5 ms·

> Did I miss the part where Wikileaks refuted the allegation Yes, you did. You can find it with a simple web search. The accusation is pretty tenuous when you

> Did I miss the part where Wikileaks refuted the allegation Yes, you did. You can find it with a simple web search. The accusation is pretty tenuous when you look at the facts.

tptacek 11y ago
I looked. I searched for the name of the reporter who broke the story and any variation of "discredited", along with "Lukashenko" "Assange" "Wikileaks" "Belarus". Can you point me at a reported link? Would you agree that funneling intelligence to the government of Belarus is a grave accusation?
- foobarqux 11y ago
  If it were true. http://wlcentral.org/node/1412 http://wlcentral.org/node/1412 http://wlcentral.org/node/1186 http://wlcentral.org/node/1186
  - tptacek 11y ago
    The only sources you have refuting reports that ran in the mainstream media about Wikileaks funneling information to Belarus is Wikileaks itself? Those allegations ran in The Guardian, in Al Jazeera, in The Daily Beast (that time, from a source within Wikileaks), and several others. I don't like the NSA. Am I required to like Wikileaks? I don't.
    - foobarqux 11y ago
      You wrote, > Did I miss the part where Wikileaks refuted the allegation that is, you asked specifically for Wikileaks response, which is contained in one of the links I posted. I don't believe that wlcentral is Wikileaks itself, and in any case the evidence and arguments they present should stand on their own, regardless of whether one likes Wikileaks or not.
      - tptacek 11y ago
        Did you read these two blog posts carefully? They don't even refute the claims. In fact, the second one appears to stipulate that Shamir got access to cables relevant to Belarus from Wikileaks, subject to an "NDA" with WL (rebutting that site's earlier suggestion that Shamir got the cables through a third-party that WL had provided them to); it then proceeds for pages and pages to discuss the question of how close Shamir was to Wikileaks and Assange in particular. It doesn't bother you that cables that we probably haven't even seen were relayed from Chelsea Manning, through Assange and Wikileaks, through a noted holocaust denier, to the government of Belarus? Again: we don't get to see them. But the functionaries of one of the world's worst dictatorships, and one of Russia's closest satellite states, do get them. In fact: all the sources I've seen appear to stipulate that's true, disagreeing only on why that happened. I don't like the NSA and have plenty of reasons to be skeptical about the official USG narratives on virtually any subject. But I find Wikileaks to be an incredibly sketchy organization. Here's former WL staffer James Ball, writing for The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/nov/08/israel-shamir-julian-assange-cult-machismo http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/nov... So far as I can tell, the most powerful rebuttal WL has to Ball is to suggest that Ball is disgruntled and has an axe to grind. But Ball's allegations are specific, and in some cases corroborated!
        foobarqux 11y ago
        There was a falling out between the Guardian and Wikileaks. Ball, who did not have any reasonable career prospects, would have had incentive to side with the Guardian and pursue a job there, by offering inside access to Wikileaks and the Wikileaks story, a job which he ultimately obtained. I don't know of any meaningful, specific and credible allegation that Ball has made. As for Shamir, it seems pretty obvious that Wikileaks did not do a whole lot of background checking on the volunteers that they used to go through the source material. That's all. There isn't any evidence to suggest that Wikileaks partnered with Shamir in order to convey cables to Belarus, a feat which could have been done far more easily in other ways. Not central to the point but I think it's only speculation that Shamir gave any cables to Belarus.

> Did I miss the part where Wikileaks refuted the allegation Yes, you did. You can find it with a simple web search. The accusation is pretty tenuous when you look at the facts.

tptacek 11y ago

I looked. I searched for the name of the reporter who broke the story and any variation of "discredited", along with "Lukashenko" "Assange" "Wikileaks" "Belarus". Can you point me at a reported link? Would you agree that funneling intelligence to the government of Belarus is a grave accusation?

foobarqux 11y ago
If it were true. http://wlcentral.org/node/1412 http://wlcentral.org/node/1412 http://wlcentral.org/node/1186 http://wlcentral.org/node/1186
- tptacek 11y ago
  The only sources you have refuting reports that ran in the mainstream media about Wikileaks funneling information to Belarus is Wikileaks itself? Those allegations ran in The Guardian, in Al Jazeera, in The Daily Beast (that time, from a source within Wikileaks), and several others. I don't like the NSA. Am I required to like Wikileaks? I don't.
  - foobarqux 11y ago
    You wrote, > Did I miss the part where Wikileaks refuted the allegation that is, you asked specifically for Wikileaks response, which is contained in one of the links I posted. I don't believe that wlcentral is Wikileaks itself, and in any case the evidence and arguments they present should stand on their own, regardless of whether one likes Wikileaks or not.
    - tptacek 11y ago
      Did you read these two blog posts carefully? They don't even refute the claims. In fact, the second one appears to stipulate that Shamir got access to cables relevant to Belarus from Wikileaks, subject to an "NDA" with WL (rebutting that site's earlier suggestion that Shamir got the cables through a third-party that WL had provided them to); it then proceeds for pages and pages to discuss the question of how close Shamir was to Wikileaks and Assange in particular. It doesn't bother you that cables that we probably haven't even seen were relayed from Chelsea Manning, through Assange and Wikileaks, through a noted holocaust denier, to the government of Belarus? Again: we don't get to see them. But the functionaries of one of the world's worst dictatorships, and one of Russia's closest satellite states, do get them. In fact: all the sources I've seen appear to stipulate that's true, disagreeing only on why that happened. I don't like the NSA and have plenty of reasons to be skeptical about the official USG narratives on virtually any subject. But I find Wikileaks to be an incredibly sketchy organization. Here's former WL staffer James Ball, writing for The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/nov/08/israel-shamir-julian-assange-cult-machismo http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/nov... So far as I can tell, the most powerful rebuttal WL has to Ball is to suggest that Ball is disgruntled and has an axe to grind. But Ball's allegations are specific, and in some cases corroborated!
      - foobarqux 11y ago
        There was a falling out between the Guardian and Wikileaks. Ball, who did not have any reasonable career prospects, would have had incentive to side with the Guardian and pursue a job there, by offering inside access to Wikileaks and the Wikileaks story, a job which he ultimately obtained. I don't know of any meaningful, specific and credible allegation that Ball has made. As for Shamir, it seems pretty obvious that Wikileaks did not do a whole lot of background checking on the volunteers that they used to go through the source material. That's all. There isn't any evidence to suggest that Wikileaks partnered with Shamir in order to convey cables to Belarus, a feat which could have been done far more easily in other ways. Not central to the point but I think it's only speculation that Shamir gave any cables to Belarus.