US election 2016

[ewerk 31561]

Can you summarise?

[Gemmill 47005]

Yes.

[Happy Face 29]

No but is publishing donor's phone number and email address necessary? Is publishing credit card details necessary. Is publishing the name of everyone who donated fairly and according to the law necessary.

 

Wikileaks makes no effort to distinguish the necessary from the dangerous.

 

But the necessary is far more valuable than the harm from the "dangerous".   I'd gladly cancel a credit card and be sent a new one if I was included in a leak that revealed wrongdoing.

 

There's a discussion to be had on the balance. Snowden specifically avoided Wikileaks because he didn't like the "dump" approach. I don't think the focus should be on the leakers more than the wrongdoing revealed.

[Happy Face 29]

Can you summarise?

 

You think the US aren't hacking and interfering in other nations elections?

 

Puts the US government in the position of arguing AGAINST their own electorate being informed.

 

Espionage will lead to leaked docs including falsehoods.

[Park Life 71]

The U.S. surveillance budget is bigger than the whole planet combined.

 

Former NSA contractor Edward Snowden has leaked documents that map out a $52.6 billion budget for the NSA, CIA, and other security agencies in unprecedented detail. The Washington Post, which reviewed the documents, describes a detailed list of objectives, failures, technologies, recruiting, and other information; the apparently 178-page summary itself has not been published. An interactive chart of some of the data, however, accompanies the piece."

 

Think for a minute that half this country is on food stamps.

Edited September 14, 2016 by Park Life

[Happy Face 29]

Wonder if Trump ever wonders to himself why Putin wants him in.

[Happy Face 29]

The other point Carlin makes is it doesn't matter who wins either.  The US population questioning it's democracy and whether they are as free as they think are could be the greater target.  Could the union be divided to the extent that it splits?

[Park Life 71]

Wonder if Trump ever wonders to himself why Putin wants him in.

Putin knows it doesn't matter who gets in.

 

It'll be Ukraine, Iran, Syria back on the table with the Guardian fully behind further war as they were for Libya.

 

It's why the EU is pushing for an EU army, it's why now Ipiss have lost the media are obsessing about aid and safe corridors (not while Ipiss were winning).

 

Destroy a country that has no debt (Iraq, Syria, Libya) ...I mean level the infrastructure and then send in the IMF with loans and take their central bank/resources hostage.

Edited September 14, 2016 by Park Life

[ewerk 31561]

But the necessary is far more valuable than the harm from the "dangerous".   I'd gladly cancel a credit card and be sent a new one if I was included in a leak that revealed wrongdoing.

 

There's a discussion to be had on the balance. Snowden specifically avoided Wikileaks because he didn't like the "dump" approach. I don't think the focus should be on the leakers more than the wrongdoing revealed.

 

Was there anything necessary about the DNC leaks? Was there anything there to inform and educate the public? We all knew that the DNC didn't want Sanders to win. The confirmation of that is all that seems to come out of this.

 

Every person and organisation has a right to privacy. Yes, leak wrong doing and abuse of power but everyone doesn't have a right to know everything.

[ewerk 31561]

You think the US aren't hacking and interfering in other nations elections?

 

Puts the US government in the position of arguing AGAINST their own electorate being informed.

 

Espionage will lead to leaked docs including falsehoods.

 

Of course they are but it doesn't make it right, particularly when there is so much at stake for the entire world.

 

This isn't informing the public, it's an attempt to make the Democrats look like they can't control their security.

[Happy Face 29]

Was there anything necessary about the DNC leaks? Was there anything there to inform and educate the public? We all knew that the DNC didn't want Sanders to win. The confirmation of that is all that seems to come out of this.

 

Every person and organisation has a right to privacy. Yes, leak wrong doing and abuse of power but everyone doesn't have a right to know everything.

 

We all knew they weren't impartial. The emails revealed the extent to which they were lying and spreading misinformation to undermine Sanders. I don't think the wider public necessarily assumed that was happening.

[Park Life 71]

You'll note Sanders didn't speak at AIPAC. In America if you don't speak at AIPAC and you're running for office you're basically toast.

 

 

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/06/03/hard-times-ahead-for-the-israel-lobby-thank-sanders-and-trump/

 

 

http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.710219

 

 

Mr Sanders delivered his remarks to an audience in Utah. It was a balanced statement that began with the pledge: “If elected president, I will work tirelessly to advance the cause of peace as a partner and as a friend of Israel. But to be successful, we have also got to be a friend not only to Israel but to the Palestinian people." He went on to say that “Palestinians can’t be ignored. You can’t have good policy ... if you ignore one side".

Mr Sanders called for ending the “occupation of Palestinian territory", and criticised Israel’s exploitation of Palestinian water resources, expropriation of Palestinian land, settlements and use of disproportionate violence. He decried the blockade of Gaza, its high unemployment rate, and the lack of progress in reconstruction."

Edited September 14, 2016 by Park Life

[Happy Face 29]

Of course they are but it doesn't make it right, particularly when there is so much at stake for the entire world.

 

This isn't informing the public, it's an attempt to make the Democrats look like they can't control their security.

 

That was my summary

 

I don't think highlightiong the flaws in DNC encryption is the goal though.  There are multiple interested parties all working on their own aims.  Without the wrongdoing, there wouldn't be an issue though. That's the root cause that we should shine a light on, not the sequence of events and competing interests that get it into the public domain.

