• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Wikileaks CIA doc dump

WakeForestRanger said:
No one is saying that the information about capabilities is false. We're saying that it is being selective leaked by a hostile foreign power to undermine faith in the US government.
Click to expand...

Could be true. Assuming what you read is true, are you concerned about the content?

How did Russia obtain this info?
 
knowell said:
https://www.wired.com/2017/03/wikileaks-cia-hacks-dump/

Initial expert reactions are that the data seems legitimate

“From what I can tell, this seems to be legitimate,” says David Kennedy, CEO of TrustedSec, who formerly worked at the NSA and with the Marine Corps’ signals intelligence unit. “It shows expansive capabilities of the CIA and divulges NSA tools as well. But a lot of it seems to be missing, as far as direct codebase used for these.” Wikileaks says it redacted much of that more specific information.
Click to expand...

I don't doubt they have the capabilities. I don't believe they used it to hose Trump, and it's way too convenient how the information fits perfectly into a narrative that absolves Russia of wrongdoing in the hacks. I call bullshit.
 
Liquid Karma said:
I don't doubt they have the capabilities. I don't believe they used it to hose Trump, and it's way too convenient how the information fits perfectly into a narrative that absolves Russia of wrongdoing in the hacks. I call bullshit.
Click to expand...

Could be. It is pretty convenient.
 
knowell said:
https://www.wired.com/2017/03/wikileaks-cia-hacks-dump/

Initial expert reactions are that the data seems legitimate

“From what I can tell, this seems to be legitimate,” says David Kennedy, CEO of TrustedSec, who formerly worked at the NSA and with the Marine Corps’ signals intelligence unit. “It shows expansive capabilities of the CIA and divulges NSA tools as well. But a lot of it seems to be missing, as far as direct codebase used for these.” Wikileaks says it redacted much of that more specific information.
Click to expand...

Why is Wikileaks in the business of redacting more specific information if it is non-partisan? What is being left out and by what logic?

I'm all for transparency, think that the Obama administration was terrible at it, and have been underwhelmed by Trump's administration so far, but I believe pretty firmly that this is just not the way.

If you can't see how the information in the leaks is carefully curated to suit the interest of a foreign entity, then I don't know what to tell you.
 
knowell said:
Could be true. Assuming what you read is true, are you concerned about the content?

How did Russia obtain this info?
Click to expand...

Am I concerned that CIA has these capabilities? No. China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran are actively developing the same capabilities. Cyberwarfare has its own arms race.

Am I concerned that information is now public knowledge? Yes. It will be used as propaganda against the US. It will also provide conspiracy theorists with a line of defense to use in protecting Trump's collusion with the Russians.

How did the Russians obtain that info? Espionage. Maybe Snowden had some of it, but there's no reason to believe it had to come from him.
 
Strickland33 said:
Why is Wikileaks in the business of redacting more specific information if it is non-partisan? What is being left out and by what logic?

I'm all for transparency, think that the Obama administration was terrible at it, and have been underwhelmed by Trump's administration so far, but I believe pretty firmly that this is just not the way.

If you can't see how the information in the leaks is carefully curated to suit the interest of a foreign entity, then I don't know what to tell you.
Click to expand...

I may have misread, but I thought they were saying that the redacted material contained info that would be dangerous if leaked.

I do see where this information is helpful to this foreign power and damaging to the current narrative. Does that automatically mean that it is wrong or untrue?
 
What do you mean by wrong or untrue?

There is little doubt that the CIA has the capabilities that are claimed.
 
knowell said:
I may have misread, but I thought they were saying that the redacted material contained info that would be dangerous if leaked.

I do see where this information is helpful to this foreign power and damaging to the current narrative. Does that automatically mean that it is wrong or untrue?
Click to expand...

Nobody is saying that it is untrue. Is it wrong to selectively leak information that is helpful to the interests of a foreign power (Russia)? Yeah, it is. End of story.

You don't see how this is a problem? The information that they leaked is dangerous. I don't trust Julian Assange's editorial discretion. Nor should you.

It would be a very different story if Wikileaks was the raw documents dump that it once was and claimed to still be, but it isn't so it's not.
 
Russian spy chimes in.

 
Strickland33 said:
Why is Wikileaks in the business of redacting more specific information if it is non-partisan? What is being left out and by what logic?

I'm all for transparency, think that the Obama administration was terrible at it, and have been underwhelmed by Trump's administration so far, but I believe pretty firmly that this is just not the way.

If you can't see how the information in the leaks is carefully curated to suit the interest of a foreign entity, then I don't know what to tell you.
Click to expand...


He can see it, he just doesn't give a shit. Anything to defend his holiness the President, the one true god in knowell's world.
 
knowell said:
Some of us are born stupid. You have to make allowances.
Click to expand...

the new ACA says that you can't fix stupid, it's called the tatar salad rule. sorry knowell
 
knowell said:
Could be true. Assuming what you read is true, are you concerned about the content?

How did Russia obtain this info?
Click to expand...

this might be the flexibility Obama was talking about after he won his 2nd term ?

 
Can somebody explain why it was so sinister for a election year incumbent to say he will have more flexibility in his 2nd term?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top