First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
Wikileaks no more
Posted 11/21/16
Sometimes I hate being right. Wikileaks has been taken over, so anything beyond that which was already handed out is questionable, and I've got a feeling it will be "leaking" things that are questionable to undermine the credibility of wikileaks.




Makes sense why there was never "the real good big stuff" we were waiting for on the clinton foundation. Its bigger and implicates too many people. Just like the Franklin case magically all of a sudden became "an internal cia matter"....
89720 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Louisville, KY
Offline
Posted 11/21/16
It could just be those who hate Wikileaks saying this to put the fear into people's heads to say "Well, what if they are truly no longer in control of the site?" in order to get people to stop posting to the site.
39161 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 11/21/16 , edited 11/21/16
We should petition President Elect Trump to pardon Julian Assange on day one of his presidency....
Posted 11/21/16

Khaltazar wrote:

It could just be those who hate Wikileaks saying this to put the fear into people's heads to say "Well, what if they are truly no longer in control of the site?" in order to get people to stop posting to the site.


That doesnt really make any sense. If one hated wikileaks, the best way to discredit it would be to take it over and start the monkey wrenches into the process, make up bs stories, etc.

So kinda like how Assange, after that midnight raid....started spelling names of people he's known for a really long time wrong, a bunch of other little issues..

Where's he at the balcony?

What they didnt say in the post above was that the deadman switch DID get out, if one was able to find it early enough and get it....and also get the hash code to open it, of course. But it never went big because it was shut down within 2-3 days after it happened.

Wikileaks deadman switch WAS triggered that night.

But, if you go watch that Steve Piecznik video...that corroborates this - the higher ups in the security agencies took over the operation, though they posited it as "we are working closely with..." no, you're not working closely with wikileaks to make sure only hillary stuff gets out and not the whole ball of wax that would be harmful to a lot of governments around the world, you put a bag over Assange's head and nobody's heard from anyone except a double of him.

The director of wikileaks was murdered within a week before this Assange incident. This was a well planned and choreographed takedown.
Posted 11/21/16

DeadlyOats wrote:

We should petition President Elect Trump to pardon Julian Assange on day one of his presidency....


Assange, Manning, Snowden, William Binney, to name a few...
14955 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Online
Posted 11/21/16
All they'd have to do now, to complete this conspiracy confederacy, is to surgically alter someone to look like these "key players" and start this ball rolling again.
11624 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Winnipeg, MB.
Offline
Posted 11/21/16 , edited 11/21/16
This fucking sucks. There goes what's probably the last bipartisan group to legitimately show the truth. Oh well, hopefully something similar will replace them.
Humms 
11933 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / CAN, ON
Online
Posted 11/21/16 , edited 11/29/16
K

Posted 11/21/16 , edited 11/21/16

octorockandroll wrote:

This fucking sucks. There goes what's probably the last bipartisan group to legitimately show the truth. Oh well, hopefully something similar will replace them.


If you think about it.....WHY has Anonymous not released all the good incriminating stuff?

As the piecznik video showed, a bunch of the "white hats" that make up Anonymous are members of the NSA, CIA, FBI - just not any bigwigs that are in on the coverups. SOME of our security agencies employees have consciences. BUT....they will listen to the bigger heads that say "wtf you guys cant do this, this will do more than just bring down the american government"...

=why we've seen nothing of real consequence from Anonymous.


If they were truly white hearted black hackers, they would gleefully expose the rotten, soft underbelly of this shitshow.
11624 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Winnipeg, MB.
Offline
Posted 11/21/16 , edited 11/21/16

RaisedInACult wrote:


octorockandroll wrote:

This fucking sucks. There goes what's probably the last bipartisan group to legitimately show the truth. Oh well, hopefully something similar will replace them.


If you think about it.....WHY has Anonymous not released all the good incriminating stuff?

