[flagged]
Why did journalists help the Justice Department identify a leaker?
21–30 of 37 posts
Re: Why did journalists help the Justice Department identify a leaker?
#22> Why is the media so eager to help the Justice Department by supplying potentially viable leads? Because journalist-activists are now part of the military-industrial complex and are fully aligned with the intelligence apparatus. > Bellingcat, meanwhile, went further and virtually handed over the potential origin point of the leak by specifying the exact name of the chatroom where the documents appear to have first b…
Maybe you should speak with a little less confidence.
Let me quote from the opening paragraphs of the Wikipedia entry for the source you just quoted:
“ A fringe website,[23] it is known for misleading reporting[24] and sympathetic coverage of authoritarian regimes.[1][15][25] The Grayzone has denied human rights abuses against Uyghurs,[29] promulgated conspiracy theories about Venezuela, Xinjiang, Syria and other regions,[30][31] and promoted pro-Russian propaganda during the Russian invasion of Ukraine.[28] The Grayzone has been described by Commentary as a propaganda shop devoted to pushing pro-Assad, pro-Maduro, pro-Putin, and pro-Hamas narratives.[32]”
Link: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grayzone
Or this section from the Wikipedia entry for the author of that “article”.
“ Blumenthal has contributed to broadcasts on RT (formerly known as Russia Today) on many occasions.[13] In December 2015, during a visit to Moscow presumed by multiple sources to have been paid for by the Kremlin,[19][22] Blumenthal was a guest at RT's 10 Years On Air anniversary party attended by President Vladimir Putin, then-Lieutenant General Michael Flynn of the United States and English politician Ken Livingstone.[19][13][23] In an interview with Tucker Carlson on Fox News in November 2017, Blumenthal defended RT against "the charge that it’s Kremlin propaganda."[13][24]
He has contributed on multiple occasions to Sputnik radio,[22][25] as well as to Iran's Press TV[26][27] and China's CGTN.[28] Blumenthal founded The Grayzone website within a month after his visit to Moscow.[5]”
Re: Why did journalists help the Justice Department identify a leaker?
#23Working to identify the source of a damaging disclosure of classified information about an ongoing war where an ally is suffering at the hands of a massive invasion force is prime, grade A, investigative journalism.
[flagged]
Re: Why did journalists help the Justice Department identify a leaker?
#24Bellingcat isn’t a news org. Most of what I saw was rehashes of their analysis. Second, journalists use their own judgement or what to publish. Had the kid given it to a news org the reporting would have been redacted. I object to the new definition of “leaking” that tries to make all cases of it unquestionably good. People can die due to info.
>I object to the new definition of “leaking” that tries to make all cases of it unquestionably good. I don't think this has ever been the case. There's still large contingents of the US that think the Snowden leaks were part of a Russian operation, that the Manning leaks were bad and so on. I wasn't alive during Vietnam, but were those leaks considered unquestionably good?
What does the word “all” mean?
Those examples seem to be addressing a statement that no one made. Is that in an effort to make people think a different statement was made, one that’s trivial to disprove rather than addressing the actual statement?
Re: Why did journalists help the Justice Department identify a leaker?
#25Bellingcat isn’t a news org. Most of what I saw was rehashes of their analysis. Second, journalists use their own judgement or what to publish. Had the kid given it to a news org the reporting would have been redacted. I object to the new definition of “leaking” that tries to make all cases of it unquestionably good. People can die due to info.
>I object to the new definition of “leaking” that tries to make all cases of it unquestionably good. I don't think this has ever been the case. There's still large contingents of the US that think the Snowden leaks were part of a Russian operation, that the Manning leaks were bad and so on. I wasn't alive during Vietnam, but were those leaks considered unquestionably good?
I don't know if Snowden was a Russian operation, I don't think the facts are there for that. However, I do think Snowden committed treason by doing what he did, and so did this National Guardsman. It doesn't matter the reason or morale justification, breaking the law is still breaking the law. If you're going to call for the prosecution of Trump you can't in the next sentence say yeah but Snowden broke the law for the right reason so it's ok. That sort of hair-splitting is disingenuous.
Re: Why did journalists help the Justice Department identify a leaker?
