Slashdot Mirror

Assange's "Deadman Switch" clicked last night (and you have to love the file dates. . .)

And the "insurance torrents" are all back up:

https://www.reddit.com/r/The_D...

It annoys me that after all these years that Assange was ridiculized for his claims that the US was after him, that finally gets arrested with a US warrant of extradition and instantly all this denial disappears and the US warrant is considered entirely justified and there is no problem at all with it. The issue at hand here is that this is an attack on the press, saying that whenever the press publishes something the government (or other players) disapprove of, they will find a way to get back at them. And that is how every journalist who investigates government business will understand it and will feel that their freedom of movement is shrinking fast.
I know what it is to catch someone on a technicality and that is what this is. You can always say about a technicality that you're applying the law and the law should be applied. On the other hand if you want to catch someone you can always arrange it for such a technicality, or worse to turn up. As I said before, that is why under Obama they decided that this was a dangerous precedent. Maybe something can be made with the case of the password. The practice of requesting more information from leakers is entirely standard practice with any journalist who functions.
Your vision of what a journalist should do is deeply flawed. I'm familiar with it, the impartial/objective neutralist journalist. It has done a lot of damage to the profession and it exists exactly to remove all the danger from journalists. There are good journalists who swear by it, but only because they don't see that they're actually doing something else. You want the journalist to be reliable and complete when he tells you what he is looking at. But a true neutral journalist looks where he is told to look and that makes him effectively neutered. And incidentally that is what most journalists are now, mere copywriters, mouthpieces and cheerleaders who teach you nothing about what is going on and make a big deal of red herrings like Russiagate. And if the case falls apart they deny all fault claiming they are just reporting and not involved othewise

I have a document here with Assanges version (2013) of the events leading up to his request for asylum in the embassy ( https://wikileaks.org/IMG/html... ) . The difference with 'what everyone knows' is remarkable. And how is that? Because your true journalism was not told to look at it.

'Memba when Glenn Thrush of Politico was exposed seeking Podesta's approval of articles about Clinton. Even Thrush wrote "please don't tell anyone" and "I'm such a hack". The consequences for Thrush? He was hired by the New York Times after the election.

'Memba when a New York Times reporter called Melania a hooker and they wouldn't even release the name of the reporter that said it, let alone fire her.

'Memba when The New York Times used eliminationist rhetoric as the lead sentence of an article on the op-ed page in December 2009: "A message to progressives: By all means, hang Senator Joe Lieberman in effigy." Burning an effigy, like burning an American flag, is constitutionally protected symbolic speech. It is also about as eliminationist as speech can get, short of a true threat or incitement.

'Memba when New York Times advocated for authoritarian China-style government?

'Memba when NYT journalist Ali Watkins blamed Trump lawyers for leaks, while she was fucking a Senate committee staffer twice her age who was leaking her classified info? Her punishment? The journalist was reassigned and given a "mentor" instead of being fired for breaking one of the most basic rules of journalism.

'Memba when the New York Times praised a coup in Venezuela? And stated in print, falsely, "With yesterday's resignation of President Hugo ChÃvez, Venezuelan democracy is no longer threatened by a would-be dictator. Mr. ChÃvez, a ruinous demagogue, stepped down after the military intervened and handed power to a respected business leader, Pedro Carmona."

'Memba when the New York Times finally admitted in print to being a liberal newspaper?

Google hired Al Qaeda sympathizers from George Soros's organization to tune the filters. Remember how 4chan turned Microsoft's Tay AI into a Nazi? Google hired Muslim right-wingers to do the same thing for their AI that will be censoring online comments. And they made it a homeland security policy so you are paying for it. And in Europe they made it illegal to disagree with the policy, and Eric Schmidt is a big fan of how they do things in Europe.

Remember: Google Is Not What It Seems

On March 12, 2013, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told Congress that intel officials were not collecting mass data on tens of millions of Americans. NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden soon revealed material that proved Clapper's testimony false: The government had been gathering and storing data from ordinary Americans' phone records, email and Internet use.

Yeah sure Ivan. Deflect and make your dear Putin look not that bad in the end in comparison.
Maybe we should all start using hardware from Russia, because we know that those are totally safe for the consumer. And we also know that Russia's government is the most benign, loving and caring for the well being of those under their jurisdiction.
No wait, we know that is not true. Even wikileaks, whose founder hates the US and tries everything to not antagonize Russia could not see around this little titbit: https://wikileaks.org/spyfiles...

Well, at least you don't pretend to be a westerner here.

"portions of sealed transcripts leaked that implicate WikiLeaks and Assange in directing hackers to target governments and corporations."

There are serious charges and would require strong independent verifiable evidence. What exactly is the evidence that Assange in directing hackers to target governments and corporations. An alternative reading of the issue and I produce the evidence below, is that this is part of the strategy by the US deepstate to discredit Wikileaks and Assange:

"The WikiLeaks Threat": An Overview by Palandr Technologies, HBGary Federal, and Berico Technologies

* Security: Need to get to the Swedish document submission server. Need to create doubt about their security and increase awareness that interac6on with WikiLeaks will expose you.

