Tell me about Julian Assange and wikileaks

jeffk said:
So can I sum it up as:

The information they release is accurate information

But since they only release information from one side that it is agenda driven?

How strong is the evidence that Russia either manipulates wikileaks with the information they provide or wikileaks works with Russia?
Click to expand...

It's not just that the information is selective, but the manner and timing of it's release and the preinterpretation/framing given to the information by Assange.
Including false implications, such as his tweets about Seth Rich.
His appearances on Russia Today show the role he plays in Russian Propaganda, regardless of his knowledge/complicity.
It's also worth pointing out that, regardless of his guilt/innocence, confinement to the embassy wouldn't have been a factor if Wikileaks had remained a faceless website produced by a collaborative organisation.
 
kpt018 said:
Even though it's been proven that the information, like the hacked DNC emails are leaked? And we don't care about the 4th amendment anymore?

What's happening to you guys?
Click to expand...
These partisan hacks pick and choose their amendments lol
 
kpt018 said: ↑
Even though it's been proven that the information, like the hacked DNC emails are leaked? And we don't care about the 4th amendment anymore?

I am not following this. Can you explain? How does the 4th amendment apply to this?
 
jeffk said:
kpt018 said: ↑
Even though it's been proven that the information, like the hacked DNC emails are leaked? And we don't care about the 4th amendment anymore?

I am not following this. Can you explain? How does the 4th amendment apply to this?
Click to expand...
It doesn’t in any way at all ever under any circumstances
 
By the way Daniel Domscheit-Berg says the reason the information is so lopsided, is because Wikileaks operates almost entirely within the anglosphere.

 
nostradumbass said:
Wikileaks is more than 10 years old, and nobody not running for office had any problem with it until they released information about Hillary just last year, and now Julian Assange is the scum of the earth for exposing her campaign.
Click to expand...
Horseshit revisionism. Or astonishing ignorance. Not sure which. Take your pick.

Julian has had a bullseye on his back for 10 years.
 
Madmick said:
Horseshit revisionism. Or astonishing ignorance. Not sure which. Take your pick.

Julian has had a bullseye on his back for 10 years.
Click to expand...
Feel free to post all the partisan articles about wikileaks from before last year. It was either you like it or you didn't, was not clearly cut along party lines until last year.
 
kpt018 said:
Well, they pretended to seek the truth and a protected outlet for whistleblowers and it turns out they're not what they pretended to be.

So yeah, intelligent people change their minds bud.
Click to expand...
Did they release any fake information? Somehow all you intelligent people decided to change your minds when it worked against your candidate.
 
MMAViewer said:
how the fuck does being secure in personal effects not apply lol, read much?
Click to expand...
What’s the 4th amendment?
How does it apply to someone from another country

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
 
Last edited:
nostradumbass said:
Feel free to post all the partisan articles about wikileaks from before last year. It was either you like it or you didn't, was not clearly cut along party lines until last year.
Click to expand...

giphy.gif

What's partisanship got to do with it? The criticisms of Assange have been consistent well before last year.
 
 
nostradumbass said:
2 of those are the same article posted on different publications by Richard Cohen, the other 2 are about Bush.
Click to expand...
You asked for partisan articles. I googled bush Wikileaks. First page first results. You’re welcome
 
bobgeese said:
They're more credible than any US news agency I can think of.
Click to expand...

its easy to appear credible when anyone who could possibly check up on your work, is deemed uncredible lol lol lol.

so in other words, who would you possibly believe if they came out and showed that wikileaks was full of shit on certain topics? no one? well no wonder you think theyre so trustworthy.
 
TheGreatA said:
I don't particularly give a damn about the 4th amendment of a foreign country.

All these leaks give me a head-ups on what sort of an agenda America is going to try to push world-wide, against my interests.
Click to expand...

They don’t give you a heads up for anything given we now know it’s propaganda and/or hit pieces that are distorted and sometimes flat out lies. And you’d care if your privacy was violated.
nostradumbass said:
Did they release any fake information? Somehow all you intelligent people decided to change your minds when it worked against your candidate.
Click to expand...

Yes. They found that the emails were modified to appear much worse than they actually were.

And no, we changed our minds when we found out they were hacks. Something you’re not capable of. Tribalism above truth for guys like you. Pathetic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

White Whale
International Artist says he'll destroy $45M worth of Rembrandt, Picasso and Warhol masterpieces if Julian Assange dies in prison
2 3 4
Replies
69
Views
2K
Hog-train
Hog-train

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,206
Messages
55,474,794
Members
174,786
Latest member
Biden's Diaper

Share this page

Back
Top