Intercepted - Collusion Between Assange and Trump
View this post on Hive: Intercepted - Collusion Between Assange and Trump
6 years ago in #wikileaks by valued-customer (67)
$8.54
- Past Payouts $8.54, 0.00 TRX
- - Author $6.43, 0.00 TRX
- - Curators $2.11, 0.00 TRX
I feel your pain. It would be nice to think that Assange and Wikileaks is all above board and honest, but that would be Pollyannaish.
Quite awhile back I remember reading a conspiracy theory that Wikileaks was a CIA straw dog, something to create dissent and discontent with the establishment in order to incite rebellion and eventual one world government. I did find this link It's admittedly weak but it does give one fuel for thought.
I don't trust liars, but I do understand why he would lie. Being anti-Hillary doesn't make one pro-Trump. Trump is a buffoon, but I do believe that Hillary is truly evil. Trumps foreign policy is bluster. Hillary's foreign policy is Full Spectrum Dominance.
Her hands are covered in Ghadaffi's blood, a man who was probably one of the greatest leaders in the 20th century. Yes, he was brutal, but he took Libya from the poorest nation in Africa to the richest. Look at Libya today. I just cannot fault Assange for working against her despite his methods.
You can't believe everything that Wikileaks leaks. All media is propaganda and all interactive media is surveillance. As long as people are aware of this, we can walk between the landmines and pick up the pieces of broken truths.
I know as a scientist you believe in absolute truths. That may be true in the physical world of reality, but in the abstract world of the human mind, truth is only relative.
I've saw a podcast with Porter Stansbery and Assange and read some opinions of those who had met Assange . Assange had said that their isn't anything that he can put out which could potentially damage Trump and he had confessed he prioritized releasing dirt on Clinton.
Trump is an objectively better pick than Hillary. I think Assange is just trying to be pragmatic instead of idealistic and opt for the lesser evil.
After reading the Intercept article you linked to, I find myself more disappointed with the Intercept than with Wikileaks.
More and more over the last few years, Assange has been attempting to run Wikileaks like a non-state intelligence agency rather than like a news organization dedicated to transparency. This is a somewhat understandable response to the ongoing attacks on Wikileaks by actual intelligence agencies. It is also ethically indefensible and strategically unwise ... but I suspect Assange is not in a position to see the foolishness of his actions in this regard. So I see Assange as something of a well-intentioned egomaniac playing a game he isn't really qualified to play.
The Intercept, on the other hand, is a well-funded and politically legitimate news organization that has everything it needs to maintain journalistic integrity while reporting on stuff most news orgs can't touch. They've got no excuse for the deterioration of their journalistic integrity. This hit piece on Wikileaks makes mountains out of mole hills, and furthers the new "Red Scare" narrative that western media is pushing as a way to distract people from the fact that the American electoral system is utterly broken.
If the Intercept piece had been written honestly, the headline would have been 'Wikileaks' Assange Tries and Fails to Manipulate Trump Jr. Into Leaking Daddy Trump's Tax Returns'. But it was not written honestly. It was written like DNC propaganda.
Very good comment. I think Assange is just a pragmatic guy who doesn't mind fighting one battle at a time and join with lesser evils against greater evils. Wikileaks is still the best media outlet we have. Nobody has been able to claim Wikileaks fake news. Assange has stated that he has prioritized releasing dirt on Clinton as he had nothing on Trump that could further damage him. I mean seriously, if trump wasn't a pedo or something nothing would damage his rep.
A cogent analysis, as is the rest of your comment.
Thanks!
My thoughts here are mixed.
It seems that Assange/Wikileaks were attempting to get Trump Jr. to leak some docs in order to 'appear' impartial.
I think this is the part that irked me the most about this interaction. Yet, I think this has been made a larger deal than it really is.
At the end of the day, all publishers/media make attempts for info/leaks form various sources.
It is very instructive as well to look at the author of this article from the CFR funded Atlantic, Julia Ioffe.
https://www.theatlantic.com/author/julia-ioffe/
Scroll through her politics and her 'world affairs' writings and you'll notice she is focused almost entirely on : Russia, Russia, Russia...
Also, if you spend anytime on reddit, this piece sky rocketed to the top in the matter of minutes and the comment sections were filled with similar messages over and over...
Now this does not prove anything conclusively, but there are signs of a coordinated attack on Wikileaks. Perhaps they're trying to soften the blow of an impending leak.
just my opinion on this, thx
I really couldn't agree more as to the Intercept. I seek out opinion that is contrary to mine, in order to ensure I am not simply hearing echos. It can be distasteful, or, as in this case, revelatory.
Thanks!
I pretty much have the same opinion on the matter. Wikileaks is the single best news source we have and Assange is simply a pragmatic person. He'll do whatever it takes to further his vision even if it meant indirectly supporting a lesser evil. I haven't met the guy. But that's the impression I get.
Either way we should't never ever trust Wikileaks less than these government influence biased and partial reporters.
anti-panties?
WHAT?
oh...anti pathy....doesn't that mean 'hate her guts'.
Antipathy does indeed mean 'hate her guts'.
I am curious about your take on this post, as I know we all share that antipathy for HRC, yet you haven't upvoted the post, and I wonder if you disapprove of my sharing it, or what?
Mebbe you could either set me straight where I'm off course, or let me know I'm on the right track. As I point out, I'm a bit socially inept, and feel anxious when trying to guess what folks think of me, or what I've got to say.
Mebbe I should just take a couple Xanax, or swill some Kava Kava, and chill, instead =p
Curiousity kills the cat, though.
I just woke up...not sure if that was a good idea..maybe I should have slept longer..
I need more COFFEE.
I was trying to be funny....a little humor? (very little)
oh yeah...i should have voted..
done
Wiki-Leaks?
I haven't looked into it specifically. It's beyond my area of expertise. It seems to make the liberals see red, froth at the mouth, run in circles and pee in their pants. That's a good thing. Other than that I have no idea.
The Final Purge continues...
☺
I noticed you've taken the time to have a look at a couple of my posts, but your only comment has been emojis, which don't mean much I understand clearly.
I personally write to get folks to converse with me, so I'd appreciate knowing what you think of my posts, more substantively. Could you either add some commentary to the conversation, or criticism, or something involving words?
I'd appreciate it.