* Feed the fuel between the feuding groups. Disinforma6on. Create messages around ac6ons to sabotage or discredit the opposing organiza6on. Submit fake documents and then call out the error.

* Create concern over the security of the infrastructure. Create exposure stories. If the process is believed to not be secure they are done.

* Cyber attacks against the infrastructure to get data on document submitters. This would kill the project. Since the servers are now in Sweden and France putting a team together to get access is more straightforward.

* Media campaign to push the radical and reckless nature of wikileaks activities. Sustained pressure. Does nothing for the fanatics, but creates concern and doubt amongst moderates.

* Search for leaks. Use social media to profile and identify risky behavior of employees.

* Palantir is broadly deployed throughout the National intelligence and defense communities.

* Comprised of decorated talent with proven analytical expertise from throughout the Armed Forces.

* Traditional responses will fail; we must employ the best investigative team, currently employed by the most sensitive of national security agencies ...

7. Huawei phones lack the backdoors that allow the US intelligence community to spy on its own people.

That's it, really. They don't trust us, not at all. You really have to wonder why? Why do they feel the need to spy on us and know what we're thinking? Our elected government made this illegal, and the intelligence community promptly broke the law and lied about it.

On March 12, 2013, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told Congress that intel officials were not collecting mass data on tens of millions of Americans. NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden soon revealed material that proved Clapper's testimony false: The government had been gathering and storing data from ordinary Americans' phone records, email and Internet use.

They don't feel any obligation to us at all. It's OK if they break the laws we passed with our elected government and lie to our faces - they don't feel safe if we can keep secrets from them. Fuck democracy, they have wars to start. If we all started buying Huawei they would feel very unsafe indeed.

Here's the deal with fake news. The corporate news agencies have a history of printing propaganda for the government. They started doing it for war strategy as a patriotic duty. Then they did it because their friends in the government asked them to. Then they did it for money, with the government's bribery disguised as ad buys from military contractors. Then the news agencies started selling the same service to foreign governments. The most successful news agencies were the ones that could sell the most fake news placement to the most foreign powers, while everyone else went out of business.

Then Obama and Clinton had the bright idea to put their campaign PR staff - Ben Rhodes, Zack Exley, Amanda Marcotte, etc - inside the very top national security agencies where they could tell the newspapers to print whatever they wanted, deliver the funding from your pocket, call it a national security priority, use the surveillance capabilities of the CIA, NSA, and GCHQ to identify anyone who resisted their PR, and use their authority to get those people fired from their jobs. They were caught selling access to this media/surveillance/punishment network to the Rothshilds, China, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Hamas, and al-Qaeda. That was Gamergate.

With all surviving mainstream media sources compromised and obviously fake as fuck, new news sources are cropping up to compete with them. Being new to the business, they have wildly varying quality and some of them like Zero Hedge and Russia Toady are run by Russian intelligence. However, any dissent threatens a very profitable business -- control of state funding through control of the human mind through control of information -- so the corrupted NATO governments are aggressively working hard at stamping out any and all competition by redefining everybody as a violent right-wing extremist and drawing state funding to harass and intimidate them.

The corrupted government agents are easy to identify. They use the words "transgender" and "social justice" and call anyone who disagrees with them "alt-right."

Google is helping al-Qaeda censor the internet.

They and their partners intentionally rig information services to control elections so that the winners won't prosecute them, they will suppress their political opposition, and they keep getting government funding.

Google Is Not What It Seems

That's why the intelligence agencies are getting freaked out and ringing the alarm bell - they don't have back doors in Chinese equipment. Thus, using Chinese equipment is safest for me, the ordinary American. I have much more to fear from my own government than any distant one. The US government kills people left and right with no conscience problems.

They're not protecting YOU, they're protecting themselves. It's all the compassion of a farmer installing electric fences when his cattle think they might be better off not being slaughtered. This isn't some kind of loony conspiracy theory, we know for a fact they lied about spying on us. On March 12, 2013, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told Congress that intel officials were not collecting mass data on tens of millions of Americans. NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden soon revealed material that proved Clapper's testimony false: The government had been gathering and storing data from ordinary Americans' phone records, email and Internet use.

https://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/12/1210665_obama-leak-investigations-internal-use-only-pls-do-not.html

Glenn Thrush, the former senior staff writer at Politico who was outed when a WikiLeaks dump revealed that he ran an article by Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta prior to publishing. He wrote "please don't tell anyone" and "I'm such a hack". His punishment? After the election he was hired as a political correspondent for The New York Times.

Wikileaks detailing how the Democrats are coordinating with the media.

Liberal media listed and named.

This journalist specifically targets the clerk with a verbal tirade that includes multiple remarks about the employee's appearance, her social class and ability to do her job. She made fun of the female clerk's education job, weight and teeth, says she's better than the clerk because she's on TV.

