It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Assange: WikiLeaks did not receive Clinton emails from Russia

page: 2
38
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 10:43 AM
link   
a reply to: GreenGunther

So you'll accept it just because you are desperate for this information? Beggars can't be choosers, but that doesn't mean you compromise your evidence standards because someone is saying something you want to hear.
edit on 3-11-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 10:45 AM
link   
a reply to: ghostrager

That's the narrative I get whenever I post something from an American media so I think I'll just push it on you guys for your media heroes.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 10:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: GreenGunther

So you'll accept it just because you are desperate for this information? Beggars can't be choosers, but that doesn't mean you compromise your evidence standards because someone is saying something you want to hear.


Talk about saying something you want to hear. How about those allegations against Russia with no proof. Seems the same on both sides now doesn't it.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 10:57 AM
link   
IMO, speaking of real experts, they would say that the whole story about the dangers from Russia is nothing comparing to the two real threats the Western world will have to face in the coming decades.

The first one is China and the second is the Islamic world.

These are the issues those hilarious "17 US intelligence agencies" should study if they care about genuine threats.

Edit: P.S. Not mentioning internal enemies and their puppets, of course.
edit on 2016 by JedemDasSeine because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 10:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: GreenGunther

So you'll accept it just because you are desperate for this information? Beggars can't be choosers, but that doesn't mean you compromise your evidence standards because someone is saying something you want to hear.


Talk about saying something you want to hear. How about those allegations against Russia with no proof. Seems the same on both sides now doesn't it.

Which allegations would they be? I just said I can't trust Russia to be honest with this that's all.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 11:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

When did I say I'll accept it?
I'll listen and make my own conclusions.

I'm just saying beggars can't be choosers in the sense of 'if someone is willing to grant Julian an audience he'll accept it, to get his message out'

Please don't assume I just accept everything as fact because it's coming from Assange.
I'm also well aware that Putin plays tactics, pretty well I might add.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 11:07 AM
link   
a reply to: GreenGunther

Fair enough. Just making that point. If you understand this then I hope you apply it when you watch.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 12:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ohanka
Provide evidence for this accusation please.

Spreading demonising anti-Russian propaganda and slandering an anti-corruption, pro-transparency activist isn't particularly helpful to anything


Ah, I did not make an accusation, nor was I demonising Russia. You are too fast on the trigger. Was what I said untrue or misleading? But hey, you got loads of stars of who's complaining?

The mayhem over the Clinton emails - and there was a story that her email server may have been hacked five times - does not let Russia off the hook, nor does it put them on the hook either. However, denial that the source of Wikileaks' emails was not Russian, does not mean Russia have not been involved. This RT.com denial is a tactic used in other things that have proven true, such as with the annexation of Crimea.

Not sure anti-corruption and transparency can exist in the same sentence as the word Russia, considering they are one of the most corrupt nations out there.... Transparency International



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 12:49 PM
link   
Fellas, I can't tell how bad I want to say something but I just can't do it.
Just be patient and stay on top of all available sources.

I'll leave you with this video, I think its very good.



Buck
edit on 3-11-2016 by flatbush71 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 12:54 PM
link   
Whether the information comes from Russia or not is inconsequential. Whether RT is a soviet era mouthpiece, is inconsequential. Julian Assange a spy, hero, 3rd party state actor is also inconsequential.

None of that actually matters...

Because None of those answers or questions change what (C)linton did....

She (through malice or negligence) allowed classified Government material, to fall into the hands of a pedophile, who granted possible exposure of said material around the darknet and various unsavory actors. And thats not the worst of it.

Stay on target, don't entertain these attempts at distraction.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 12:57 PM
link   
a reply to: flatbush71

Anonymous does have an official youtube channel and it has more than 51k subscribers. This video is not good lol.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 01:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Christosterone

" Hillary Clinton is the ultimate candidate for the elite our brokers of the world…
She is a person with no moral compass and an unfathomable ambition paired with a proclivity for lying regardless of the publics outrage at her obvious falsehoods, fictionsand mischaracterizations...

Furthermore Hillary's insulation from criticism by a fawning media desperate to see another progressive pet group(women in this case) drive our country further into an unrecognizable leftist hell hole Who long since surrendered the moral high ground once fully occupied by the light of the west, America... "


" Hillary Clinton is the ultimate candidate for the elite our brokers of the world…
She is a person with no moral compass and an unfathomable ambition paired with a proclivity for lying regardless of the publics outrage at her obvious falsehoods, fictionsand mischaracterizations...

After All , she Learned all of that from her Master Darth Vader Obama .





