wikileaks attacked, releasing contingency plan passwords - Polidicks

I find it kind of funny that even Wikileaks has fallen for the absurd mental gymnastics it takes to see the guy who wants us bomb civilians, take Iraq's oil, torture detainees, use 'extreme vetting' (guess how that sort of information is obtained), and thinks whistleblowers should be executed as the person to rein in the intelligence agencies.

[QUOTE=da space core;51928227]I was kinda pointing out that you make way too many assumptions in your arguments. In this post, you assume a whole lot of things without explaining any basis of your claims. You should try providing more reasoning. Also, dont put words in peoples mouths. Your views actually arent too far off from some other people as you seem to think[/QUOTE] The government doing anything is socialism. [QUOTE=Jim Morrison;51928249]What are the merits of the actual information being leaked? All I see is people just dismissing it out of hand. Wikileaks has done bad shit and they've done good shit. The CIA, of course, spies on anything they can get away with. I wouldn't be surprised if it was legitimate.[/QUOTE] Interestingly enough this leak shows the CIA following the law to a T. For instance, since leaking confidential information is a crime, so none of their malware (viruses and source code) are marked as confidential. so that's nice.

[QUOTE=Mingebox;51928259]I find it kind of funny that even Wikileaks has fallen for the absurd mental gymnastics it takes to see the guy who wants us bomb civilians, take Iraq's oil, torture detainees, use 'extreme vetting' (guess how that sort of information is obtained, and thinks whistleblowers should be executed as the person to rein in the intelligence agencies.[/QUOTE] Like I'm actually wondering why they're not also shitting on Trump even though he's literally part of the government right now and has so many abhorrent anti-freedom pro-government policies. Is it because - They'll lose their main user base? - The media is already reporting on Trumps fuckering and they want to distance themselves from mainstream media? - Russia has them by their balls?

[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;51928294]Like I'm actually wondering why they're not also shitting on Trump even though he's literally part of the government right now and has so many abhorrent anti-freedom pro-government policies. Is it because - They'll lose their main user base? - The media is already reporting on Trumps fuckering and they want to distance themselves from mainstream media? - Russia has them by their balls?[/QUOTE] Because Trump is like a magician who keeps getting visibly stuck on the strings, but half the audience wants to belive in flight so bad they just mentally censor them and are astounded at the amazing flying man.

[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;51928294]Like I'm actually wondering why they're not also shitting on Trump even though he's literally part of the government right now and has so many abhorrent anti-freedom pro-government policies. Is it because - They'll lose their main user base? - The media is already reporting on Trumps fuckering and they want to distance themselves from mainstream media? - Russia has them by their balls?[/QUOTE] [URL="https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Whistleblowers/Russia"]https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Whistleblowers/Russia[/URL]

For those of you who want the content of these leaks nicely summarized, Philip DeFranco seems to do an OK job here: [video=youtube;LBl2l76fp0w]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBl2l76fp0w[/video] [QUOTE=Arctic-Zone;51926613]"Starts supporting conservatives" That's exactly it. They are selectively releasing information due to their bias and agenda. If they were truly devoted to the transparent truth, they would be independent.[/QUOTE] Has anyone considered that they've concluded that their dedication to transparency and truth is better served by supporting "conservatives" (in the instance of 2016 at least) than simply being "independent"? (pretending elections don't matter)

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51928341]Has anyone considered that they've concluded that their dedication to transparency and truth is better served by supporting "conservatives" (in the instance of 2016 at least) than simply being "independent"? (pretending elections don't matter)[/QUOTE] That is such a hilariously absurd statement, that by obfuscating the truth you are somehow clarifying it.

Many are just assuming there is dirt on trump they aren't releasing, therefore they have a pre-existing bias and should be considered "russian state propoganda" (lol). Maybe the reason they are expressing bias is because they dont have dirt on trump's faction but do have dirt on everyone else. The enemy of your enemy is your friend, especially when that person is the POTUS and in an active dispute with agencies you've been trying to fight for decades. It's a generally valid position to prefer someone who is shitty but had public views to a group masking their intentions. Also, how many times do they need to lie to congress under oath and receive zero punishment before we're allowed to be "not cringy" when we accuse intel agencies of misusing their massive powers.

[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;51928423]That is such a hilariously absurd statement, that by obfuscating the truth you are somehow clarifying it.[/QUOTE] War is peace, freedom is slavery, obfuscation is transparency.

[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;51928423]That is such a hilariously absurd statement, that by obfuscating the truth you are somehow clarifying it.[/QUOTE] How exactly has Wikileaks obfuscated the truth?

