3 ms·
From the article in your comment: >“As far as we recall these are already public,” WikiLeaks wrote at the time. >In 2014, the BBC and other news outlets report
by ramblerouser 8y ago
From the article in your comment:
>“As far as we recall these are already public,” WikiLeaks wrote at the time.
>In 2014, the BBC and other news outlets reported on the cache, which revealed details about Russian military and intelligence involvement in Ukraine. However, the information from that hack was less than half the data that later became available in 2016, when Assange turned it down.
So the source was trying to piggyback on the well earned publicity Wikileaks publications get to bring attention to an old leak by adding some uninteresting documents to it. I suspect if his addition had contained revelations, we would have heard about it, especially given the anti-Russia bias of the corporate media lately.
On the Syrian payment, why is Russia giving money to an ally something I should find questionable? How much money did the US give Israel that year alone?