JackRiddler wrote:Now you want to line up with Pompeo and Brennan and General Alexander and Boris Johnson, fine.
Jerky » Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:15 pm wrote: like it or not, this is the world we're in now, folks. Pretending like there's any way to prevent the Powers That Be from using the most advanced technologies available in their law enforcement efforts is pure intellectual masturbation at this point. Hell, I'm not even prepared to accept, as many here seem to, that them doing so is always and necessarily "a bad thing" quote/unquote.
But hey, that's me.
The Times wrote:Assange and his groupies backed wrong side
Only five years ago, life was so simple. Julian Assange and Edward Snowden were heroes, defending individual freedom and privacy against the depredations of overweening state power. Western intelligence agencies were the arch-villains, reckless and unaccountable snoopers. Nato was an anachronism and worries about Russia were strictly for scaremongers. Facebook was a nice way of sharing information and keeping up with your friends.
Antisemitism was bad, and so was Israel.
tweets implicitly backing the Russian approach to the nerve-agent attack in Salisbury
Its reputation is tarnished by its role in smearing Hillary Clinton and in trying to help Donald Trump’s election campaign.
The same people who used to rally round Mr Snowden are now hoping that Robert Mueller’s investigation will bring down the president.
Facebook has emerged as a far bigger threat to privacy than anything the state can get up to, at least in western countries.
The huge data heist perpetrated by Mr Snowden in 2013 did not reveal a single instance of interference by western intelligence agencies in public life.
and their supporters have mostly been firing at the wrong target. A fraction of the ire, and whistleblowing zeal, that they directed against the mythical big brother of the intelligence agencies might have helped tame the real problem of greedy and reckless technology companies.
A less gullible attitude to Russia might have helped stiffen spines on that front too.
Racism, it turns out, is not just a problem on the far right. If you care about feminism and gay rights, you need to be ready to confront hardline Muslims who regard them as detestable. If you dislike imperialism you should lambast Russia for its treatment of ex-colonies such as Ukraine. If you want to defend democracy, you should be a grateful ally of our security and intelligence services.
And, as Mr Assange should note as he skulks in his fetid squat, we should all remember that the rule of law is still the best guarantee of individual liberty.
If you want to defend democracy, you should be a grateful ally of our security and intelligence services.
WHY IS THE FBI IGNORING BOMB-MAKER CONNECTED TO TSARNAEVS?
Marionumber1 » Fri Mar 30, 2018 11:01 am wrote:And who will investigate their own crimes? Themselves? Just because the intelligence services do sometimes catch real criminals like Trump's gang doesn't mean we should be their "grateful ally". That article is asking people to lie down and pretend that US intelligence agencies aren't themselves criminals on a massive scale. I'll gladly take the victories I can get, but in no way are they defenders of democracy, merely defenders of their ability to subvert democracy.
Several members of the board, including Snowden, have grown disenchanted with WikiLeaks. Snowden has for some time considered it to have strayed far from its laudatory transparency and accountability missions,
“Democratizing information has never been more vital, and @Wikileaks has helped,” Snowden tweeted. “But their hostility to even modest curation is a mistake.” The mild rebuke drew a sharp response from Assange: “Opportunism won’t earn you a pardon from Clinton.”
EXCLUSIVE: The Freedom of the Press Foundation has routed half a million dollars to WikiLeaks. But Julian Assange’s embrace of Trump split the group’s board, which includes Edward Snowden, and now it’s on the verge of a major break
The free press group’s impending split with Assange is a microcosm of a broader anxiety over him amongst his erstwhile allies, now that WikiLeaks has made common cause with extreme right-wing forces, principally Trump and Putin
“Suddenly the voice of WikiLeaks seemed to be all about questioning one candidate—Hillary Clinton.” When the group’s tone began to resemble that of Nazi publications’, a source said, “something is wrong”
Snowden, sources close to him tell The Daily Beast, has felt for a long time that Assange has taken WikiLeaks far from a positive, constructive vision of what Snowden believes WikiLeaks could—or should—be
“When the guy in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, who is normally of the extreme left, is echoing Nazi publications, something is wrong”
After the 2016 election, when Trump’s fortunes had clearly turned, WikiLeaks floated to Trump Jr. the trial balloon of convincing Australia to appoint Assange as its next U.S. ambassador
“This is the final mark of someone who’s in it for himself,” says journalist James Ball, who once worked for WikiLeaks, of Julian Assange. “He’s a sad man in a broom cupboard”
As Brown pointed out in another tweet, it was all-caps exasperating that Assange was in this case “complaining about ‘slander’ of being pro-Trump IN THE ACTUAL COURSE OF COLLABORATING WITH TRUMP.”
“Plainly,” he observed with bitterness, “the prospect of a Clinton in the White House was such an unimaginable nightmare scenario that all normal standards of truth and morality became moot and it became necessary to get people like Sebastian Gorka into the White House to establish order.”
Brown had a visceral reaction to the news, first reported by The Atlantic, that WikiLeaks had been advising the Trump campaign. In a series of tweets and Facebook videos, Brown accused Assange of having compromised “the movement” to expose corporate and government wrongdoing by acting as a covert political operative.
Brown explained that he had defended WikiLeaks for releasing emails hacked from the Democratic National Committee, “because it was an appropriate thing for a transparency org to do.” But, he added, “working with an authoritarian would-be leader to deceive the public is indefensible and disgusting.”
It is not surprising that Brown felt personally betrayed by Assange, since, as he explained on Facebook Tuesday night, “I went to prison because of my support for WikiLeaks.” Specifically, Brown said, the charges against him were related to his role in “operations to identify and punish members of the government and members of private companies that had been exposed by Anonymous hackers of my acquaintance, via email hacks, as having conspired to go after Assange, to go after WikiLeaks.”
That sort of activism, dedicated to making public secret wrongdoing, Brown argued, is very different from “colluding with an authoritarian presidential campaign backed by actual Nazis while publicly denying it.”
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot], streeb and 14 guests