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51928341]For those of you who want the content of these leaks nicely summarized, Philip DeFranco seems to do an OK job here: [video=youtube;LBl2l76fp0w]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBl2l76fp0w[/video] Has anyone considered that they've concluded that their dedication to transparency and truth is better served by supporting "conservatives" (in the instance of 2016 at least) than simply being "independent"? (pretending elections don't matter)[/QUOTE] So is it not a lie if you go up on stage and say something so obviously false that everyone knows it's not true? That's the only way in which I could see serving this administration as being a better way of serving transparency and truth than just remaining neutral. As for whether conservatives or liberals in general are less or more transparent, I'd say that both their shit stinks on that front and that it's really more a function of whether you're more or less authoritarian than anything else. But even that's a moot point because, although I'd definitely say conservatives are more economically libertarian, they're definitely not more libertarian when it comes to the military and national intelligence which is what 90% of wikileaks' stuff deals with anyways. I think that some of the people who were most angry about earlier wikileaks leaks were conservative republicans IIRC. [editline]7th March 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Whoaly;51928497]How exactly has Wikileaks obfuscated the truth?[/QUOTE] He said you obfuscated the truth not wikileaks.

[QUOTE=OmniConsUme;51928311][URL="https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Whistleblowers/Russia"]https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Whistleblowers/Russia[/URL][/QUOTE] I'm confused as to what your point is here.

[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;51928249]What are the merits of the actual information being leaked? All I see is people just dismissing it out of hand. Wikileaks has done bad shit and they've done good shit. The CIA, of course, spies on anything they can get away with. I wouldn't be surprised if it was legitimate.[/QUOTE] Tagesschau reported that there's a fairly large CIA hacking unit here in Germany according to their internal wiki. It also looks like that group's hack tools' source code was leaked to the black market somehow and Wikileaks got their hands on it. Apparently they're trying to figure out how to release it in a way that gets the vulnerabilities patched without even more people getting the exploits.

[URL="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/03/hey-cia-you-held-security-flaw-information-now-its-out-thats-not-how-it-should"]EFF has responded.[/URL] Edit: remember the San Bernardo Iphone FBI issue?

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51928341]Has anyone considered that they've concluded that their dedication to transparency and truth is better served by supporting "conservatives" (in the instance of 2016 at least) than simply being "independent"? (pretending elections don't matter)[/QUOTE] given the actions of the current administration, their conclusion clearly proved wrong

[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;51926425]This time it seems they're doing it because some video of theirs got taken down. Which is to say they're probably just using it as a pretext to punch back at the intelligence agencies for giving Trump hell.[/QUOTE] jokes on them it'll only make trump's admin much less effective.

Why is there so little discussion about the actual content of the leak? "Russian connection" this, "conservative bias" that. The timing being incredibly advantageous for the administration does not preclude this stuff from being true.

this story deserves way more attention than MSM are giving it rn

[QUOTE=Mechanical43;51929390]this story deserves way more attention than MSM are giving it rn[/QUOTE] Hasn't it only been less than a day since the info was released? I'd rather everything be sifted at least at a basic level before jumping on the train full speed.

[QUOTE=space1;51928166][video]https://youtu.be/VIVrvihtKgE[/video] could you please stop stooping to [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism"]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism [/URL][/QUOTE] This has nothing whatsoever to do with McCarthyism, but if snickering over the inappropriate comparison helps you feel better about disregarding the reality of our situation, then don't let me cloud your fantasy. Any mention of Russian aggression is not, by default, paranoid McCarthyistic fingerpointing. The Russian and US governments are involved in a state of cyber warfare with each other, and every major US intelligence agency will tell you the same thing. Identifying WikiLeaks as the primary mouthpiece of these attacks, and the Trump political team as the primary beneficiaries, is no great stretch.

[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;51928212]Not too sure about this source. [t]http://i.imgur.com/WG8uDDB.png[/t] It's like a tamer version of Naked Ape[/QUOTE] "high quality political commentary" and "youtube" are mutually exclusive. if you can find anything higher quality than "harmful opinions" "1791L" let me know. 1791L I consider shoddy at best, but it's way better than any liberal equivalent I can find. Harmful opinions is a bit better when it comes to factual information, but he still makes a few grave mistakes. [QUOTE=Big Dumb American;51929632]This has nothing whatsoever to do with McCarthyism, but if snickering over the inappropriate comparison helps you feel better about disregarding the reality of our situation, then don't let me cloud your fantasy. Any mention of Russian aggression is not, by default, paranoid McCarthyistic fingerpointing. The Russian and US governments are involved in a state of cyber warfare with each other, and every major US intelligence agency will tell you the same thing. Identifying WikiLeaks as the primary mouthpiece of these attacks, and the Trump political team as the primary beneficiaries, is no great stretch.[/QUOTE] while what you have posted here is a bit better and more nuanced than "This is pretty clearly another case of cyber-warfare from the Russian government, leaked through their state's favorite "independent" actor: Wikileaks.", you still can't prove any real links between wikileaks and russia. they've been around way longer than trump has(politically) and currently hold dirt on the saudi arabians, dirt on the syrians, and dirt on chinese power struggles with western governments over drilling rights for Africa Also hacking isn't "russian aggression", it's typical of any major power to gather intelligence this way. The chinese do it to us all the time with absolutely no diplomatic backlash and little press coverage. Here watch our security get probed by foreign government agencies in real time; [URL]http://map.norsecorp.com/#/[/URL] This is just an exaggeration of rather routine shit, just that the subject matter is more touchy.