Glenn Thrush, the former senior staff writer at Politico who was outed when a WikiLeaks dump revealed that he ran an article by Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta prior to publishing. He wrote "please don't tell anyone" and "I'm such a hack". His punishment? After the election he was hired as a political correspondent for The New York Times.

Wikileaks detailing how the Democrats are coordinating with the media.

Liberal media listed and named.

This journalist specifically targets the clerk with a verbal tirade that includes multiple remarks about the employee's appearance, her social class and ability to do her job. She made fun of the female clerk's education job, weight and teeth, says she's better than the clerk because she's on TV.

Glenn Thrush, the former senior staff writer at Politico who was outed when a WikiLeaks dump revealed that he ran an article by Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta prior to publishing. He wrote "please don't tell anyone" and "I'm such a hack". His punishment? After the election he was hired as a political correspondent for The New York Times.

Wikileaks detailing how the Democrats are coordinating with the media.

Liberal media listed and named.

This journalist specifically targets the clerk with a verbal tirade that includes multiple remarks about the employee's appearance, her social class and ability to do her job. She made fun of the female clerk's education job, weight and teeth, says she's better than the clerk because she's on TV.

2016 was the watershed year when the mainstream media finally dropped the mask and came out as full-throated political partisans. They openly supported the most corrupt candidate for President in American history. Their treatment of Trump was unprecedented in its hostility. The media live in an echo chamber where they think that they are loved and adored by the population. They believe they are the final authority on truth and that we, their grateful audience, should believe everything they tell us.

"The Times completely missed the story, and misled its readers in the process." Source: New York Times.

Wikileaks detailing how the Democrats are coordinating with the media. Organization after organization, CNN, McClatchy, Time, WSJ, the list goes on and on. How do any of these people still have jobs after being exposed like this?

Look at all these respected journalists express surprise, dismay, and a total lack of understanding that Hillary lost. They even admit it: "I genuinely do not understand America."

CBS's John Dickerson: Donald Trump Didn't Ruin the Press's Reputation, We Did That Ourselves

Regarding the ODNI report, I'll just leave this here as it covers most of the bases. More amazing are the points you did not argue over: you do not point to the report or any arguments or evidence from it. It's hard to do that for a document with a bunch of unsupported conclusory statements, though.

> But you've got a real knack for finding the meat of a story, which obviously is how many agencies contributed to the report written by Coats which was then ignored and dismissed by Trump against the counsel of virtually everyone around him. Yeah, the story there is the number of agencies.

That was *your* argument. You are the one who trumpeted the number of agencies as proving something, I said it was BS and challenged you to point to items of substance from the ODNI report. You failed to do so and then created this smokescreen as if I was the one claiming this statistic was meaningful. If you admit that it's BS and don't want it attacked, then maybe it shouldn't be the only damned factoid about the report that you cite. Maybe you should actually discuss the *factual basis* of said report as I've repeatedly challenged you to do so.

You do not because you cannot. Heck, you didn't even bother to link to the ODNI report because apparently it's not even important, despite you being the one to put it into evidence. Then again, that would get us back to discussing the factual basis underlying the report and you'd run into trouble right at the start of the document when we see this -

Thus, while the conclusions in the report are all reflected in the classified assessment, the declassified report does not and cannot include the full supporting information, including specific intelligence and sources and methods.

I used to joke that my classified evidence can beat up your classified evidence, but I don't really have to any more. Half of this stuff on the origins of the Russia nonsense came about via this bogus FISA warrant against Carter Page.

Also, one of the leaked emails from waaaay back when floated the idea of attacking Trump on Russia, so we knew it was planned as far back as the campaign. You can claim that Wikileaks is Russian if you want, but you would have to prove them *wrong* on this email to counter the argument. I alsso hope you don't want to play the game that some have of pretending the emails were manipulated, because they're not and I've long ago posted on Slashdot a copy of the DKIM keys that provide cryptographic non-repudiation.

> OK. Well, just because I'm curious, I've got a question for you: has Russia been actively attacking and trying to undermine US and European democratic processes, yes or no?

All countries are interfering with all other countries, more or less, I'm more interested in the specifics of actual wrongdoing. For example, Obama had Steele & Halper, both foreign spies, running a lot of interference.

I don't generally consider uncovering corruption or making political arguments to be 'wrongdoing' though, at least in the moral sense, nor do I consider anonymous or pseudonymous speech on the internet to be that either, as if each country had some right to regulate whether or not the rest of the world could even talk about them online. There are definitely process crimes that it can run afoul of--which is why the Podesta group was

Google is not what it seems by Julian Assange. Hey, remember when Wikileaks was popular? Before they started talking about Gamergate and Hillary Clinton? Then suddenly no one followed them anymore and you never heard about them again.

As Google Spins, So Does Silicon Valley. Google trained the public relations departments of many major Silicon Valley companies. The public relations departments control what information the executives hear from the public, controlling their decision making process by proxy.

Google leaked plans to censor the Internet for the benefit of foreign powers

Google and Facebook are working "to solve one of the Internet's pervasive problem: Trolls" with Islamists who believe that any opposition to al-Qaeda is "Islamophobia"

Google Ideas Invites Online Harassers to Talk About Online Harassment with such notables as Randi Harper, Zoe Quinn, and Rose Eveleth from Shirtgate.

