4 ms·

* Theres a theory that WIKILEAKS has been a FSB front since 2010: * https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/3pobtq/is_russia_secretly_influencing_wikileak

• seivan 11y ago
  Maybe it's harder to get leaks from Russian intel? Just a guess.
  • NN88 11y ago
    Not an excuse. Read the link. In 2010, they claimed to have a massive cache of information. Then guess what? Moscow sent very subtle but real threats towards them. And their tune hasn't been the same SINCE. Its well outlined in the link.
    • CzarSpider 11y ago
      > https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalDiscussion/comments/3ponbs/id_like_to_discuss_my_skepticism_of_wikileaks/ https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalDiscussion/comments/3ponbs... The original post was removed. You might want to check that.
      • NN88 11y ago
        https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/3pobtq/is_russia_secretly_influencing_wikileaks_i_dont/ https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/3pobtq/is_russi...
    • sb057 11y ago
      Not reporting on something because of a threat hardly qualifies someone as a "front". That's like saying newspapers that don't publish Muhammad cartoons for fear of retaliation are fronts for the Islamic State.
      • NN88 11y ago
        chart wikileaks' leaks since Russia threatened them at the end of 2010 and tell me you don't see a trend there
  • Grue3 11y ago
    There's been many major leaks. Hell, Prime Minister Medvedev's email has been hacked and he's certainly higher ranked than CIA director. Nothing on Wikileaks of course. Strange, isn't it?
• lvs 11y ago
  This is completely illogical and tinfoily. If an intelligence outfit knows something, it's unwise to show their cards. It reveals sources and methods to do so. Nobody operates this way.
  • NN88 11y ago
    former intelligence analysts have suggested this. The USGovt would never admit this because it might backfire as merely attacking a leaker, whose leaks are legitimate. But the fact is, Wikileaks has to be judged on what they're not leaking.
  • chatmasta 11y ago
    I'm not sure how "tinfoily" a suggestion is when it's referencing wikileaks. Wikileaks is in the business of conspiracies. It isn't much of a stretch to suggest a conspiracy might be behind wikileaks itself.
• mtgx 11y ago
  Sounds like one of those "the US has been keeping aliens in Area 51" kind of things. And what I mean by that is that if it were true, we'd probably know about it by now. And really, don't you think the US gov would push that narrative across all the US media if it learned it was true? I mean, they've been pushing the "Snowden is a Russian spy" story already - and that's not even true.
  • NN88 11y ago
    Its hard to prove because it would be interpreted as just attacking a leaker. The USGovt has to be sensitive to the fact that the leaks are real information. But its far more nuanced to prove that WIKILEAKS is just pushing an anti-USA/NATO view. Look at the Saudi Arabia leaks in light of the fact they're in a price war with Russia right now. You won't see an Iranian leak on WIKILEAKS..and you haven't.
    • Kristine1975 11y ago
      >You won't see an Iranian leak on WIKILEAKS..and you haven't. What about this one: "Assorted plans and papers from the Iranian Ammunition Industries Group, 2009" https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Assorted_plans_and_papers_from_the_Iranian_Ammunition_Industries_Group,_2009 https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Assorted_plans_and_papers_from_th...
• rhizome 11y ago
  So what? Information is information.
• deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]