3 ms·
All you have to do is scan through Wikileaks' twitter posts to determine what side they are on. It takes a certain willful blindness to think otherwise.
by jnwatson 9y ago
All you have to do is scan through Wikileaks' twitter posts to determine what side they are on.
It takes a certain willful blindness to think otherwise.
- cookiecaper 9y agoWell, the first several tweets in their stream right now are: Project Dumbo (this story, a leak against the CIA), a leaked series of documents on Swedish arms sales to India, a link to leaked transcripts of Trump's calls with Mexican and Australian leaders, a criticism of the Washington Post's decision to leave "minor spelling and grammatical errors" in the leaked documents intact (as these could be useful in identifying the leaker), a criticism that U.S. interference in Venezuela has worsened their governance crisis, and finally, two tweets that link to leaked phone calls which strongly imply Seth Rich was Wikileaks's source for the Podesta mail dumps. That seems to be pretty much what you'd expect from Wikileaks, no? A bunch of links to raw documents and cited critiques on international meddling and journalistic practice? That stream includes a criticism of U.S. meddling in international affairs, two leaks against the Trump admin, and a criticism of the WaPo's incompetence in sanitizing their leak, thus risking their inside man. How does it reveal "the side" that Wikileaks is on? If it's simply a matter of willful blindness, please enlighten me; I've got my eyes open here.
- elif 9y agoThey are on the side of transparency and seek to correct propaganda spread about them. They did not choose to be the left's whipping boy, but are in a position of defense.