[QUOTE=space1;51928050]Which is exactly the problem? the current shift in political organization is towards that of a perfect socialist government disguised by promises of capitalism with a loss of freedom of speech/privacy "for the good of the majority". While this is "stable", there is a lot of moral ambiguity about the amount of power governments have and how it is and will be used in the future.[/QUOTE] what does this mean? the current shift in politics is anything but socialist. [editline]8th March 2017[/editline] I love how McCarthyism has become a conservative buzzword, and it's especially hilarious to see it used as an insult by the same people who decry government intervention as socialism.

someone found this in the files [t]http://i.imgur.com/3vuxYsE.png[/t] is this a half life 3 arg

[QUOTE=Gray Altoid;51929067]Why is there so little discussion about the actual content of the leak? "Russian connection" this, "conservative bias" that. The timing being incredibly advantageous for the administration does not preclude this stuff from being true.[/QUOTE] as far as I'm aware there's no proof it's true at all. [editline]8th March 2017[/editline] Also lmao this data leak is so perfectly framed to absolve Russia of blame it's wild. If you fall for this rhetoric then you're not just fucking stupid, you're a traitor.

[QUOTE=Wii60;51930146]someone found this in the files [t]http://i.imgur.com/3vuxYsE.png[/t] is this a half life 3 arg[/QUOTE] It better be. CIA couldn't wait for HL3 anymore and hacked Valve to get a copy. Plottwist incoming.

[QUOTE=Wii60;51927290] good shit[/QUOTE] Fucking brilliant. Piece of software which, when injected, simply turns off screen and all sound when you press on the Power button. Simple is genius. ninjat [editline]8th March 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Big Dumb American;51929632] Any mention of Russian aggression is not, by default, paranoid McCarthyistic fingerpointing. The Russian and US governments are involved in a state of cyber warfare with each other, and every major US intelligence agency will tell you the same thing. Identifying WikiLeaks as the primary mouthpiece of these attacks, and the Trump political team as the primary beneficiaries, is no great stretch.[/QUOTE] Judging by your logic, Obama wiretapping Trump to find incriminating evidence (and failing at that) is not a great stretch either.

[QUOTE=CruelAddict;51930286] Judging by your logic, Obama wiretapping Trump to find incriminating evidence (and failing at that) is not a great stretch either.[/QUOTE] There is nothing illegal about a suspect being investigated, especially not for the sake of national security.

[QUOTE=Gray Altoid;51929067]Why is there so little discussion about the actual content of the leak? "Russian connection" this, "conservative bias" that. The timing being incredibly advantageous for the administration does not preclude this stuff from being true.[/QUOTE] Probably because the leak itself is basically same old same old. Spy agency has spy tools, more at eleven. Is there evidence of it being unlawfully used against the American public? No? Alright, maybe it will be of interest to security firms. The drama regarding Russia is by far the most controversial aspect of this so that's what people are talking about.

[QUOTE=space1;51927925]im sorry but i would not like to live in your dystopian future[/quote] I'm talking about the past there though? [quote]Sure, if you would like a country founded through a history of bloodshed and persecution, go ahead.[/QUOTE] uh you live in one of those countries what necessarily is bad about a worldwide confederation created by voluntary association?

[url]http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/08/politics/wikileaks-cia-investigation/index.html[/url] [QUOTE]A federal criminal investigation is being opened into WikiLeaks' publication of documents detailing alleged CIA hacking operations, several US officials told CNN Wednesday. The officials said the FBI and CIA are coordinating reviews of the matter. The investigation is looking into how the documents came into WikiLeaks' possession and whether they might have been leaked by an employee or contractor. The CIA is also trying to determine if there are other unpublished documents WikiLeaks may have. The documents published so far are largely genuine, officials said, though they are not yet certain if all of them are and whether some of the documents may have been altered.[/QUOTE]