The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Publishing stolen material: WikiLeaks, the DNC and freedom of speech > Comments

Publishing stolen material: WikiLeaks, the DNC and freedom of speech : Comments

By Binoy Kampmark, published 2/8/2019

The case presented in the United States District Court of the Southern District of New York was never convincing but remains an aspect of a broader effort to inculpate WikiLeaks and Julian Assange in assisting the Trump campaign triumph.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
Assange is an egotistical nutcase, probably autistic, certainly not a nice person, who js getting too much publicity.
Posted by ttbn, Friday, 2 August 2019 9:29:58 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
During the Trump campaign, Mr Trump publically avowed he loved WikiLeaks. Now he wants to shut RUSSIAN OPERATIVE, electoral interfering, Assange down along with any compromising evidence that may negatively affect his reelection campaign? OR EXPOSE THE FACTS AND THE MOUNTAIN OF LIES.

As they say, be careful what you wish for, Donald!

Who has the right to invade and expose the private musings of candidates or ambassadors!? Nobody! Unless there is a bonafide case to be made in the interests of national security!

Yes, hero to zero, Assange initially exposed some war crimes, that will never ever be punished, just covered! With a lot of loud trumpeting from the most powerful military on the planet!

They patently no longer respect international convention nor the rules of war? But then who does?
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Friday, 2 August 2019 10:21:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Elsewhere on these pages I've been trying to explain to all and sundry that Assange/ Wikileaks weren't being pursued for publishing Bradley Mannings stolen documents, but for allegedly participating in the theft ie that publishing stolen documents isn't a crime.

Hopefully, following this court case and article, others will now accept the accuracy of that.

OTOH, I'm a little disappointed that this case failed to proceed. Had it done so, the defendents would have had the chance to demand access to the DNC servers to verify that the data was actually stolen by Russians.

Because, despite the volumes that have written on the issue, there is actually no evidence that the Russians were involved. For reasons that are utterly bewildering, Mueller and his cohorts declined to examine the servers and merely took the word of the DNC that it was the 'Ruskies wot done it'.

There is at least some evidence that it was an inside job, a whistleblower, who took the data and passed it to Wikileaks. It would've been nice to get a little closer to the truth of that.
Posted by mhaze, Friday, 2 August 2019 5:08:23 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Rather than be led by the nose by Binoy's predictable leftwing academic sympathies for Assange/Wikileaks

it pays to study the much more thorough Four Corners investigation of the Russian intelligence-Assange contacts on Russia stealing the private files of the US Democratic Party (DNC files).

And then looking at the provision of said files by Russian Military Intelligence (GRU) to Assange/Wikileaks.

Click on "Transcript" left bottom of Hero or Villain: The United States vs Julian Assange (part 2) Four Corners http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/hero-or-villain:-part-2/11363888

"...GRU, established a secret cyber operations unit. In April 2016, the [Russian Intelligence] hackers attacked the democratic national committee and stole 10s of thousands of emails.

...REPORTER: [Russian Intelligence] established a website called DC leaks to begin publishing the emails and in an attempt to cover [Russian Intelligence's] tracks created a new online persona called Guccifer 2 point 0.

...REPORTER: WikiLeaks wanted whatever [Russian Intelligence's front website] Guccifer had. Correspondence revealed in the US indictment of the [Russian Intelligence] hackers, shows that on June 22nd [2016] WikiLeaks sent [Russian Intelligence front website] Guccifer a private message on Twitter:

[Wikileaks, under Assange's control, said] "Send any new material here for us to review and it will have a much higher impact than what you are doing."

SCOTT SHANE NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER, THE NEW YORK TIMES:
WikiLeaks was there for [Russian Intelligence]. it was a huge boon to distribute those emails [stolen by Russian Intelligence] through WikiLeaks which had a sort of established audience in the millions around the world."

Naturally leftwingers round the world side with Assange/Wikileaks/Russian Intelligence...

Oh well. Non-Russian democracies around the world will see how Assange explains it all in the US court system.
Posted by plantagenet, Friday, 2 August 2019 5:35:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pete, for all your supposed evidence, here are some facts.

Two highly respected and retired NSA former Directors undertook a forensic examination of the purported ‘hack’ of the DNC servers. Their scientific conclusions clearly demonstrated there was no ‘hack’.

The information was clearly downloaded onto an external drive (most likely a USB) and most likely given directly to Assange, probably by Seth Rich (conveniently for the DNC, now deceased in mysterious circumstances). There could not have been a hack because insufficient time was available to do it via the internet and additionally time stamps on the data showed it had been manually downloaded.

There goes the magical Russian hack and the entire fiasco that has been Russiagate.
Posted by Galen, Saturday, 3 August 2019 12:51:04 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Giday Galen

Yes its quite possible an AGENT of RUSSIAN INTELLIGENCE "downloaded [the DNC files] onto an external drive (most likely a USB) and most likely given directly to Assange."

It is also risible that Assange/Wikileaks decided to embugger the US electoral system by document dumping/publishing the DNC files stolen by RUSSIAN INTELLIGENCE.
_____________________________________________

The SETH RICH myth is an intentional Assange/Wikileaks' distraction

Click on "Transcript" left bottom of Hero or Villain: The United States vs Julian Assange (part 2) Four Corners http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/hero-or-villain:-part-2/11363888 and it yields

"REPORTER: While in Washington it was now widely accepted that the Russians had been behind the DNC hack, Assange refused to be drawn on his source. Instead Assange chose to cast more shadows. He implied the source might have been a young DNC staffer called SETH RICH who had been murdered in a suspected late night robbery.

SCOTT SHANE NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER, THE NEW YORK TIMES: I mean he was all but naming SETH RICH as his source, and I saw that as completely underhanded and really kind of cruel to SETH RICH's family. I think he was just trying to protect his own reputation by refuting, using Seth Rich to refute the idea that he'd become a sort of witting tool of the Russian state."
Posted by plantagenet, Saturday, 3 August 2019 9:36:06 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy