The US told Ecuador to give Wikileaks 'an eviction notice' - Polidicks

[QUOTE]The US government quietly urged Ecuador to cut off internet access for [URL="http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/u-s-urged-ecuador-act-against-assange-n669271"]Wikileaks founder Julian Assange[/URL], according to intelligence officials who spoke with NBC News."It was a bit of an eviction notice," one senior intelligence official said. On Tuesday, amid a trove of new Clinton leaks and hacked emails from campaign manager John Podesta, the anti-secrecy [URL="https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/788369924175441920?ref_src=twsrc^tfw"]organization alleged[/URL] that Secretary of State John Kerry asked for Assange's internet to be cut off as he visited Colombia last month. “While our concerns about Wikileaks are longstanding, any suggestion that Secretary Kerry or the State Department were involved in shutting down Wikileaks is false,” a spokesman [URL="http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/wikileaks-john-kerry-julian-assange-cut-internet-ecuador/"]told[/URL] the Daily Dot. “Reports that Secretary Kerry had conversations with Ecuadorian officials about this are simply untrue. Period.”[/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.businessinsider.com/us-wikileaks-internet-2016-10"]src[/URL]

I thought Ecuador hated the US and this was the reason Assange went to their place.

[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51247824]I thought Ecuador hated the US and this was the reason Assange went to their place.[/QUOTE] So does Iran. Amazing what money can buy.

[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51247824]I thought Ecuador hated the US and this was the reason Assange went to their place.[/QUOTE] pretty sure US has the advantage in a negotiation like this and can probably strong arm anyone at this point that isn't russia or china

[QUOTE=Kigen;51247829]So does Iran. Amazing what money can buy.[/QUOTE] or maybe Ecuador doesnt like that their guest is using their embassy to interfere with US politics. the embassy staff have a duty and its not to assange, its to the people and country they represent and he could be hurting that effort.

[QUOTE=mchapra;51247841]pretty sure US has the advantage in a negotiation like this and can probably strong arm anyone at this point that isn't russia or china[/QUOTE] Completely unrelated, and it may just be Flagdog being a goofass, but I had no idea that FP had Pakistani posters.

[QUOTE=Sableye;51248320]or maybe Ecuador doesnt like that their guest is using their embassy to interfere with US politics. the embassy staff have a duty and its not to assange, its to the people and country they represent and he could be hurting that effort.[/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure Assange said that if they had leaks from Trump/GOP they'd release them too. It's just this time around that the DNC/Hillary have been massively flippant about cyber-security.

[QUOTE=Sableye;51248320]or maybe Ecuador doesnt like that their guest is using their embassy to interfere with US politics. the embassy staff have a duty and its not to assange, its to the people and country they represent and he could be hurting that effort.[/QUOTE] Or maybe they were pressured by the US government.. Aka what the article is about, not your dumb assertion that Ecuador suddenly has a moral opposition to WikiLeaks' work.

[QUOTE=DuCT;51248820]I'm pretty sure Assange said that if they had leaks from Trump/GOP they'd release them too. It's just this time around that the DNC/Hillary have been massively flippant about cyber-security.[/QUOTE] Most of the time, the "scandal" leaks straight out of Trump's mouth to national television anyway, so Wikileaks could just be ignoring the GOP and letting it burn itself down into the ground

You're literally posting in a thread where we receive confirmation that the US is pressuring Ecuador to silence Assange, why are you continuing with this stupid propaganda about Ecuador being tired of Assange when the real reason behind their actions is in the OP of the thread?

[QUOTE=DuCT;51248820]I'm pretty sure Assange said that if they had leaks from Trump/GOP they'd release them too. It's just this time around that the DNC/Hillary have been massively flippant about cyber-security.[/QUOTE] Given that the source of most of these hacks is widely considered to be the Russian government, the lack of info damning Trump and the GOP kind of explains itself. It's not that there aren't scandals to uncover, but that uncovering them would undermine their objectives. These leaks aren't coming from benevolent hackers who just want to share the power of knowledge and transparency. They are coming from foreign states who want to shake our faith in the democratic process and scare us into putting a fool in the white house.

[QUOTE=lavacano;51248837]Most of the time, the "scandal" leaks straight out of Trump's mouth to national television anyway, so Wikileaks could just be ignoring the GOP and letting it burn itself down into the ground[/QUOTE] That's a disastrously bad double standard. If WikiLeaks had any integrity to freedom of information they wouldn't sit on it like that.

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;51248890]Given that the source of most of these hacks is widely considered to be the Russian government, the lack of info damning Trump and the GOP kind of explains itself. It's not that there aren't scandals to uncover, but that uncovering them would undermine their objectives. These leaks aren't coming from benevolent hackers who just want to share the power of knowledge and transparency. They are coming from foreign states who want to shake our faith in the democratic process and scare us into putting a fool in the white house.[/QUOTE] So is there nothing in the leaks that should be made public? Is what wikileaks putting out there false/forged? Should they not release them because it came from Russia? Is this just a vast right-wing conspiracy against Hillary?

[QUOTE=srobins;51248839]You're literally posting in a thread where we receive confirmation that the US is pressuring Ecuador to silence Assange, [B]why are you continuing with this stupid propagand[/B]a about Ecuador being tired of Assange when the real reason behind their actions is in the OP of the thread?[/QUOTE] Irony Also I guess when the head of intelligence says Russia was behind the DNC hacks its just propaganda but an anonymous intelligence source says the US pressured Ecuador it must be true.

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;51248890]who want to shake our faith in the democratic process and scare us into putting a fool in the white house.[/QUOTE] Don't worry, the media is already doing that plenty by itself.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;51248967]That's a disastrously bad double standard. If WikiLeaks had any integrity to freedom of information they wouldn't sit on it like that.[/QUOTE] I don't doubt that if Wikileaks actually had anything on them, they'd post it the same as they'd been posting DNC shit. What I'm saying is they're making no effort to get any of that information because they know Trump's just going to sink the party either way. Sometimes, some people just aren't worth the effort.

i cannot describe the ridiculousness of the idea that the political corruption of the Clintons is literally just a Russian conspiracy. it's the ultimate kind of mental gymnastics-- "my candidate can't be corrupt, it's just the russians painting her that way! damn reds!"

[QUOTE=lavacano;51249000]I don't doubt that if Wikileaks actually had anything on them, they'd post it the same as they'd been posting DNC shit. What I'm saying is they're making no effort to get any of that information because they know Trump's just going to sink the party either way. Sometimes, some people just aren't worth the effort.[/QUOTE] Assange specifically said he had stuff on Trump but wasn't releasing it, using your logic as the defense [editline]23rd October 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Monkah;51249004]i cannot describe the ridiculousness of the idea that the political corruption of the Clintons is literally just a Russian conspiracy. it's the ultimate kind of mental gymnastics-- "my candidate can't be corrupt, it's just the russians painting her that way! damn reds!"[/QUOTE] I too can't describe the ridiculousnessof strawmen i build to misrepresent what other people say

[QUOTE=Monkah;51249004]i cannot describe the ridiculousness of the idea that the political corruption of the Clintons is literally just a Russian conspiracy. it's the ultimate kind of mental gymnastics-- "my candidate can't be corrupt, it's just the russians painting her that way! damn reds!"[/QUOTE] Kind of like the mental gymnastics you perform to defend Trump and ignore any criticism of him?

[QUOTE=Monkah;51249004]i cannot describe the ridiculousness of the idea that the political corruption of the Clintons is literally just a Russian conspiracy. it's the ultimate kind of mental gymnastics-- "my candidate can't be corrupt, it's just the russians painting her that way! damn reds!"[/QUOTE] I can not describe the ridiculousness of you never reading anyone else's posts and just assuming people disliking the wikileaks for their obvious bias is the same as everyone ignoring corruption.

