“Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you.” ― Joseph Heller
Tell that to Arjen Kamphuis.
CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]
231–240 of 299 posts
Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]
#232Am I alone in finding that these slides read like the ramblings of a looney?
Lol, found the CIA plant. But seriously, how much time/money is it worth to put to planting agents in online forums like this to both monitor and influence?
Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]
#233Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
Again, it's proof of a relationship. His actions via Wikileaks is proof he is a Russian asset. King and Ventura didn't participate in a coordinated attack on American democracy, so your comparison remains useless.
> If there was any actual evidence he was a Kremlin agent
"why don't spy agencies burn sources and methods to charge Assange with espionage when he's already in prison for other charges?" That's really not how it works.
Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]
#234What happened to Assange is what happens when you take moralistic nonsense designed to control the masses and actually try to apply it to the real world. It's like when people try to apply feminist theory or diversity theory. (Some notes on diversity theory here, turn on showdead in your profile to see: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25505252)
I think either Assange only realized it when he got to the point of no return... or will never realize it. But at least, it's a lesson for everyone else who is sharp enough to see it.
If you're smart enough, you can work for the elites and rise in the ranks, and get what you want.
I'm sure Snowden had time to realize it... except he had settle for working for different set of elites than what he started out doing. Overall, I think he got pretty lucky. Unfortunately for Assange, things don't look so good.
Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]
#235Earlier 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…
The Washington Post wasn't neutral either when it investigated Watergate. They had previously battled Nixon and had close ties with JFK and LBJ.
Nonetheless, in that case as well as in the case of Wikileaks, any result of reporting the truth should be blamed on the people who committed the unpopular acts, not the people who reported them.
Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]
#236Earlier 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…
No. Absolutely not.
The incredulity is 100% genuine. Just seeing how everyone reacts looking at and seeing how absolutely fucking insane it is to have the FBI and their powers in a building named "J Edgar Hoover"
Someone said the fbi reformed since those days of criminality. Why would anyone believe that while they continue to celebrate J Edgar Hoover. While they go to work to protect the rule of law to a building named J. Edgar Hoover. Why would any judge take the word of any FBI agent when they've covered up criminal behaviour, and performed it and lied about it instead of arresting J. Edgar Hoover the first second they became aware of what he was?
They said they weren't criminals when Hoover was in charge. They lied. They continue to exult Hoover while claiming they aren't criminals anymore. Who actually isn't feeling sick at the idea of believing that? Hoover is the biggest FBI hero. A vicious criminal thug running the FBI as a criminal conspiracy is the FBI's biggest hero. Says so right there on their HQ.
It's something that's impossible to get your head around. 30 years ago. No sign of it changing?
The FBI flagrantly advertise their lack of respect for the rule of law. That's on all of us.
Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]
#237He 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 is actively trying to create Narrative #2, which is a bit concerning.
Not just Pompeo and the CIA, the mainstream news industry.
Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]
#238Earlier quoted context omitted.
People keep saying this, but never include the story. What's the meat behind the claim that they did this?
The New York Times did reporting on the WikiLeaks disclosure of the Clinton emails that suggested the timing indicated political motivation. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/27/us/politics/assange-timed...
The same New York Times that endorsed hillary?
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/25/opinion/sunday/hillary-cl...
I'd take anything the New York Times's "reports" on political/etc with a grain of salt.
Also, I'm of the opinion that all news/media organizations are propaganda organizations. But so what? Let these propagandists fight to expose each other rather than colluding together to mislead the public by serving the same state.
Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]
#239Earlier quoted context omitted.
Talking about "connecting the dots" is a bit naive in this context, though. The NSA has been pursuing what they called a "total information awareness" program since the late 90s / early 2000s. The goal is to collect all digital data about all of the world citizens, so it can be used later in case that's deemed "necessary" for "national security." Basically like Facebook+Google, plus geolocation and mobile phone data…
I don't think it's naive; I think you have correctly interpreted their goals and the ends those goals are structured to achieve. Total information awareness, to be used in circumstances where it's necessary for national security. Pull the scare quotes off and it's directly in line with the NSA's mission "to gain a decision advantage for the Nation and our allies under all circumstances."
There is absolutely no reason why the use should be limited, now or in the future. In practice, the information will be fed to automated systems effectively putting everyone into surveillance, and I wouldn't be surprised if the number of manual pulls is in the 100 000 people per year range.
Re: CIA vs. Wikileaks [video]
#240Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
Again, it's proof of a relationship. His actions via Wikileaks is proof he is a Russian asset. King and Ventura didn't participate in a coordinated attack on American democracy, so your comparison remains useless. > If there was any actual evidence he was a Kremlin agent "why don't spy agencies burn sources and methods to charge Assange with espionage when he's already in prison for other charges?" That's really not…
Publishing reliable information that is politically relevant is not a "coordinated attack on American democracy," it's journalism. The only link you've provided is common between the three of them.
>why don't spy agencies burn sources and methods to charge Assange with espionage when he's already in prison for other charges?
We already know that all of his communication in the Ecuadorian embassy were tapped for years, what are they protecting?