Vault 7 (wikileaks data dump)

I like this guy's take on all of this

When the Gov wanted in to the Iphone i was surprised they didn't already have a way in.

No idea if this has been linked here but there it is.

Dude, you claimed that there was only one point in that article. Why the hell would I argue with you? I've been on the internet long enough to know a fool's errand when I see one. You either are or you aren't reasonable enough to see the issues.

in other news...

It does. It uses 3rd party erroneous reporting to discredit wikileaks analysis. That is its singular point. And uses 2 examples of this (messaging apps and smart tv hacking).

Unless you think the argument "well wikileaks thinks that the CIA wants to hack cars for assassinations, but we think it is only surveillance - see how insincere wikileaks is? " as a valid/important point. I do not, even though i humored it for the sake of discussion.

I argued on every example articles gives, even argued in favor of criticizing the wikileaks assumption on the smart car example and your only reply on this is "you are all a bunch of idiots to discuss anything with you". Are you sure you are being the reasonable agent on this discussion?

If you think i missed sth important please tell me. That is why I insist. But if you do not want to discuss and only affirm your point then why are you on this thread?

2 Likes

neither of you are going to convince the other of anything, you both want to believe what you want to way too hard. I'd suggest dropping it.

I want to discuss the matter because i think it is important. I am not trying to convince him. I am trying to understand his arguments cause i see them as incomplete and not supported. And his reaction is basically "f!@# off".

If we drop heated discussions and any attempt to refutes each others argument why have a damn forum in the first place? Just to agree with each other?

then do so from a more dispassionate, facts-based perspective. note that I've done so, and he's chosen only to respond to those who haven't, because you're "easy pickings" for lack of a better term.

Interesting...I do not even see the way that i replied as particularly passionate. But i guess you are right on the fact that it should be more impersonal....sorry about that @ImprovizoR

That's because this has 2 purposes.
1. Distract the media from Russia/Trump
2. Trump launching a pre-emptive strike against the intelligence community that's planning to take him down.

All this stuff is what we knew already but with the details we didn't know and as much as it's important, we have to also recognise that Assange is now Trump's lapdog. Also note that Farage visited Assange yesterday.

1 Like
  1. Please cite substantive evidence of Trump Administration and Putin's Collusion (Government officials Talking to diplomats is not collusion, it's literal diplomacy)

  2. Please cite evidence of Wikileaks' coordination of their efforts with the trump administration

(and no, primary sources are not too much to ask)

Far more concerning are the opportunistic motions in the house/senate (defunding PP, Net Neutrality, possible dismantling/defunding of EPA, DOE) that are happening under the cover of this media shitstorm manufactured by both partisan camps, than any supposed global Right wing/Russian/alternative media conspiracy.

Seems you're so busy chasing shadows that you're blind to the real, impactful problems with having a GOP-dominated legislature under Trump.

3 Likes

If by lapdog you mean a tool to achieve an end, than maybe yes. But he doesn't control him. Not directly, nor indirectly. Which, again doesn't mean that Assange isn't being used as an asset.
It might be a distraction, certainly wouldn't be the first time.

I've heard talk about this yesterday here.
Budget cuts are mentioned, and also that guy is apparently being slandered for having ties with the fossil fuel industry.

Sorry for the off topic but this is fun stuff. By the time anyone has any concrete evidence of anything, dubious legislature will already be in full power. There's a reason why we call them "the elites", they really know what they're doing, they've been doing it since forever, and they're now playing hacky sack with the media and public opinion.

I'm always also trying to factor in that possibility because I have seen it happening. Think it'd be great idea for news to only do wide range of side things I may have missed while this hype period was on, by expecting that I haven't been following anything else during these past two weeks.

"Hey Mr.Golfish, as you were travelling to the other side of your glass bowl for the past two weeks, in the meantime we have collected these 17 things for you to digest!"

It's always two weeks which right now just enables me to expect the worse when that period is complete.
OR if one's timing is well planned you can pretty much state anything like day before, its like too much Battlefront has been going on I don't care even if you suddenly improve performance by 231%. Then afterwards its hard to re-hype that as its old news. :D

Show me your warrant and I'll consider it. First of all, I'm not a Journalist and am as free as anyone else to express an opinion, secondly, Who the F do you think you are and what do you think gives you the right to interrogate me? I present a personal opinion based upon a life time's study of History and Politics which has repeating patterns. Until I run for some kind of public office I'm not answerable to you or anyone else. If you don't like what I say you're welcome to disagree or ignore but don't ever think you have the right to demand anything from me.

It all comes down to to one fact: accuracy doesn't sell (or drive CPM)

In other words, you can't substantiate your claims (that you're likely just parroting from people you follow on twitter or similar), so you're trying to frame me as some sort of fascist because I'm challenging their factual basis. Have fun with that.

Also, this reads like the Navy Seal Rant copypasta. A little self awareness goes a long way.

2 Likes

You couldn't be more wrong. Here's a simple diagram:

Russia hacks data -> Provides to Assange -. WikiLeaks leaks data

Farage is Trump team's go between to Assange

Oh and I'm not calling you a Fascist, I'm calling you a bully

The point people seem to miss is that if Assange is compromised by Russia, Trump or anyone else, is there more that's being held back? Russia and China are pretty adept at this stuff and so is Israel, how do we know that other information is not being sat on because of who is or isn't bank rolling Wikileaks or any other organisation?

That's a fair point but Assange comes across as a narcissist who believes his own press. In many respects I believe it's more about personal glory than "the cause". When I see Snowden interviewed I get a very different impression. I don't trust Assange because I believe he's a very flawed character. On top of this, I don't underestimate the effect of having spent 4 and a half years as a virtual prisoner. I also don't believe Ecuador can afford to be bankrolling him. He may have done a great deal of good, which I truly appreciate but his motives are unclear and in them circumstances you have to be prepared to question what context that adds to the intelligence.

Did you actually read that?

(I just did, because I'm not intellectually lazy) and whatever you may think, It is neither substantive nor evidence of a russian wikileaks/trump conspiracy.

It's emails from a 4-5 year old case in which a right wing political party attempts to contact Julian Assange (this is absolutely par for the course if they think they can leverage public opinion with support, means next to nothing), a few news clips, and truckloads of innuendo. If this is your benchmark for fact and evidence, I weep for your both your reading comprehension and any person who is subjected to your standing as a juror on their case.

This is some of the most lazy, desperate yellow journalism I've seen in quite a while.

Your "simple diagram" is only simple insofar as that's the demographic it's targeting.

apparently asking for sources is bullying now. What a time to be alive

If you want to make accusations of worldwide conspiracies that involve large nuclear powers and the one verifiable source that publishes their unsavory information, it's not even approaching a stretch to ask for something to back it up.