That was some Eloquent Description of the True Nature of Hillary Rodham Clinton there Chris . I Commend you on your Astute Powers of Observation here ! Let us All Hope the " Fog " she had Descended over the Minds of her Misguided Supporters will be Lifted once the Realization of Her Flawed Character sets in .
edit on 3-11-2016 by Zanti Misfit because: spelling



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 01:23 PM
link   
I'm sure Russia is hacking anything they can just like our government security agencies do. I do not believe all of the stuff coming out against Hillary is from the same places. Russia probably would not directly release articles to Wikileaks. But they may have provided the software to someone who would.

There are people all over that could hack that and they could even hack the Russians to get some extra spyware. I saw a release from the FBI somewhere that said there is no evidence to show Russia was behind it. But Hillary is sure they are and uses ill acquired pseudo evidence to point a finger at anyone who opposes her. She is very good at deception and deflective measures and a person like that should not be president. I can't even believe anything she says unless I research it, I know what kind of person she is, I know people like her in real life and I just do not believe she is someone our kids can look up to.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 02:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: CrawlingChaos
Whether the information comes from Russia or not is inconsequential. Whether RT is a soviet era mouthpiece, is inconsequential. Julian Assange a spy, hero, 3rd party state actor is also inconsequential.

None of that actually matters...

Because None of those answers or questions change what (C)linton did....

She (through malice or negligence) allowed classified Government material, to fall into the hands of a pedophile, who granted possible exposure of said material around the darknet and various unsavory actors. And thats not the worst of it.

Stay on target, don't entertain these attempts at distraction.

Exactly. This is just trying to shoot the messenger because you don't like his message. How does it matter if it was a foreign hack, versus a domestic hack (NSA or similar), versus an internal leak? The info shows clear evidence of corruption.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 03:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Christosterone

So Assange will be on a Russian state sponsored news program telling us that it DEFINITELY wasn't Russia that sent him those files? And you don't see any room for bias in any of that?


Exactly. No bias there at all. *eyeroll*
Assange looks more like he wants Russia to save him and is playing on their team. He must be starting to lose it, cooped up like that.

Assange may not really know who hacked it. They may have set it up so he didn't know, or that he thinks he knows but he's been tricked, or that he is lying to gain favor with Russia.

Russia was hacked recently and it showed how Putin organized the opposition in the Ukraine quite clearly.

They lie. Russia Today is their mouthpiece for propaganda. ZeroHedge is their comrade in this. Believe RT at your own risk.

edit on 3-11-2016 by AboveBoard because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 08:43 PM
link   
Think about it for a few seconds.

Who are you going to believe?

The DNC?

Or Assange and Wikileaks. Wilileaks has a flawless reputation of accuracy. Hillary Clinton and the DNC almost lie every time they open their mouths.

If Assange says Russia wasn't his source I believe him 100%.

All the Clintons do is try to discredit anyone that comes after them. Whether it's Bills latest rape victim or FBI Director James Comey.

It makes no difference. Weak minded DNC victims can be lied to 1000 times and they will believe 1001 times. I chuckled at the Russian narrative. I thought even my fellow Americans aren't stupid enough to believe that one! But to my amazement their are those gullible enough to buy it! I guess it's true that a sucker is born every day.

edit on 3-11-2016 by Doctor Smith because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2016 @ 11:07 AM
link   
I have questions.....

If a confirmed source, other than Russia were discovered ; Would those of you dismissing the crimes committed by (C)linton feel differently about them ? Is that the issue, where the info comes from instead of what they reveal ? And why is the messenger a bigger issue than the facts ? How does alleged Russian interference, have any effect on what was done by the Democratic Candidate during her time as Sec. of State ?

Those complaining about alleged "Russian" interference, were you at all concerned when the State Department used millions of U.S. taxpayer funds to boost Isreali PACs against Netanyahu in their elections ? Why not ?


OneVoice used the money to build a voter database, train activists and hire a political consulting firm with ties to President Obama’s campaign — all of which set the stage for an anti-Netanyahu campaign, the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations said in a bipartisan staff report. - Washington Times Stephen Dinan


Selective outrage ?
Or are you consistent in what you believe ?
edit on 4-11-2016 by CrawlingChaos because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2016 @ 08:45 AM
link   
Here's the 24 minute video of Pilger's interview with Assange...




posted on Nov, 5 2016 @ 10:20 AM
link   
a reply to: JacKatMtn

Thanks!

"In the American mind and the European mind he [Donald Trump] represents American white trash. Deplorable and irredeemable." (LOL!!)

That should lay to rest any notion Julian is trying to sway the election in favor of Donald I would think.

I'm willing to bet there are plenty of highly educated, wealthy, upper class people who support Trump with big bucks but they don't advertise it.



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 09:35 AM
link   
a reply to: paraphi

Evidence?

While you have a point, I think the Russians would be better served keeping this secret to blackmail her once she wins.




top topics



 
38
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join