As the piecznik video showed, a bunch of the "white hats" that make up Anonymous are members of the NSA, CIA, FBI - just not any bigwigs that are in on the coverups. SOME of our security agencies employees have consciences. BUT....they will listen to the bigger heads that say "wtf you guys cant do this, this will do more than just bring down the american government"...

=why we've seen nothing of real consequence from Anonymous.


If they were truly white hearted black hackers, they would gleefully expose the rotten, soft underbelly of this shitshow.


Comparing anonymous to wikileaks is a false equivalence. While wikileaks is (or now I guess was) an organised group with leadership and organization, Anonymous always was closer to a stand alone complex from my understanding. You really can't hold them accountable as a group because they really arent a group. That and most of them apparebtly really suck at covering up their tracks, so many of the bigger members are in jail now.
15084 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 11/21/16 , edited 11/21/16
I really struggle to consider a rando on 4chan "credible", but just for funzies I decided to check /pol/ to see if I could read a bit more about this and it isn't even on the top 10 pages... Is there any reason why I should believe this?
Posted 11/21/16 , edited 11/21/16

octorockandroll wrote:

Comparing anonymous to wikileaks is a false equivalence. While wikileaks is (or now I guess was) an organised group with leadership and organization, Anonymous always was closer to a stand alone complex from my understanding. You really can't hold them accountable as a group because they really arent a group. That and most of them apparebtly really suck at covering up their tracks, so many of the bigger members are in jail now.


dude....who do you think was handing wikileaks its material? they jailed Manning pretty quickly, if you recall.

that doesnt negate the fact that it was manning that helped get the whole wikileaks thing started, but they didnt have a whole heck of a lot of anything until anonymous started feeding them.

*shrugs* I love how people never have any consistency checks in their heads on things when they decide whether or not something makes sense. focusing on leadership and other non-issues that contribute nothing to the assessment of the situation.

2+2=anonymous is largely coopted also, duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!

but that's ok, disregard it all because I'm the one who said it

like the buddha said, dont believe anything even if it is my words, verify truths for yourselves

not that I'm calling myself a buddha, because otherwise I wouldnt come close to losing patience with young fools that decide the tv might just be right no matter how many ways its shown they're lying to you.
11624 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Winnipeg, MB.
Offline
Posted 11/21/16

sundin13 wrote:

I really struggle to consider a rando on 4chan "credible", but just for funzies I decided to check /pol/ to see if I could read a bit more about this and it isn't even on the top 10 pages... Is there any reason why I should believe this?


Ah. Didnt notice who OP was. My bad. Thanks for pointing that out for us.
Posted 11/21/16

sundin13 wrote:

I really struggle to consider a rando on 4chan "credible", but just for funzies I decided to check /pol/ to see if I could read a bit more about this and it isn't even on the top 10 pages... Is there any reason why I should believe this?


never in the history of man has "do your own research and come to your own conclusions" been more valid and important than now.

I dont have all the answers, but I happened to be paying particularly close attention to all of this when Assange disappeared in the black armored car that showed up at the london embassy at 2am that night. the night that the deadman switch stuff was activated and released. I knew about the couple key people dying, the anonymous link well before the piecznik vid came out.

whatever conclusion you come to is your own....but these days I just start out with the premise of "question everything"
Posted 11/21/16 , edited 11/21/16

octorockandroll wrote:


sundin13 wrote:

I really struggle to consider a rando on 4chan "credible", but just for funzies I decided to check /pol/ to see if I could read a bit more about this and it isn't even on the top 10 pages... Is there any reason why I should believe this?


Ah. Didnt notice who OP was. My bad. Thanks for pointing that out for us.


Ah yes, now the powerful displays of logic come out, lol...messenger=message, yah! Way to go, you get a nice play dough cookie to eat as a reward for that one.


Reminds me of one time like 30 years ago my dad brought home catfish for dinner....my mom liked it, until she discovered it was catfish, and she pushed her plate away LOL
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.