@sineyaprime said:
@rubear said:
@sineyaprime said:
@rubear said:
Way more relevant then pseudoinvestigations with evidience shown to nobody except pseudoinvestigators or, say, you)
This was kinda hard to read, but I take it you don't trust official investigations?
And i also believe that only rather naive people'd believe such investigations just on word without any evidience or with fake evidience like this poweder shown by US state secretary Colin Powell to provoke invasion in Iraq. Official investigations tend to be political. Official investigators likewise tend to have political motivations. So if you hear that they're demanding your trust but not willing to show you any facts or real evidiences - do not trust them. On the other hand we both know how many dirty secrets were uncoverd on Wikileaks or on other sources by, say, hackers... and confirmed.
Hm. But is WikiLeaks any more trustworthy ? It's endangered millions of people by posting personal information in it's dumped leaks. Julian Assange has a show on RT which is funded by the Russian Govt. who seem to be clamoring for a Trump presidency. Plus they rarely actually scrutinize the information they released, even if it's not verified as true.
I'm not sure how posting of e-mails can really endanger millions, of course if it's not millions of dollars used on presidential election by side of one of candidates.
That I can remember Wikileaks has posted a voter databases that included private information on the millions of citizens, particularly endangering the women in it, in 79 of the 81 provinces in Turkey, their addresses, citizenship IDs, party registration, etc. A similar thing happened when they again dumped thousands of documents from Saudi Arabia, releasing personal data on LGBT citizens, rape victims, HIV patients, etc.
But i certainly see how reckless invasions such as already mentioned invasion in Iraq endangered and actually killed hundreds of thousands if not millions of people. Julian Assange certanily can be sometimes on one side with Russian Gov, just as Trump can benefit from this revelations. I see it. Now let's imagine reverse situation. Imagine that US lost Cold War and entered Second Great Depression, that some states became independent, that in one of them, say, in California there is now civil war with one of sides pro-US and another pro-USSR. That USSR acted as "world policeman" for like 25 decades and broke some states, say, Australia or Algeria in process. And that there are coming elections in Russia. There are two candidates. One is old-school memeber of communist party with grudge and attitude towards US and another is businessman without direct connections with old establishment. One wants to press on US and perhaps, say, build Statue of Lenin instead of Statue of Liberty one day. Another thinks that USSR already did much, perhaps in some cases too much and it's time to limit foreign activity and focus on internal problems. He also tells people that he don't want conflict with US and want to discuss peace instead. For whose presidency US Government'd be clamoring in this theoretical case? And how this theoretical clamouring part would erase mistakes done by pro-agression, pro-intervention candidate during his tenure as secretary of party from existence?
I'm sure Russia's apparent intervention is based more on them viewing Trump as a weaker and more easily manipulated leader, either way if indeed they are involved, why shouldn't we question it and their ties to one of the candidates? You're making false parallels that don't work here, especially if you don't think Trump is the more pro-aggression candidate.
Really or you just think so?) Even if it is so, look on the other side. WikiLeaks are just giving you information. They're not demanding your absolute trust in it.
The problem is that they aren't even attempting to curate information based on its accuracy, they're well aware of the following and influence they have so they are at fault for spreading misinformation, especially when it's spread by readers throughout social media where it's taken as fact by gullible people. They lack the integrity to even bother redacting the personal information of innocent people that they expose to the world.
Log in to comment