Anita Sarkeesian's Feminist Frequency was part of a campaign to empower "Muslim, Arab, and South Asian communities"

The folks at the NSA are jealous that they cannot have the same thing.

https://wikileaks.org/google-i...

https://wikileaks.org/Op-ed-Go...

The folks at the NSA are jealous that they cannot have the same thing.

https://wikileaks.org/google-i...

https://wikileaks.org/Op-ed-Go...

It sure is convenient when you can just dismiss arguments out of hand and never have to confront them.

Google is directly on record as being biased in their own words. I don't really care about what happened with the SOTU address, we already know about the bias at this point because we've been comparing results with other engines.

Funny thing, but I have a hard time finding anything from Wikileaks on Google, for example, never mind the emails are DKIM validated and true. I have to work hard to craft a search to find things I already know to be there... or just use another engine and find it on the first page, easily.

Funny how that works.

Sure, and that's how Trump gets criticized for saying everyone coming across the southern border are rapists, criminals, and 'animals'. Because the criticism leveled at him is always fair, without lies of omission, and never completely disingenuous smear tactics.

There's every reason not to trust Google's page ranking, just as there no reason to have faith in the actual popularity of what is 'trending' on Youtube, or how keywords in autocomplete are generated. There is no transparency that allows confidence, only the tattered motto of 'don't be evil'.

There is however the evidence that Google, or namely Eric Schmidt, remains an ally of the DNC and the Clinton campaign.

The problem comes when an ID system becomes mandatory or essentially mandatory for things it shouldn't be needed for in the first place

Excellent point, this is exactly the problem here. The legislation text itself says nothing at all about it being mandatory (although government lawyers in the 2017 Supreme Court case have argued that it should be). However, there are now at least 50 official schemes that require Aadhaar to utilise - anything from receiving social welfare payments, applying for a scholarship, opening a bank account, making any payment above a threshold (INR 50,000) or receiving treatment for - for example - HIV. So it isn't mandatory, but you basically need it to do anything remotely useful.

Not only this, but details of 130 million people and 100 million bank accounts have been leaked via four *government* websites, and a handy little backdoor has turned up (under the 'ExpressLane' programme) which allows the CIA real-time access to unencrypted Aadhaar data.

In short, it's a gigantic shit show.

Remember the Vault7 exploits that allow the CIA to hack people while making it look like it was Russians? Remember when the CIA claimed Russian hacking due to finding "Russian" malware on infected systems? From Vault 7: CIA can customize the "fingerprints" hacks leave behind and make it look like someone else did it. No, this is not some crazy conspiracy theory nonsense just because I said "CIA". This is for real.

Now, because the tools that the CIA developed to put a Russian fingerprint on any hack were leaked to hackers and rogue agents, anyone else can too, because the CIA was so utterly lax with their security. Any fingerprint is evidence of absolutely nothing, thanks to these leaks.

The CIA's Remote Devices Branch's UMBRAGE group. Yup, that's what they're called. But don't trust me, check it out yourself: https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...

Remember the Vault7 exploits that allow the CIA to hack people while making it look like it was Russians? Remember when the CIA claimed Russian hacking due to finding "Russian" malware on infected systems? From Vault 7: CIA can customize the "fingerprints" hacks leave behind and make it look like someone else did it. No, this is not some crazy conspiracy theory nonsense just because I said "CIA". This is for real.

Now, because the tools that the CIA developed to put a Russian fingerprint on any hack were leaked to hackers and rogue agents, anyone else can too, because the CIA was so utterly lax with their security. Any fingerprint is evidence of absolutely nothing, thanks to these leaks.

The CIA's Remote Devices Branch's UMBRAGE group. Yup, that's what they're called. But don't trust me, check it out yourself: https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...

You joking? The mainstream media that we know for a fact was colluding with the Democrats to throw the election for Hillary? We have hard proof; Wikileaks confirms. Freedom of the Press does not imply Honesty of the Press. The media tells only the story that confirms its own view, that in the end it was incapable of seeing an alternative outcome and of making a true risk assessment of the political variables - reaffirming the Hillary Clinton camp's own political myopia. This defines the parallel realities in which liberals, in their view of themselves, represent a morally superior character.

Here's CNN getting caught red-handed planting debate questions. http://imgur.com/a/OMD6b#ed8AV...

On June 16, 2014, Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank published a column alleging that a peaceful Muslim was nearly verbally lynched by violent Islamophobes at a Heritage Foundation-hosted panel. What Milbank described was despicable. Unfortunately for Milbank and the Washington Post's credibility, someone filmed the event and posted the film on YouTube. Panel discussants, including Frank Gaffney and Brigitte Gabriel, made important points in a courteous manner. Saba Ahmed, the peaceful Muslim, is a "family friend" of a bombing plotter who expressed a specific desire to murder children. It soon became clear that Milbank was, as one blogger put it, "making stuff up."

