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

CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

media.ccc.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 299 posts

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#211

Post by AndrewBissell »

arminiusreturns wrote: post #196
harry8 wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> 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 batahit crazy).

The parent is clearly lampooning this perspective, not advancing it unironically. But I can kind of understand mistaking it for the real thing, the insistence on denying the possibility of conspiracies has reached some pretty serious Poe's Law proportions.

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#212

Post by seppin »

stunt wrote: post #174
seppin wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?)

> Recognizing Wikileaks as an arm of Kremlin information warfare Isn't that the same strategy that countries like Iran, Russia, and China have against their whistleblowers? And isn't that the exact behavior that we always blame and condemn? We have human rights sanctions against Iran for punishing journalists.

> Isn't that the same strategy that countries like Iran, Russia, and China have against their whistleblowers?

We can't have a discussion if basic we can't get basic things right. Snowden isn't a whistleblower. He leaked stolen materials then fled to a hostile country.

Multiple IC whistleblowers were allowed to testify against the President in the last 4 years, all without punitive punishment (although the Trump's tried). Snowden could have chosen a different path. His impressive control of his own narrative seems to have most of this community fooled.

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#213

Post by seppin »

seppin wrote: post #152
rmrfstar wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about this summer? The way DHS and local police specifically targeted journalists? That's way more harmful to "liberal democracy" than some foreign sock puppet dumping evidence of high-level corruption.

> The way DHS and local police specifically targeted journalists? How many of them were killed/disappeared? If you can't cite a number in the hundreds (or even one case), your comparison is false.

Downvote opposing views without response and move on. This website is pathetic.

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#214

Post by AndrewBissell »

woodruffw wrote: post #193
harry8 wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 pie…

Do you have any thoughts on why the FBI slow walked the Jeffrey Epstein investigation since the 1990s? Why they still haven't raided his ranch property in New Mexico? Why they seem to have done nothing with the extensive cache of CDs they raided from his Manhattan townhouse?

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#216

Post by boomboomsubban »

seppin wrote: post #208
boomboomsubban wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.

No he is a Kremlin agent for using his once storied organization for espionage. The RT job was to point out the obvious relationship between himself and Russian propaganda efforts going back decades.

It has only been one decade since he created a show that RT broadcast, but you've done nothing to show why that relationship makes him a Kremlin agent but not King and Ventura.

This argument is ridiculous. If there was any actual evidence he was a Kremlin agent, why would they currently be using the flimsy hacking charges to extradite him?

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#217

Post by woodruffw »

AndrewBissell wrote: post #214
woodruffw wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 pie…

Do you have any thoughts on why the FBI slow walked the Jeffrey Epstein investigation since the 1990s? Why they still haven't raided his ranch property in New Mexico? Why they seem to have done nothing with the extensive cache of CDs they raided from his Manhattan townhouse?

Not particularly, no. I think there's a world of difference between an established part of the FBI's history and (what would be) mostly speculation on my part.

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#218

Post by arminiusreturns »

AndrewBissell wrote: post #211
arminiusreturns wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> 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 batahit crazy). The parent is clearly lampooning this perspective, not advancing it unironically. But I can kind of understand mistaking it for the real thing, the insistence on denying the possibility of conspiracies has reached some pretty serious Poe's Law proport…

Oh my, I feel a bit ridiculous now. Thank you for the whoosh warning. Side note: I am convinced this is a side effect of me being way too serious, I need to learn to lighten up a bit.

Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]

#219

Post by jessaustin »

arminiusreturns wrote: post #218
AndrewBissell wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 batahit crazy). The parent is clearly lampooning this perspective, not advancing it unironically. But I can kind of understand mistaking it for the real thing, the insistence on denying the possibility of conspiracies has reached some pretty serious Poe's Law proport…

Oh my, I feel a bit ridiculous now. Thank you for the whoosh warning. Side note: I am convinced this is a side effect of me being way too serious, I need to learn to lighten up a bit.

It's kind of discouraging when the TLAs don't even bother showing up... we all just end up talking past each other!
Post reply on HN