13
votes
What are your thoughts on Wikileaks?
I'm curious to see what the public consensus towards the site is nowadays. They have been controversial since their inception, but no matter what you think of them, there is no denying that the information they've released has sparked massive debate around the world.
I believe that the whole operation was compromised when the hashes mismatched back in 2016. I believe that it was Russia who comprised the operation and since then they've been used by Russia to disseminate information harmful to the U.S.
Source for the hash statement:
http://nymag.com/selectall/2016/11/wikileak-hashes-dont-match-so-whats-going-on.html
EDIT: Typo
Thanks for linking to that. That's a red flag indeed and their reasoning for the mismatch makes no sense at all so it seems very likely that something is going on there.
Its also interesting how they threatened to release documents on the Kremlin, and then when the FSB responded with a casually worded threat and they never followed through with their leak.
Its a shame to think they could be compromised or under duress.
Also consider that the RNC was hacked along with the DNC (by I think the same people) but only the DNC emails were leaked by wikileaks....so more circumstantial evidence for you.
A source for that in case anyone was wondering like I was. It's of note that the FBI stated that the emails obtained were 'older' than the DNC counterpart
On the one hand, I am in favor of releasing just about any information about governments and public figures. I want there to be transparency in the world, especially for anything related to the government. This should help fight corruption and bring to light anything unsavory public figures are doing so they can be brought to justice as needed.
On the other hand, I have seen several articles in the last couple years noting that Wikileaks is curating the information they release and may be doing it specifically for political reasons. I'm not totally up to speed with what exactly they have released, and what people are cl;aiming to have held back. I hear accusations from both US Liberals and US Conservatives that they are biased against them, which makes me feel like they might be working magnanimously. I've also heard accusations that they are actively working to further the divide between the US political parties by releasing information damaging to both sides.
Long story short, I am generally in favor of transparency and revealing corruption, especially among public figures. I am unsure if Wikileaks is genuinely working towards that end, of if they are sowing dissent under the guise of transparency.
They are definitely biased against democrats.
WikiLeaks hasn't released anything particularly damning since Clinton's emails. They used to be a lot more non-partisan.
That about covers my opinion of them. They are too partisan, biased against the Democrats, for me to take seriously.
Assange used whatever power he had at the time to help throw the election for Trump, and I hate him for that.
I don't believe that Hillary was the best choice to run, but I do believe that she would have worked for the best interests of America, while not intentionally destroying us within and without.
Just because I do not like their facts does not mean I get to throw-out their arguments.
They also have claimed to be "journalists", but wouldn't know objectivity if it sat in their lap and licked their face.
Ten years ago, I "leaked" a document off of a public but extremely obscure government website to them. They published it a week later - and used not a word of the description or title I'd provided, inventing their own hyperbolic, editorialized, ones.
Then there was the ridiculousness with "Collateral Murder", and... yeah.
Add in their blatant anti-leftist biases (reportedly they've repeatedly refused to publish leaks about the alt-right, when offered them) and it's very difficult to take them particularly seriously.
To be fair (not that they deserve it, TBH...) they have at least done a better job of protecting their sources than, say, The Intercept, who are a similarly unobjective, biased circus, just without the occasional moments of technological competence.
That we know of. The Russians, who I honestly believe have compromised Wikileaks (or it was their asset from the very start), may very well know the leak sources and are using that knowledge to turn those leakers into assets themselves.
I think that assange is a political prisoner, and that political prisoners is a sign of something very very evil and dangerous. The issue is complicated by his other crimes and possible partisanship, it becomes very hard to overlook and judge it only as an issue of somebody being trapped for defiance against the state. so there is a lot of controversy about it. For me it comes back to this interview he gave with John Pilger where he explained that he has been separated from his family and wasn't able to see his children grow up. Heartbreaking. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sbT3_9dJY4
He allowed the Swedes to interview him from inside them embassy and he has repeatedly said he would face trial if he was guaranteed safety. That rape case was dropped by investigators shortly after they went to see him.