CNN cuts off congressman when he mentions Wikileaks with Clinton.

Ex-CBS reporter's book reveals how liberal media protects Obama

Compilation of CNN & MSNBC Cutting Guests Mics to Protect Hillary Clinton

The entire media endorsed Hillary.

CBS's John Dickerson: http://www.mediaite.com/online...">Donald Trump Didn't Ruin the Press's Reputation, We Did That Ourselves.

Here's the media changing headlines to attack Trump on dozens of occasions.

Look at all these respected journalists express surprise, dismay, and a total lack of understanding that Hillary lost. They even admit it: "I genuinely do not understand America."

Journalists don't want the media to stop being partisans, they just want them to be *more effective* partisans! To be more effective at beating Trump. The assumptions and goals are the same - Trump is evil, he should be destroyed. It never occurs to the media or their "critics" that the media is not supposed to have any skin in the game...you can only "lose" if you are fighting an opponent...and THAT'S THE PROBLEM.

What bothers me the most about the media is that not only are they horribly prejudiced - they don't even seem to be able to recognize their prejudice. That's so bad.

Citation needed.

Given.

Too bad that totally disagrees with your assertion. You claimed 92% of media supports Democrats. The reality is, from your own goddamn link, 7% of journalists are Republicans, 28% are Democrats, and the vast majority are independent.

It's a fact just a FYI

Your claim: "The media is a propaganda arm for the Democratic party". The facts: "The media" is NOT a monolithic entity. SOME reporters are biased towards Democrats, and SOME reporters are biased towards Republicans. Your own links show this, and agree with the link I posted showing a distribution of biases among media orgs.

Or the reporters who went to John Podesta's house for dinners?

Ooh... spooky. Guess what - I've had dinner with reporters, and I'm not a Republican or a Democrat! Reporters are just humans, and having dinner with someone is not a crime, or proof of bias.

There IS a slight leftward lean among media as a whole, but it is minimal and there are several mainstream (and reputable) media sources with a rightward lean that you can read if you prefer. Instead, Republicans scream "MSM BIAS!"to indiscriminately dismiss any piece of reality that isn't comfortably aligned with their political preferences. It's a war on the press, a war on truth, and a war on the simple idea that facts matter more than opinions. And YOU are defending it.

Citation needed.

Given. You can also find the wapo story on it if you really want.

Naked assertion. You've got nothing whatsoever to back this up.

It's a fact just a FYI

what the hell are you talking about?

You don't know what they're talking about? Remember when she handed off debate questions to Clinton from CNN? Or the reporters who went to John Podesta's house for dinners? You'll note they're registered democrats by the way. It's almost like you've only ever heard half the story...

Whataboutism is a propaganda technique first used by the Soviet Union, in its dealings with the Western world.[1] When Cold War criticisms were levelled at the Soviet Union, the response would be "What about..." followed by the naming of an event in the Western world.[2][3] It represents a case of tu quoque (appeal to hypocrisy),[4] a logical fallacy that attempts to discredit the opponent's position by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with that position, without directly refuting or disproving the opponent's initial argument.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

Wikileaks has a 100% record for accuracy and the emails that confirm media collusion have been cryptographically verified. https://wikileaks.org/podesta-... "Are we doing anything to cover Dem leaning bloggers, columnists?"

Wikileaks detailing how the Democrats are coordinating with the media. Organization after organization, CNN, McClatchy, Time, WSJ, the list goes on and on. How do any of these people still have jobs after being exposed like this? https://wikileaks.org/podesta-...

Whataboutism is a propaganda technique first used by the Soviet Union, in its dealings with the Western world.[1] When Cold War criticisms were levelled at the Soviet Union, the response would be "What about..." followed by the naming of an event in the Western world.[2][3] It represents a case of tu quoque (appeal to hypocrisy),[4] a logical fallacy that attempts to discredit the opponent's position by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with that position, without directly refuting or disproving the opponent's initial argument.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

Wikileaks has a 100% record for accuracy and the emails that confirm media collusion have been cryptographically verified. https://wikileaks.org/podesta-... "Are we doing anything to cover Dem leaning bloggers, columnists?"

Wikileaks detailing how the Democrats are coordinating with the media. Organization after organization, CNN, McClatchy, Time, WSJ, the list goes on and on. How do any of these people still have jobs after being exposed like this? https://wikileaks.org/podesta-...

When he was leaking things that made Bush look bad you loved Julian Assange so hard that Benedict Cumberbatch played him in the movie.

By reporting our government's fuckups, Wikileaks has taken a rather extreme pro-America attitude and is basically doing the job that our own media ought to be doing. Wikileaks is the enemy of America's enemy. Maybe he's not really our friend, but if you adopt the point of view of us American citizens, you'll see that he sure appears to be either a friend, or even one of us.

Whistle-blower site WikiLeaks has been nominated for the 2011 Nobel Peace Prize by a Norwegian politician who cited its role in freedom of speech, news agency NTB reported Wednesday. 'WikiLeaks is one of this century's most important contributors to freedom of speech and transparency,' parliamentarian Snorre Valen said in his nomination. Valen cited WikiLeaks' role in disclosing the assets of Tunisia's former president Zine El Abidine Ben Ali and his nearest family, contributing to the protests that forced them into exile. http://www.thenewage.co.za/935...

WikiLeaks released the State Department cables in 2010, revealing that appeasing Russia was a motivator for canceling the plan with Poland.

Wikileaks published CIA espionage orders for the 2012 french presidential election. When Russia does it, it's an attack. When US does it, it's just mates havin' a go?

deserves a repost

“The lengths the deep state will go to try and distract and disrupt the historic achievements of this president are truly amazing. I don't think I've ever seen a president so disrespected. The constant need to tear down everything he does is just, well, amazing.”

I'm not a fan of Trump, but I do believe you're right that 'reports' such as the above and other such activities, are part of a strategy by the deep state to depose a sitting President, a palace coup in all but name.

Vault 8 the CIA's Malware Control System.

So we have to compete with China in creepiness?

Of course since the average american and person in capitalist society is unaware how extreme wealth inequality is. So all the rulers are at full blown war against their publics. That's why the spying is there, to make sure you have the "correct" free market, corporation worshipping thoughts and not notice the end of the rule of law, endless copyright laws which equals total domination of government by the rich.

See it in this speach by former national security adivisor of the United states:

Elites fear political awakening of the globe

The Citibank memo

Citigroup memo

US distribution of wealth

https://imgur.com/a/FShfb

http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

These links will take a while to digest, but if you want to understand what's going on in the world, you owe it to yourself to become informed about the true state of the world. Realize that business and the wealthy is hostile to your interests.

Testing theories of representative government

https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/files/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf

Aka the rich (big business) vs the rest of mankind.

The grand chessboard

The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives

Grand chessboard user review

Stratfor and social media like reddit to monitor / influence and control public opinion.

Reddit and intelligence agencies

  Wikileaks -- Reddit and intelligence agencies

"Intended as an internal document. Good reading to understand the nature of rich democracies and the fact that the common people are not allowed to play a role."

Crisis of democracy

Crisis of democracy - PDF

http://www.amazon.com/Crisis-D... ">Crisis of democracy - BOOK

Education as ignorance

Education as ignorance

  Overthrowing other peoples governments

Overthrowing other peoples governments, the master list

Interference in other states when the rich/corporations dont get their way

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mxp_wgFWQo&feature=youtu.be&list=PLKR2GeygdHomOZeVKx3P0fqH58T3VghOj&t=724

> Did they ever release any actual evidence the Russians hacked the DNC?

They released the CrowdStrike report which said they think it was a Russian APT based on various signatures, such as an old copy of Ukranian malware called P.A.S. and a bunch of tor exit nodes, which they presented but failed to identify. They later retracted some of their claims. The DNC did not at any time turn over the affected servers to the FBI or anyone else, as one might expect for such a serious crime as was alleged.

Then the ODNI released the "17 agencies" report that doesn't present any technical info at all, just a few conclusions.

Somewhere in here we have that story about the "mystery server" where they think a Trump server (actually a 3rd party marketing site) is talking to a Russian bank. It turns out to be DNS traffic due to spam, but it's funny to look at now given the #Spygate allegations.

Then there were reports from Trend Micro including this one. There's a lot there about phishing and such, but not a whole lot about how to identify who this is other than "we think this is Russia."

Of course, then comes the Vault 7 leaks showing the CIA (likely among many others) has lots of tools to falsely attribute stuff to other parties. A person was later blamed for that leak, but they instead find that he's a pedophile which is... interesting. One may or may not be aware of a short-lived attempt by the "Todd & Claire" site to frame Julian Assange of that which melted under public scrutiny. There were also the infamous Guccifer 2.0 "Russian fingerprints" which seemed interesting, as he only dropped random Trump opposition research docs.

Wow. Just wow. It is hard to see BuzzFeed publishing a 35-page document containing unverified, lurid allegations about President-elect Hillary Clinton that it didn't consider credible.

"They stopped being journalists and began being *cheerleaders*, and became people who had a conclusion that they reached, and then searched for facts to show that Hillary Clinton was an 92, 93, 99 point 9999 chance winner, of winning this campaign.

CNN caught red-handed planting debate questions

Democrats ordered the media to play up Trump - they obeyed! :(

CBS's John Dickerson: Donald Trump Didn't Ruin the Press's Reputation, We Did That Ourselves

Media changing headlines to attack Trump
https://heatst.com/culture-wars/harvard-study-reveals-huge-extent-of-anti-trump-media-bias/

The Times completely missed the story, and misled its readers in the process.

Compilation of CNN & MSNBC Cutting Guests Mics to Protect Hillary Clinton

The entire media endorsed Hillary

You one of those crazy coincidence theorists? I mean, I thought it was an outrageous lie that the Democrats rigged their primaries to prevent Bernie Sanders from winning. Turns out, it was true. I thought it was crazy that the media was running stories past the Democrats for approval before publication. That was true too.