#26That this happened the way it did is deeply concerning and should anger you. The media worked with a rare diligence to help the government apprehend someone who made information about which we've been repeatedly lied to available to the public. Let's not forget both the media and the government have spent the last couple of weeks on a gaslighting tour telling us the leak was Russian propaganda, etc. The tenacity with…
> Let's not forget both the media and the government have spent the last couple of weeks on a gaslighting tour telling us the leak was Russian propaganda, etc. Who has been saying this? First time I've heard it. The closest I've heard is that there's two versions of the "leak", one with modified numbers making it look better for Russia. Which still appears to be true. > We have US troops on the ground presumably figh…
Well, the New York Times opined on the possibilty...
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/07/us/politics/classified-do...
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation wrote about it https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/ukraine-russia-military-leaks-...
One of the first reactions from the government and Ukraine was that this was all Russian disinformation. Then within a couple of days other media sources weighed in and there was considerable debate, until this guy was identified.
So yes. Many people have hypothesized this was Russian disinformation.
Here's two more: Al Jazerra: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/4/10/us-scrambles-to-fin...
and NBC: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/pentagon-...
Re: Why did journalists help the Justice Department identify a leaker?
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I object to the new definition of “leaking” that tries to make all cases of it unquestionably good. I don't think this has ever been the case. There's still large contingents of the US that think the Snowden leaks were part of a Russian operation, that the Manning leaks were bad and so on. I wasn't alive during Vietnam, but were those leaks considered unquestionably good?
What does the word “all” mean? Those examples seem to be addressing a statement that no one made. Is that in an effort to make people think a different statement was made, one that’s trivial to disprove rather than addressing the actual statement?
I have no idea, you're the one who used it.
Re: Why did journalists help the Justice Department identify a leaker?
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Let's not forget both the media and the government have spent the last couple of weeks on a gaslighting tour telling us the leak was Russian propaganda, etc. Who has been saying this? First time I've heard it. The closest I've heard is that there's two versions of the "leak", one with modified numbers making it look better for Russia. Which still appears to be true. > We have US troops on the ground presumably figh…
Well, the New York Times opined on the possibilty... https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/07/us/politics/classified-do... Canadian Broadcasting Corporation wrote about it https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/ukraine-russia-military-leaks-... One of the first reactions from the government and Ukraine was that this was all Russian disinformation. Then within a couple of days other media sources weighed in and there was considerabl…
None of that really seems to support this claim:
> "Let's not forget both the media and the government have spent the last couple of weeks on a gaslighting tour telling us the leak was Russian propaganda, etc."
They all call it a leak and specify that parts of it appear doctored, which is also what I said, right? Has any of that changed or been disproven?
Re: Why did journalists help the Justice Department identify a leaker?
#29> Why is the media so eager to help the Justice Department by supplying potentially viable leads? Because journalist-activists are now part of the military-industrial complex and are fully aligned with the intelligence apparatus. > Bellingcat, meanwhile, went further and virtually handed over the potential origin point of the leak by specifying the exact name of the chatroom where the documents appear to have first b…
Bellingcat founder publicized OSINT tools and techniques that are used by citizens to reports/find out what's happening in protests. Those tools are used in France to report on the action of a "liberal" government and were used in Israel to report on the action of the closest US ally.
Also, Bellingcat brought a lot of people into OSINT and ridiculed Russia multiple times (including the one time they modified the wikipedia page of a USSR airplane to fit their narrative on MH17). The thing is, they do not only write articles, they publish their data and methodology, and encourage you to try yourself. It's not just consummer thinking "ahah, Russia Opsec is shit", it's engineers and people interested in OSINT finding out how incompetent Russia is.
The one thing i don't like about Bellingcat is that they don't write when they fail to find something. I understand that for journalists, its bad to report on nothing, but people like me learn more wth failure than with success. But the Osint community is big and i'm not a Bellingcat contributor anymore, i found better shoes (and in my language).
Re: Why did journalists help the Justice Department identify a leaker?
#30That this happened the way it did is deeply concerning and should anger you. The media worked with a rare diligence to help the government apprehend someone who made information about which we've been repeatedly lied to available to the public. Let's not forget both the media and the government have spent the last couple of weeks on a gaslighting tour telling us the leak was Russian propaganda, etc. The tenacity with…
> Let's not forget both the media and the government have spent the last couple of weeks on a gaslighting tour telling us the leak was Russian propaganda, etc. Who has been saying this? First time I've heard it. The closest I've heard is that there's two versions of the "leak", one with modified numbers making it look better for Russia. Which still appears to be true. > We have US troops on the ground presumably figh…
[deleted]