3 ms·

Does the article mention any lies Wikileaks has promulgated? I only saw it talking about how they're willing to play hard in politics and 'take political scalp

Does the article mention any lies Wikileaks has promulgated? I only saw it talking about how they're willing to play hard in politics and 'take political scalps'

Gatsky 8y ago
"WikiLeaks baffled some supporters when it started seeding or promoting fake news about Hillary Clinton’s health, Pizzagate, and even Democrats engaging in satanic rituals at the same time it was releasing genuine material stolen from the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign."
- Natsu 8y ago
  Which statements from Wikileaks, precisely, were false? One normally quotes that and then shows what part of it is false, rather than alluding to various conspiracy theories formed around certain items and blaming them for every random conclusion someone who read an email came to. If someone takes your post to some absurd conclusion, can you be held responsible for it even if what you said was true? For example, John Podesta really did receive (not send!) a strange email saying 'The realtor found a handkerchief (I think it has a map that seems pizza-related. Is it yorus? They can send it if you want. I know you're busy, so feel free not to respond if it's not yours or you don't want it.' [1], but that certainly doesn't lead any normal person to the conclusion that those are code words or there are pedophiles lurking at (or under) the local pizza shop. And one might also note that Podesta doesn't appear to have responded to that (implying that whatever that was, it's not even his). For Hillary's health, she did collapse and there is video. [2] This does not, however, imply that she has kuru or whatever odd theories Reddit has come up with now. So it's hard to blame Wikileaks for presenting true facts or even questioning WTF some of the emails meant, or what that weird picture is attached to [3] is, just because random Redditors invented a conspiracy around it. Rather it seems that people have been taking strange, but verifiable events and stretching them completely beyond reason, so they blame Wikileaks for that rather than all the random people online who actually drew the insane conclusions. [1] https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/32795 https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/32795 [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zYthqiLs_I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zYthqiLs_I [3] https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/39999 https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/39999 - view the attached image. See also: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/15893 https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/15893 but note that the Spirit Cooking dinner with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Abramovic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Abramovic did not actually happen, as can be seen in later emails.
  - zeth___ 8y ago
    I'd like to know why you were downvoted.

Does the article mention any lies Wikileaks has promulgated? I only saw it talking about how they're willing to play hard in politics and 'take political scalps'

Gatsky 8y ago

"WikiLeaks baffled some supporters when it started seeding or promoting fake news about Hillary Clinton’s health, Pizzagate, and even Democrats engaging in satanic rituals at the same time it was releasing genuine material stolen from the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign."

Natsu 8y ago
Which statements from Wikileaks, precisely, were false? One normally quotes that and then shows what part of it is false, rather than alluding to various conspiracy theories formed around certain items and blaming them for every random conclusion someone who read an email came to. If someone takes your post to some absurd conclusion, can you be held responsible for it even if what you said was true? For example, John Podesta really did receive (not send!) a strange email saying 'The realtor found a handkerchief (I think it has a map that seems pizza-related. Is it yorus? They can send it if you want. I know you're busy, so feel free not to respond if it's not yours or you don't want it.' [1], but that certainly doesn't lead any normal person to the conclusion that those are code words or there are pedophiles lurking at (or under) the local pizza shop. And one might also note that Podesta doesn't appear to have responded to that (implying that whatever that was, it's not even his). For Hillary's health, she did collapse and there is video. [2] This does not, however, imply that she has kuru or whatever odd theories Reddit has come up with now. So it's hard to blame Wikileaks for presenting true facts or even questioning WTF some of the emails meant, or what that weird picture is attached to [3] is, just because random Redditors invented a conspiracy around it. Rather it seems that people have been taking strange, but verifiable events and stretching them completely beyond reason, so they blame Wikileaks for that rather than all the random people online who actually drew the insane conclusions. [1] https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/32795 https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/32795 [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zYthqiLs_I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zYthqiLs_I [3] https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/39999 https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/39999 - view the attached image. See also: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/15893 https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/15893 but note that the Spirit Cooking dinner with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Abramovic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Abramovic did not actually happen, as can be seen in later emails.
- zeth___ 8y ago
  I'd like to know why you were downvoted.