"We heard loudly and clearly yesterday from Bernie supporters that the process was rigged, and it was. And you've got to be honest about it. That's why we need a chair who is transparent."
-- former Secretary of Labor Tom Perez, February 8, 2017
http://observer.com/2017/02/dnc-chair-candidate-tom-perez-admits-democratic-primaries-rigged/

Because I have become a hack I will send u the whole section that pertains to u
Please don't share or tell anyone I did this
Tell me if I fucked up anything
-- Glenn Thrush, senior editor of Politico
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/36329

Here's a bunch of New York Times employees talking behind the scenes.

Person B: and frankly microaggressions and people being obtuse cut the deepest. and this is DAILY.
Person M [an editor on the masthead]: Hey all, a lot of smart thoughts here and just wanted you to know I am following along. Definitely worth more discussion.

So yeah, this stuff happens and it happens a lot. The school shooting thing with Hogg was definitely coordinated behind the scenes. There are apps like Signal that allow secure communications, we will never see leaked emails again.

And ironically Podesta put in writing that he supported Trump as the candidate because he thought his campaign could beat him:

https://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hillary-clinton-campaign-intentionally-created-donald-trump-with-its-pied-piper-strategy/

Thank you Podesta for helping create this mess. The actual email (view the attached PDF):

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/1120

"We need to be elevating the Pied Piper candidates so that they are leaders of the pack and tell the press to them seriously"

between Hilliary's campaign and the 95 media stars who attended dinners and drinks on April 9th & 10th to discuss how they were going to report her campaign and candidacy, and probably how to disparage the Republican candidate.
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-...

And we sure saw the results. Fortunately for US she lost, but she is still campaigning and the media is still her, and the DNC's, sock puppet. Attendance was so small at her rallies the media constantly cropped their photos of those events to avoid revealing the dismal numbers, but other photos of those events were taken and released by attendees and observers, and yet they claim she "won" the popular vote. LOL! Now, we are finding out that "popular" vote included a lot of non-citizens and voters voting more than once. Some precincts had more voters than the population of the precinct!

Should I mention the collusion between Hillary and the news reporters who moderated those town hall meetings and other public forums? How cute that an adolescent girl with a red ribbon in her hair has am "unexpected" complex question to ask Hillary and Hillary has a perfectly prepared answer. Or that Donna Brazile finally admitted that she had passed questions to Hillary before one interview on CNN. Then later reveals that she "found proof" that the DNC rigged the convention election". Surprise, surprise. What she meant was the super delegates, a scheme by Hillary to guarantee that regardless of how local precincts voted the super delegates were going to vote for her. AND, it gave Hillary a way to bypass local election laws and funding limits, putting those monies directly into her coffers and, most likely, her Foundation, which turned out to be her, Bill's and Chelsey's personal ATM, with sending nothing to Haiti after claiming to have sent millions.

After her not so stellar performance as Sec of State, during which she colluded with Russia to transfer some of our U235 stocks to Russia in exchange for "donations" to the Clinton Foundation and $500,000 to Bill for a "speech" in Moscow -- the pay to play scheme designed to enrich her, Bill and their "Foundation", along with bones thrown to the DNC.

Go ahead, DNC, continue the suit. It will be great to get this information exposed in open court, under oath, and with cross examination of subpoenaed witnesses from the DNC and Democrats as well.

https://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/12/1264544_fwd-ignorance-is-futile-about-google-.html

It's not just spyware.

Even better: Don't use an url shortener service at all. What's the point?

To feed the machine "God" which will slaughter all of Humanity and create an actual Matrix because Google knows brains are cheaper than CPUs.

That alphabet soup can hide the fact that it's forwarding your request through another website that captures all of your browser's javascript-visible data

That's the point.

I feel like they've hurt you in some way... just point to the area on the doll where they touched you

Spoken like a true PR shill. They've hurt and are actively plotting to hurt everyone.

How does this legislation impact a treasonous president who hires underage sex workers and ogles naked underage girls at his creepy 'beauty pageants'?

What the hell are you talking about? Hillary lost.
>> Her and Bill's flights on Jeffrey Epstein's "Lolita Express"
>> Her connection to Laura Silsby/Galyer, who was CONVICTED of trafficking Haitian children while working with children, and then went right back into working with children after the name change
>> Her campaign manager, John PEDOsta, and such doozies as the Luzzatto children in the pool
>> then you have "we sleep in the same bed" Uma Abedin... and her "prize" of a husband, Anthony Weiner
>> not to mention creepy uncle Joe
>> and Barak Hussein "I was a communist in college and I love walnut sauce and $65K-worth of hotdogs" Obama... and his "wife" Big Mike
>> then you have all the spirit cooking rituals they got up to with Marina Abramovic

Should I go on?

Also the "dirty dossier" was confirmed to be a complete hoax written by Christopher Steele.
If you're really against sick shit, you should probably figure out who's really guilty of it.

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-...

What's next? "Primary sources are not good sources."?

COO of Facebook.

