They claimed they did not consent to rawdogging, which is why Sweden charged him. Otherwise there would be no crime, even in Sweden. Consensually banging without a raincoat is legal, otherwise there wouldn’t be any more Swedes.
Am I understanding correct that they’ve now dumped a bunch of government documents on the net as a response?
I very much doubt wikileaks held on to anything of substance, they tended to release everything they got.
From the freshly unsealed indictment, Assange is accused of helping Manning to hack a password to get unauthorized access. So if that is true, and it sure sounds like they have evidence, he’s shit out of luck as far as 1st amendment protections go.
1 Like
Idk who would want to stand in solidarity with him.
Someone already posted a link to QAnon. It’s the internet, man. People are batshit crazy.
That was debunked ages ago.
It was obvious that things could only end one way for Assange. Now let’s see if they were bluffing about releasing a bunch of intel if this were to happen. If I had to guess I’d say that it was a bluff.
1 Like
link?
From what I have heard just a month ago it was not
It was debunked even before Mueller indicted those 12 Russians. I can’t be arsed to look for a two or three year old article. The indictments should be evidence enough. The only people still pushing the physical hack story are Russian trolls and conspiracy theorists serving as useful idiots.
2 Likes
That’s the problem all too often today, people go by “what they heard” rather than what is actually substantiated to be true.
1 Like
I would agree, I have read that document @ImprovizoR linked already, however (need to find the video) there are people that do not believe wholly the claims made with reasons that sound fairly correct to me. I am inclined to agree with the email hack, but as of now do not agree the DNC was done by the same people.
I could be wrong no doubt, could just be something like a qanon crazy idea, but I can only go off what I know and I will admit I do not know all the information on this subject.
1 Like
okay, lets get to the bottom of this!
4 Likes
While I do hold great respect for whistle blowers, I have no respect for Assange. He has no qualms about just DUMPING sensitive data that could have disastrous effects for undercover operatives. He doesn’t give two shits about people out in the field who could get killed, or who could have their families put in danger from said info.
That’s why I had such great respect for Snowden. He actually went through his info, and made sure that actual sensitive information wasn’t leaked that could actually harm anyone.
1 Like
The Snowden files would have been void without Wikileaks though.
Why? Snowden didn’t release anything to wikileaks.
They did help him escape Hong Kong, but that was after he gave up all his stolen data.
1 Like
It sure sounded like they had “substantial evidence” that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction as well.
I’m curious if his extradition is going to create some blowback.
I’m not talking political, but hackers and botnets going after the US government and intelligence community sites and databases. There have been similar retaliations before.
1 Like
?? What
Indeed, but this isn’t a political thing, it’s an indictment. They will need to show their cards.
The Dutch intel agency literally saw them do it. They hacked into their HQ (computers, cameras etc.) and saw everyone involved and what they were doing. That’s how the FBI got to know the names of the people involved. Russians aren’t nearly as good as they’d like the world to think.
Interesting, have not heard that. Will have to look it up
Well seeing as we have such unconstitutional authoritarian power, imma say asap.