29, 2020, 9:14 PM UTC

harry8 wrote: post #175

woodruffw wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not going to play the historical game of who-did-what-is-worse. Hoover was a criminal, and the US MIC/IC has a long history of committing domestic and international atrocities. But, on the long tail of things, I'd rather be subjected to the US legal (and extralegal) system than the Russian legal system. I have more confidence that the former offers just recourse, even if it takes a generation or two.

>Hoover was a criminal Are you really saying that the FBI has and continues to celebrate a criminal [1] and their own criminal behaviour as most exemplary? For nearly half a century now? And no bi-partisan political rebuke? And are not treated with total contempt by every adult in the USA and every court in the world? How is that remotely possible? Surely this is a conspiracy theory? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/J…

I think he gets a pass as Kissinger was a fan.

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#193

Post by woodruffw » Tue, Dec 29, 2020, 9:16 PM UTC

harry8 wrote: post #189

woodruffw wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Hoover was a criminal in the literal sense of the word: he repeatedly and brazenly violated US laws, and fostered a culture of illegality in the FBI. His crimes are well attested by both his own records and the official records of the FBI. The FBI is a law enforcement organization; anybody who knows this history of LEOs in the US shouldn't be particularly surprised that they defend their own. Many Americans do h…

So you're saying the Federal Bureau of Investigation is a criminal organisation that does not respect the rule of law and indeed brazenly celebrates that in public in a way nobody could miss by making sure a criminal is its most famous ever employee? And this doesn't come up in every single news article about the FBI? This doesn't come up to discredit every single piece of FBI evidence in court? I would believe that…

> you're saying the Federal Bureau of Investigation is a criminal organisation

No. What I said was that Hoover was a criminal, and that his reign at the FBI was marked by illegality. Whether or not the present FBI is a criminal organization is a separate claim that I'm not going to make right now.

> And this doesn't come up in every single news article about the FBI? This doesn't come up to discredit every single piece of FBI evidence in court?

It's an established fact about the FBI, the same way that the Tuskegee Experiment is an established fact about the CDC. Both agencies (claim to) have reformed, so there's nothing to "bring up" in court.

The fact that you don't personally know about it doesn't mean it's ignored. It's taught in US high schools as a critical part of America's cold war hysteria as well as the federal government's reaction to the civil rights movement.

> Tragically what "Many Americans" believe means nothing about credibility.

You asked specifically whether Americans hold Hoover in contempt, not for the factual content of their beliefs. I think that they're right to hate him, but the base factuality of their beliefs doesn't change the fact that his public image is negative.

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#194

Post by boomboomsubban » Tue, Dec 29, 2020, 9:19 PM UTC

seppin wrote: post #149

for_i_in_range wrote: post #99

He makes an important point early on in outlining the mission of Wikileaks centering on making Data and Information freely accessible to all (the concept of Dataism, for those who have read Yuval Harrari’s HOMO DEUS ). However, the processing of Information into Intelligence that can be acted upon is what characterizes Intelligence agencies. Wikileaks does not concern itself with this phase. Yet, the CIA’s Pompeo is…

The CIA recognizes Wikileaks as an arm of Kremlin information warfare. Western leftists are all too willing to help Wikileaks deflect from that obvious classification. (julian assange had a TV show on RT, what more do you need?)

>julian assange had a TV show on RT, what more do you need?)

I love this argument as it turns both Larry King and Jesse Ventura into Kremlin agents.

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#195

Post by kthxbye123 » Tue, Dec 29, 2020, 9:19 PM UTC

harry8 wrote: post #175

woodruffw wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not going to play the historical game of who-did-what-is-worse. Hoover was a criminal, and the US MIC/IC has a long history of committing domestic and international atrocities. But, on the long tail of things, I'd rather be subjected to the US legal (and extralegal) system than the Russian legal system. I have more confidence that the former offers just recourse, even if it takes a generation or two.

>Hoover was a criminal Are you really saying that the FBI has and continues to celebrate a criminal [1] and their own criminal behaviour as most exemplary? For nearly half a century now? And no bi-partisan political rebuke? And are not treated with total contempt by every adult in the USA and every court in the world? How is that remotely possible? Surely this is a conspiracy theory? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/J…

Man, you think that's bad, just wait until you hear about how Americans treated the legacy of a gang of violent slave-owning traitors who tried to destroy the country and killed hundreds of thousands of Americans in the process

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#196

Post by arminiusreturns » Tue, Dec 29, 2020, 9:20 PM UTC

harry8 wrote: post #189

woodruffw wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Hoover was a criminal in the literal sense of the word: he repeatedly and brazenly violated US laws, and fostered a culture of illegality in the FBI. His crimes are well attested by both his own records and the official records of the FBI. The FBI is a law enforcement organization; anybody who knows this history of LEOs in the US shouldn't be particularly surprised that they defend their own. Many Americans do h…

So you're saying the Federal Bureau of Investigation is a criminal organisation that does not respect the rule of law and indeed brazenly celebrates that in public in a way nobody could miss by making sure a criminal is its most famous ever employee? And this doesn't come up in every single news article about the FBI? This doesn't come up to discredit every single piece of FBI evidence in court? I would believe that…

Are you seriously defending the FBI and Hoover right now on the basis of the fact that newspapers dont openly criticise it and its history in every article on the topic?