 

The Wikileaks reward for a conviction in the murder of Seth Rich is an interesting one as well.  Was he genuinely their leaker or is he a Russian patsy?

[ewerk 31561]

But was it fair to release it without the balance of doing the same to the other side? That isn't informing the electorate, that's attempting to change the outcome of an election.

[ewerk 31561]

The Wikileaks reward for a conviction in the murder of Seth Rich is an interesting one as well.  Was he genuinely their leaker or is he a Russian patsy?

 

What's that about? I knew he was killed but didn't hear anything about him being a leaker.

[Park Life 71]

There are no conspiracies remember.

[ewerk 31561]

Oh now I get it. Hillary pulled the trigger.

[Happy Face 29]

What's that about? I knew he was killed but didn't hear anything about him being a leaker.

 

http://uk.businessinsider.com/wikileaks-20000-seth-rich-dnc-2016-8

[Park Life 71]

Oh now I get it. Hillary pulled the trigger.

[Park Life 71]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-31/whistleblowers-stunning-claim-nsa-has-all-hillarys-deleted-emails-it-may-be-leak

 

The war against privacy....

 

To trick targets into visiting a FoxAcid server, the NSA relies on its secret partnerships with US telecoms companies. As part of the Turmoil system, the NSA places secret servers, codenamed Quantum, at key places on the Internet backbone. This placement ensures that they can react faster than other websites can. By exploiting that speed difference, these servers can impersonate a visited website to the target before the legitimate website can respond, thereby tricking the target's browser to visit a Foxacid server."

 

 

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/10/how_the_nsa_att.html

 

If you've ever visited the Wikileaks site...

 

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/02/19/wiki-f19.html

 

 

The government of the UK has played a major role in the targeting of the web site. The leaked documents contained information about a GCHQ program called ANTICRISIS GIRL. The program is revealed in a Power Point slide prepared by the British spy agency for the 2012 SIGDEV Conference, an annual symposium held by the surveillance bureaucracies of the major powers. Under ANTICRISIS GIRL, GCHQ has been collecting IP addresses of individual computers that visit the WikiLeaks site, allowing them to identify and surveil individuals who access WikiLeaks."

 

Every single thing you fukin do on the internet is logged. EVERYTHING.

Edited September 14, 2016 by Park Life

[Happy Face 29]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-31/whistleblowers-stunning-claim-nsa-has-all-hillarys-deleted-emails-it-may-be-leak

 

The war against privacy....

 

To trick targets into visiting a FoxAcid server, the NSA relies on its secret partnerships with US telecoms companies. As part of the Turmoil system, the NSA places secret servers, codenamed Quantum, at key places on the Internet backbone. This placement ensures that they can react faster than other websites can. By exploiting that speed difference, these servers can impersonate a visited website to the target before the legitimate website can respond, thereby tricking the target's browser to visit a Foxacid server."

 

 

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/10/how_the_nsa_att.html

 

If you've ever visited the Wikileaks site...

 

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/02/19/wiki-f19.html

 

 

The government of the UK has played a major role in the targeting of the web site. The leaked documents contained information about a GCHQ program called ANTICRISIS GIRL. The program is revealed in a Power Point slide prepared by the British spy agency for the 2012 SIGDEV Conference, an annual symposium held by the surveillance bureaucracies of the major powers. Under ANTICRISIS GIRL, GCHQ has been collecting IP addresses of individual computers that visit the WikiLeaks site, allowing them to identify and surveil individuals who access WikiLeaks."

 

Every single thing you fukin do on the internet is logged. EVERYTHING.

 

Unless you use TOR, Signal, Telegram, Proton Mail etc 

[Renton 22380]

It's ironic that supporters of wikileaks are often the ones that value their own data protection. You've got nowt to hide HF, why don't you post all your personal details here?

[Happy Face 29]

It's ironic that supporters of wikileaks are often the ones that value their own data protection. You've got nowt to hide HF, why don't you post all your personal details here?

 

You don't know the difference between private citizens having transparent leadership, rather than leaders being shrouded in secrecy and citizens privacy being entirely eroded?

[ewerk 31561]

Does Wikileaks go through its dumps to remove any reference to/information on private citizens?

[Happy Face 29]

I don't know. Are you aware of specific examples of private citizens who have complained they don't?

 

I've read that the Pentagon weren't truthful about military leaks from Wikipedia...

 

The claim is false. WikiLeaks has clearly conducted harm minimization on all of its War Log releases. These harm minimization measures included:

 

Inviting the Pentagon to help WikiLeaks/Sunshine Press and partner news organizations to redact the documents in their possession prior to release. The Pentagon has refused unilaterally in all cases.

 

Using metadata to identify documents in the Afghanistan launch as sensitive.

 

Withholding 15,000 of the some 90,000 documents pertaining to Afghanistan for a full redaction and review.

 

A comprehensive redaction process for the Iraq War Logs release, working back from full redaction to disclosure of information of interest to the historical record, leaving the names of sensitive sources concealed.

 

A policy of gradual release of the State Department Cables release, inviting media organizations to help with the redaction of those documents relevant to their interests in return for (initially) embargoed access.

 

http://wlcentral.org/node/379

 

Wikileaks perception of who is fair game might differ from others, but I've not heard of any case where someone outside the public eye made complaint about their inclusion or came to any harm as a result.

 

Always happy to see examples. But if they do exist, I would have to weigh up the individual harm against the greater good of an aggressive press devoted to shining a light on wrong doing.