You have to acknowledge that the situation is more complex than that. The threat of extradition is very real and he made a decision to skip bail in order to avoid that outcome. The UN has backed him here thus giving him the arbitrary detention label.
You honestly don't believe that if Assange were to step out of that embassy that he would face extradition to the United States?
So Assange rapes 2 women, gets charged and then decides to take up political asylum to avoid talking to the authorities thus saving him from any harm. That story doesn't make any sense because he voluntarily spoke with Swedish police anyways.
The charges have been dropped since then. He is not being held there because of an old accusation but because he chose to skip bail. Things were heating up between Assange and the US during that time and once the UK arrested him the walls were closing in. The UK is not supposed to extradite for political reasons but once the court case sprung up they were given an easy reason to. Given his line of work, his decision seems pretty reasonable to me.
Its been bad from the start. If anyone believed in them even before the elections then they need to take a good look in a mirror. We had a LOT of former credible wikileaks workers leave the site and give interviews over how horrible Assange is and how he has an agenda but everyone on Reddit and here seems to circle jerk him hard.
I am glad the election has woken people up to show that Assange has been untrustworthy for a very long time.
Before you can reasonably discuss their bias or whatever it's probably helpful to read the early white papers on what they're trying to do.
This suggests that their only real target is Democratic governments that use conspiracy to hoodwink voters.
As such they have relatively little reason to leak against authoritarian states. How would anyone action the information?
I think it's likely that they have been compromised or else decided that given the US establishment is clearly out to get them then the enemy of their enemy is their friend. But I don't hold this belief very strongly, we have no real data and the whole topic is clearly going to attract a lot of fuzzing from powerful actors.
I don't know what to think. The accusations of Russian influence seem completely misaligned with (what I perceived to be) Assange's motivations. After learning about his partisan views (admittedly disliking Trump and Hillary but ultimately favoring Trump's presidency), I had been ready to dismiss him. I'm absolutely interested in the forced transparency of powerful institutions, if Assange is attempting to facilitate what is published, I can't trust them not to become another self-interested gatekeeper of information.
Recently, I've come across some presentations by Yanis Varoufakis and some programs by the Diem25 movement and they resonate with me. A lot of the political and philosophical thinkers surrounding that movement strongly support Assange, express solidarity with him, visit with him regularly. I have not come across any condemnation by those people regarding the conduct of wikileaks as described by other posters in this thread. It gives me a sense of unease.
Well, it seems like many of you are on the same page about wikileaks being another Russian conspiracy that has been out to get the democrats from the start, so i'm just wondering, what do you all think about this article and do you think it may have anything to do with Assange not wanting the Democrat establishment to win the last election?
The idea that Wikileaks is a Russian conspiracy is not the general consensus, it's actually a bit extreme. If anything, Assange has a personal vendetta against Clinton due to her opposition to him while she was secretary of state. There is nothing to indicate he is anti-democrat. He stated in an interview that Donald Trump represented white trash and that he preferred her over Clinton due to the fact that he had less parties enabling him.
As far as Wikileaks being a "Russian Conspiracy" I think that the information they have provided is everything but one. Its just interesting that they only release information on certain governments and not others. All the information is true and it is all relevant. There just might be more of it that we have not seen.
I guess I should start by saying that I agree with you. I don't think wikileaks is anti-democrat or taking part in some kind of conspiracy. I was asking the question of the others in this thread that seem to overwhelmingly agree on that. So, my question was more to anyone who believes that is actually the case and what they think of the shady relationship between the Democrats and multi-national tech monopolies, assuming they believe the article and it's well documented sources.
I wondered if that's what you meant, but the wording of the post made it kind of hard to tell. I'll have to read that article and look into those links between the tech companies. I'll add it to my queue and get back to ya
Pretty interesting read. Its disgusting to see them working on behalf of the government in that way. Hopefully encryption and open source software can kill any effects of that alliance.
Were they anti-Demcorats even back then? Wouldn't Russia have been better served with Obama in the White House than with Romney?
Though I suppose Russia was very happy with a Republican-controlled House and a Democrat president. Such a glorious gridlock.