Lets be serious here, the FBI continues to be a criminal organization like many other three letters: due to a top down compromise system... but why do I even bother with someone who has already slyly tried to dismiss the topic as surely a conspiracy theory (the implication being all conspiracy theories are false and/or batshit crazy). If your bias and immovable opinion weren't so obvious I might tell you more about things like the mafias (including Trumps mentor, Roy Cohn) part in the Hoover compromise, and other things.

edit: I got wooshed... https://youtu.be/QKVS8TMork4?t=23

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#197

Post by michaelmrose » Tue, Dec 29, 2020, 9:24 PM UTC

harry8 wrote: post #175

woodruffw wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not going to play the historical game of who-did-what-is-worse. Hoover was a criminal, and the US MIC/IC has a long history of committing domestic and international atrocities. But, on the long tail of things, I'd rather be subjected to the US legal (and extralegal) system than the Russian legal system. I have more confidence that the former offers just recourse, even if it takes a generation or two.

>Hoover was a criminal Are you really saying that the FBI has and continues to celebrate a criminal [1] and their own criminal behaviour as most exemplary? For nearly half a century now? And no bi-partisan political rebuke? And are not treated with total contempt by every adult in the USA and every court in the world? How is that remotely possible? Surely this is a conspiracy theory? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/J…

This is like arguing that confederate generals actions weren't treasonous because they weren't charged and look there are military bases named after them!

Harry S Truman wrote during his presidency: "We want no Gestapo or secret police. FBI is tending in that direction. They are dabbling in sex-life scandals and plain blackmail

He was a villain by any reasonable accounting whose exploits are at this point well known and his moral deviance, bigotry, hatefulness, contempt not so much merely for the letter of the law as for its spirit and purpose. A contempt for justice as it might be understood by anyone other than a straight, white, conservative, republican, man that ultimately overshadows his accomplishments.

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#198

Post by boomboomsubban » Tue, Dec 29, 2020, 9:27 PM UTC

vbtemp wrote: post #132

Honest question, please don't snipe at me. Can someone please point me to significant leaks from out of china, russia, iran on wikileaks? Edit: since it appears no one can actually answer this question with an actual answer, and only down vote and troll, I think that probably means wikileaks does not make significant leaks from the military-industrial complexes of China or Russia.

Imagine you lived in any of those countries and had politically relevant information. It's incredibly unlikely you've heard of Wikileaks, by comparison how many Chinese language newspapers can you name.

On the small chance you had, you still wouldn't give an organization with nobody that speaks your language the information as none of your neighbors have ever heard of their website. You would give it to a local journalism source.

So yes, Wikileaks does not make significant leaks from the military-industrial complexes of China or Russia. Anybody expecting them to has no clue what they are talking about.

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#199

Post by michaelmrose » Tue, Dec 29, 2020, 9:28 PM UTC

seppin wrote: post #151

rmrfstar wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The primary threat to "liberal democracy" is CIA, DHS, MI5, and MI6. It is not SVR or MSS. This has been true since the Cold War. Who did more harm to "liberal democracy", J. Edgar Hoover (who tried to extort MLK into suicide), or KGB?

> Who did more harm to "liberal democracy", J. Edgar Hoover (who tried to extort MLK into suicide), or KGB? I get this is supposed to be a debate, but the FBI never rolled tanks into Poland or Czechoslovakia. The FBI never annexed the peninsula of a foreign country, then set up fraud elections to make it look organic. Most importantly, the US largely ended it's support of anti-democratic forces post-cold war. The KGB…

The American KGB is called the CIA. The FBIs purview is domestic affairs.

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#200

Post by Fnoord » Tue, Dec 29, 2020, 9:28 PM UTC

erdos4d wrote: post #106

Fnoord wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe a better question to ask yourself in such a situation is "Are you ready to avoid senseless violence?" ie. "is this worth it?" I don't believe is worth fighting police during a demonstration. I'm biased, sure, but still if you are in such situation you need to stop for a moment and think about such questions. Whenever I went to demonstrations -and, granted, its been a while since War in Iraq started- I made…

> I don't believe is worth fighting police during a demonstration. As many protesters will tell you, in a lot of cases the police start the fight. Are you saying you're okay with them being able to just silence you? What do you propose doing when they use violence to shut down your protest?

Sorry, I do not believe the police in uniform are the ones who start the fight. Not in my (democratic) country, at least.

Instead, you need to announce a permit for a demonstration. If you don't have one, the police will tell you to leave the premise. If you fail to comply, you might get arrested, even if you don't use violence. But the part where protestors fail to comply with (reasonable and legal) instructions by the police is the part you omit.

Whereas I never got into trouble with the police. Partly because I got the popular skin colour, gender, etc but also because I know when to be obedient and sincere. I can only recommend the same. Pick your battles!