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;51248890]Given that the source of most of these hacks is widely considered to be the Russian government, the lack of info damning Trump and the GOP kind of explains itself. It's not that there aren't scandals to uncover, but that uncovering them would undermine their objectives. These leaks aren't coming from benevolent hackers who just want to share the power of knowledge and transparency. They are coming from foreign states who want to shake our faith in the democratic process and scare us into putting a fool in the white house.[/QUOTE] The establishment is already against the nationalist right and does its own inquiries, why would alternative media and leak culture need to delve into it? Remember when liberals were anti-war and liked wikileaks for hitting bush? It's because, like it or not, by targeting parties and ideologies in power, regardless of motivation you are doing the just thing of creating transparency. The democratic establishment just can't handle the same heat, and deflects to enemies of clinton's aggressive foreign policy. In order to pretend wikileaks is biased you'd have to go through the mental gymnastics of assuming both progressives and nationalists are on the same playing field as liberals and (increasingly irrelevant) conservatives. They're not, and there's no reason to have a fairness quota for leaking whatever secrets of theirs. The 'bias' of wikileaks is defined by who is in power because chiefly it is shaped in reaction to what they are doing. If the Russians are involved, it's just the other side to an information war and I expect you to therefore have the integrity of understanding the suspicion of various cultures to our own propaganda that encourages regime change. I understand it's difficult since we're not used to it, but you can blame figures like the clintons for encouraging economic policies that have increased inequality and consolidated the media in a few corporations, as well a foreign policy that has resulted in fatigue with our empire, together they have paved the way for this anti-establishment side in a war of ideas and information. That's the source of weakened faith in our democracy, not your petty russian boogeyman.

[QUOTE=Monkah;51249004]i cannot describe the ridiculousness of the idea that the political corruption of the Clintons is literally just a Russian conspiracy. it's the ultimate kind of mental gymnastics-- "my candidate can't be corrupt, it's just the russians painting her that way! damn reds!"[/QUOTE] Go ahead and quote a post in this thread where someone said that.

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;51248890]Given that the source of most of these hacks is widely considered to be the Russian government, the lack of info damning Trump and the GOP kind of explains itself. It's not that there aren't scandals to uncover, but that uncovering them would undermine their objectives. These leaks aren't coming from benevolent hackers who just want to share the power of knowledge and transparency.[B] They are coming from foreign states who want to shake our faith in the democratic process and scare us into putting a fool in the white house.[/B][/QUOTE] Not just a fool, [URL="http://time.com/4433880/donald-trump-ties-to-russia/"]but a puppet with direct financial ties to Putin's inner circle. [/URL] [editline]23rd October 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Monkah;51249004]i cannot describe the ridiculousness of the idea that the political corruption of the Clintons is literally just a Russian conspiracy. it's the ultimate kind of mental gymnastics-- "my candidate can't be corrupt, it's just the russians painting her that way! damn reds!"[/QUOTE] And I cannot fathom the full extent of your inability to make an argument without strawmanning. You, and many other Trump supporters I've spoken to, don't seem to get that the vast majority of FPers, myself included, don't support Clinton because we think her a saint. We consider her a lesser evil when the alternative is electing someone guaranteed to ruin the economy and the livelihoods of millions of Americans, and one who has made his intentions clear to make members of vulnerable minorities second-class citizens. And since my country is unfortunate enough to share a border with the United States, which dwarfs our own economically, militarily and in population, we have a stake in the results of your election as well.

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;51248890]Given that the source of most of these hacks is widely considered to be the Russian government, the lack of info damning Trump and the GOP kind of explains itself. [/QUOTE] [url]https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/10/really-really-upset-foreign-office-security-services/[/url] [QUOTE]I left Julian after midnight. He is fit, well, sharp and in good spirits. WikiLeaks never reveals or comments upon its sources, but as I published before a fortnight ago, I can tell you with 100% certainty that it is not any Russian state actor or proxy that gave the Democratic National Committee and Podesta material to WikiLeaks.[/QUOTE] As far as i know the only people saying "it's russia" is the DNC/hillary themselves, with hillary saying that her top officials all say it's russia. But frankly, [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dY77j6uBHI"]what is that worth[/URL]? But frankly there's a far more broad spectrum of voices saying it isn't russia. A russian official just laughed when asked about it, as opposed to the usual noise they give when challenged on shit they've done. I seriously doubt it's anything but lone actors funneling this stuff into the public eye, and for damn good reason too. Hillary confirmed all the leaks were legit during the debates, and the US trying to shut it down only cements it. And frankly who cares where it came from? The stuff in there is extremely troubling. If it is Russia, and all they have to do to shake the very foundations of the US is pull back the curtain a little, frankly i'm glad they did. Say what you will about trump, but the worst of his laundry is out in the public, trump university being the worst of it. If the entire US goverment has to shit its pants and run around the world silencing people to keep one person's laundry in the dark, maybe that should tell you something about that one person, and the system they're riding.

I'm sure someone's going to call me a government shill, but 'according to intelligence officials' means absolutely nothing- it could be an NGA intern speculating on the situation and they'd report it like it came from Clapper's lips. If 'intelligence officials' said that Wikileaks was being cut off because Ecuador no longer wants to be associated with Assange, I have no doubt that people would be questioning the authority of the source, but when it fits with the narrative of the US government buying influence at any price it goes unquestioned. Take this entirely unsubstantiated story with a grain of salt.

[QUOTE=Trilby Harlow;51250402][url]https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/10/really-really-upset-foreign-office-security-services/[/url] As far as i know the only people saying "it's russia" is the DNC/hillary themselves, with hillary saying that her top officials all say it's russia. But frankly, [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dY77j6uBHI"]what is that worth[/URL]? But frankly there's a far more broad spectrum of voices saying it isn't russia. A russian official just laughed when asked about it, as opposed to the usual noise they give when challenged on shit they've done. I seriously doubt it's anything but lone actors funneling this stuff into the public eye, and for damn good reason too. Hillary confirmed all the leaks were legit during the debates, and the US trying to shut it down only cements it. And frankly who cares where it came from? The stuff in there is extremely troubling. If it is Russia, and all they have to do to shake the very foundations of the US is pull back the curtain a little, frankly i'm glad they did. Say what you will about trump, but the worst of his laundry is out in the public, trump university being the worst of it. If the entire US goverment has to shit its pants and run around the world silencing people to keep one person's laundry in the dark, maybe that should tell you something about that one person, and the system they're riding.[/QUOTE] But among the people saying it's Russia is the Director of National Intelligence, who is non-partisan?

[QUOTE=archangel125;51250629]But among the people saying it's Russia is the Director of National Intelligence, who is non-partisan?[/QUOTE] No, he didn't. The release concluded that it was a possibility. [url]https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/press-releases/215-press-releases-2016/1423-joint-dhs-odni-election-security-statement[/url] [QUOTE]The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process. Such activity is not new to Moscow—the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia's senior-most officials could have authorized these activities.[/QUOTE] This isn't an absolute inditement of Russia, this is simply saying "yeah it could've been them i guess.". What gets me is that it's framed as a conclusion, even though no evidence beyond "IT FITS THE PATTERN!" is given. That is some disingenuous shit right there, treading the line that closely can't be an accident. Also hillary's claim that "17 agencies" back the conclusion that russia is the culprit is a lie. From what i can find, only the DNI and DHS even began to support that, both being equally loose and ambiguous with that above official statement. This wouldn't be the sort of thing you'd have to lie about

The link to Russia is confirmed by CrowdStrike, a security firm that investigated the hacks. I think it's kind of futile to argue against Russia being the perpetrator, largely because it makes no difference. The leaks are legitimate, WikiLeaks dumps whatever they're given, and the fact that their source isn't handing them dirt on Trump does nothing to indicate Assange is a "Russian puppet" or that the leaks should be discounted. It's the ugly truth and all the anti-Russian shitflinging is just to try and get people to ignore the information being leaked itself.

[QUOTE=DuCT;51248978]So is there nothing in the leaks that should be made public? Is what wikileaks putting out there false/forged? Should they not release them because it came from Russia? Is this just a vast right-wing conspiracy against Hillary?[/QUOTE] I don't think BDA's post is quite implying that. In any case, it'd be wrong to disregard the information because of its source. The US's democracy not being very trustworthy has been a huge and continued issue before all this, and [I]maybe[/I] this will cause at least [I]someone[/I] to reconsider doing shady or outright illegal stuff since the prospect of it being exposed is now a lot more prevalent.

"waaaaaa" there was nothing damning in the leaked emails so we have to make up bullshit to spin about the evil clinton murder machine. Waaaaa pay no attention to the obvious Russian connections or assange's self admitteted bias and agenda the clintons are eeeevvvvviiiillllll