4 ms·

what are you talking about? your first paragraph is completely unintelligible. you realize Russia gave them the documents to leak right? no one is saying they g

what are you talking about? your first paragraph is completely unintelligible. you realize Russia gave them the documents to leak right? no one is saying they gave them an incentive. they are just pawns and will release anything they get.

Tannic 10y ago
There is no actual evidence it came from Russia. Even the "official statement" from DHS is ridiculously vague to the point of meaninglessness. Assange implied heavily the DNC leaks came from a staffer who was subsequently murdered...
dmix 10y ago
> they are just pawns and will release anything they get The media can and often does publish anything they get from government sources. Wikileaks isn't unique here. NYT is notorious for writing articles daily with "anonymous government sources" as the only source. Often unquestionably supporting a pro-US policy position. Does that make NYT/WaPo/etc pawns? Wikileaks is not immune from being manipulated by Intel agencies to push agendas. You're fooling yourself if you think the news organizations who have been accusing Wikileaks of doing this with moral outrage aren't also doing the same. There's probably a good argument in favour of the fact Wikileaks actually releases the raw data without caring about the source. Rather than continually taking quotes from 'anonymous' sources while feigning neutrality.
- thesimpsons1022 10y ago
  i didn't pass any judgement in using the word "pawns" or say that other news sources weren't. i've actually been a supporter of wikileaks for years. the post i was responding to however highly suggested that somehow the russians weren't involved which is silly bs promoted by trump. i also do feel that a source like wikileaks can be dangerous in the situation were currently in where one side of a political race has a bunch of its stuff leaked but the other side has none.

Tannic 10y ago

There is no actual evidence it came from Russia. Even the "official statement" from DHS is ridiculously vague to the point of meaninglessness. Assange implied heavily the DNC leaks came from a staffer who was subsequently murdered...

dmix 10y ago

> they are just pawns and will release anything they get The media can and often does publish anything they get from government sources. Wikileaks isn't unique here. NYT is notorious for writing articles daily with "anonymous government sources" as the only source. Often unquestionably supporting a pro-US policy position. Does that make NYT/WaPo/etc pawns? Wikileaks is not immune from being manipulated by Intel agencies to push agendas. You're fooling yourself if you think the news organizations who have been accusing Wikileaks of doing this with moral outrage aren't also doing the same. There's probably a good argument in favour of the fact Wikileaks actually releases the raw data without caring about the source. Rather than continually taking quotes from 'anonymous' sources while feigning neutrality.

thesimpsons1022 10y ago
i didn't pass any judgement in using the word "pawns" or say that other news sources weren't. i've actually been a supporter of wikileaks for years. the post i was responding to however highly suggested that somehow the russians weren't involved which is silly bs promoted by trump. i also do feel that a source like wikileaks can be dangerous in the situation were currently in where one side of a political race has a bunch of its stuff leaked but the other side has none.