Wikileaked email

it's not censorship if the government didn't do it

This is so incredibly stupid I wonder if you're trolling. It's still censorship. The actions are the same. The actor does not define the action. Maybe in you insane leftist sub-"reality" where double standards are the fundamental.

Google is essentially creating a state within a state and usurping the authority of congress. Aside from the fact they are owned and operated in great part by federal agencies, but hey, that's a "conspiracy theory"[1].

They operate a public space. The constitution applies, or would, if the United States of America was still a country. But it's constitution has been repealed by the authorities who are supposed to enforce it - the general public especially.

But the fact remains, it's on paper, it's still in the same place as it was to begin with, and violating its provisions still makes the actor self-contradictory and malicious, due the same justice.

[1] - https://wikileaks.org/google-i...

Or, alternatively, how about "Keys for Chinese Accounts Moving to China - Easing Fears NSA Can Tap Communications"

Imagine this from their perspective. Keys for communications that are increasingly being used in official capacities have been held in a country that is antagonistic to you. A country with hugely funded security apparatus that has demonstrably and repeatedly used government sponsored back doors in computing equipment and undisclosed zero day vulnerabilities in operating systems to get access to your communications and industrial infrastructure.

I find it amusing that every time China takes a step in this direction the news outlets decry fears of human rights abuses. Like, say, Guantanamo Bay, the Collateral Murder, and every Snowden revelation have never happened. It's no surprise that China is creating rules to require cryptographic keys be held there. The surprise is that it took them this long.

The problem here is that Carter Page appears to have been one of *our* spies working for the FBI who helped bust some Russian scammers with a wiretapped binder and there are plenty of reports about it. He also didn't work for Trump for very long at all. You're relying on a lot of secret "evidence" and ignoring how people are leaking rumors to various media outlets to "corroborate" themselves. You do realize how easy it is to pull that sort of nonsense off, right? I mean, right here on Slashdot, we infamously saw the post making that point by saying that one could just as easily claim to have secret evidence you wet the bed... mere days before the dossier about prostitutes peeing on Obama's bed went public.

Meanwhile, we have FBI agents who join that team texting each other about secret societies, insurance policies and telling us that Weiner's laptop was full of classified Hillary emails and they really reopened the investigation just to seize them from the NYPD and declare it a nothingburger before that could get out. Apparently they were too dumb to actually read any of the emails and notice classification markers on thousands of emails, so Comey goes on and mumbles that it's just "a few portion markings" (never mind she'd already lied to the FBI about that, but no need for 18 USC 1001 charges for lying about improper storage of classified material, apparently) and they also hide the fact that Obama knew the whole time, as fact which Hillary's lawyer Cheryl Mills made clear. You can see his press department lying about that around 44:55 in the linked video.

Anyhow, as should have been obvious to anyone with half a brain, Muller isn't going to come out with a damned thing until the mid-terms, at which time we'll start to see various leaks and whatnot building up to a climax right at the election. Not that it helps much, there simply aren't all that many seats for Dems to pick up, but then again, I shouldn't underestimate the crazy tricks...

By driving a portion of their voters to someone with no chance of winning (e.g. a Libertarian candidate), Democrats could make it far easier to win elections due in part to the first-past-the-post voting.

This already happened. One of the Podesta emails, in an internal discussion of Clinton's campaign strategy, argued for supporting the more extreme Republican candidates to improve the chances of a Democrat victory.

The email is here. Go to the "Attachements" tab and download the PDF. The relevant passage is:

In this scenario, we don't want to marginalize the more extreme candidates, but make them more "Pied Piper" candidates who actually represent the mainstream of the Republican Party. Pied Piper candidates include, but aren't limited to: [...] Ted Cruz [...] Donald Trump [...] Ben Carson [...] We need to be elevating the Pied Piper candidates so that they are leaders of the pack and tell the press to them [sic] seriously.

Well, they got their Pied Piper candidate after all.

What shocks me in all of these e-mail leak scandals is how un verified it is. I remember being able to telnet to open port 25s and send e-mail to anyone as anyone. PGP encryption and signing should be standard by anyone at that level.

There were DKIM signatures on the Hillary Clinton emails

http://blog.erratasec.com/2016...

This Politifact post muddles over whether the Wikileaks leaked emails have been doctored, specifically the one about Tim Kaine being picked a year ago. The post is wrong -- we can verify this email and most of the rest.

In order to bloc spam, emails nowadays contain a form of digital signatures that verify their authenticity. This is automatic, it happens on most modern email systems, without users being aware of it.

This means we can indeed validate most of the Wikileaks leaked DNC/Clinton/Podesta emails. There are many ways to do this, but the easiest is to install the popular Thunderbird email app along with the DKIM Verifier addon. Then go to the Wikileaks site and download the raw source of the email https://wikileaks.org/podesta-....

As you see in the screenshot below, the DKIM signature verifies as true.

If somebody doctored the email, such as changing the date, then the signature would not verify. I try this in the email below, changing the date from 2015 to 2016. This causes the signature to fail.