Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sheb]

well she was on record asking to "drone" him, so there's that.

Sigh... http://www.snopes.com/julian-assange-drone-strike/

so the article source is her 'not recalling' telling it? she hasn't the best memory these days.

... no? Read the snopes thing. Like, in full? The source of the drone claim itself was unverifiable, coming from unnamed "sources" in the state department. The "corroborating" emails could be summed up as "cannot into English" in terms of how much they supported the claim. Clinton noting she can't recall even joking about it is tertiary to what makes the claim effectively empty. There's not actually record of her saying it, just some rando claiming she did, and then citing emails as back up evidence that were nothing of the sort.

It's not only "unnamed source", but its "unnamed sources" from the same website which broke the story that Clinon promised Scalia's seat to Obama.

[Criptfeind]

What an article. 79 year old man with a history of heart trouble dies of mysterious causes. Thanks Obama. What a weird world we live in that people can just make stuff up.

[Sheb]

Nah, it wasn't Obama, it was Clinton. (Yes, same website).

[Xeron]

Moreover, some Snowden documents published in 2014 show that the United States government put Assange on the "2010 Manhunting Timeline",[137] and in the same period they urged their allies to open criminal investigations into the editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks.[138] In the same documents there was a proposal by the NSA to designate WikiLeaks as a "malicious foreign actor", thus increasing the surveillance against it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange#US_criminal_investigation

I do like how almost everyone just changed the subject and ignored this.
There's more though.
https://wikileaks.org/Background-and-Documents-on-Attempts-to-Frame-Assange-as-a-Pedophile-and.html?update2

[Sheb]

What, the fact that the US tried to get Assange down? I mean, I think we just ignored it because we all agree with this, why?

[Neonivek]

What, the fact that the US tried to get Assange down? I mean, I think we just ignored it because we all agree with this, why?

Naw it is because there is no evidence he ISN'T a pedophile

(actually... oddly enough people often misunderstand the old quote "There is no evidence he isn't a communist" or at least I give it too much credit. It is more about how someone having an excessively clean record is extremely suspicious.)

[mainiac]

Moreover, some Snowden documents published in 2014 show that the United States government put Assange on the "2010 Manhunting Timeline",[137] and in the same period they urged their allies to open criminal investigations into the editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks.[138] In the same documents there was a proposal by the NSA to designate WikiLeaks as a "malicious foreign actor", thus increasing the surveillance against it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange#US_criminal_investigation

I do like how almost everyone just changed the subject and ignored this.
There's more though.
https://wikileaks.org/Background-and-Documents-on-Attempts-to-Frame-Assange-as-a-Pedophile-and.html?update2

Oh hey guys, let's assume that the wikileaks guys who have consistently distorted the truth in every circumstance are telling the truth when their leader is accused.

People think they are skeptical because they are irrationally suspicious of actors that are pretty known quantities.  I have a lot of issues with CNN and they are hardly perfect but it's clear where they are coming from.  Wikileaks on the other hand is blatantly trying to deceive you at all times but you accept their story at face value.  It just goes to show that the more cynical a person is, the more naive they are.

It's sad how far wikileaks has strayed from it's founding mission and so quickly.  I would not have thought it possible.

[Rolan7]

Moreover, some Snowden documents published in 2014 show that the United States government put Assange on the "2010 Manhunting Timeline",[137] and in the same period they urged their allies to open criminal investigations into the editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks.[138] In the same documents there was a proposal by the NSA to designate WikiLeaks as a "malicious foreign actor", thus increasing the surveillance against it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange#US_criminal_investigation

I do like how almost everyone just changed the subject and ignored this.
There's more though.
https://wikileaks.org/Background-and-Documents-on-Attempts-to-Frame-Assange-as-a-Pedophile-and.html?update2

Late Sep, Press widely misreport that WikiLeaks is going to launch its "October Suprise" against Hillary Clinton on Oct 4, misinterpreting its press conference call

Hehe, the "Press" [sic] widely misinterpreted their conference call?  That must hurt when they release so many intentionally misleading headlines and tweets in their desperate bid for continued relevancy.

Anyway... huh.  The Todd & Clare Facebook page *is* pretty weird.  Hundreds of foreign-language likes despite supposedly being a grassroots dating thing.  And "Guys join free"...  The world doesn't work that way...

So yeah, actually, that's pretty weird.  Who did this "investigative report" for Assange, though?  I think I'll see how real news agencies handle it, the ones with resources to call up the agency and confirm that they're more than a shell.  I mean, lots of companies do buy likes to become relevant on social media.

I certainly don't see how they're tying it to Clinton but I should be used to that.  No reason is ever necessary, she is teh r00t of a11 evil.
Edit: I quoted the wrong post

[Neonivek]

Look we ALL know Clinton is evil and will fix this election.

Heck the reason she only recently went on the sides of homosexuals was because she was trying to be popular... (and not because... you know... if she did it earlier it would have been political suicide...)

[misko27]

Look we ALL know Clinton is evil and will fix this election.

Heck the reason she only recently went on the sides of homosexuals was because she was trying to be popular... (and not because... you know... if she did it earlier it would have been political suicide...)

Neo, friend, we're in a stage of this election where Poe's Law is in FULL effect.

[Rolan7]

@Neo
Yeah so I take offense to that particularly, because I was mad at her for a while because of that "flip".
Thing is, she was never against us.  She just didn't speak out for us ineffectually.
I still want a Congress full of Bernie Sanders but hey, we live in reality.  More's the pity.

[mainiac]

Awwww, Canada

[Neonivek]

@Neo
Yeah so I take offense to that particularly, because I was mad at her for a while because of that "flip".
Thing is, she was never against us.  She just didn't speak out for us ineffectually.
I still want a Congress full of Bernie Sanders but hey, we live in reality.  More's the pity.

That is fine.

I am just kind of tired of the whole "She will say anything to get elected" which forgets the political climate we live in.

Think Bernie Sanders doesn't make compromises?

Awwww, Canada

The article has one thing right...

This might be the American Elections... But for what effect it will have on Canada it is like our election too.

[Rolan7]

Nope!
And I think that changing your position over time is a feature, not a weakness, particularly in a representative.

[mainiac]

You guys seem to be in agreement?