The Deep State File Dump. (-Happy Christmas!)

a reply to: purplemer


Not sure if anybody has posted this, but a screen shot of the AltAssange account shows a link to chronicle.su. Soooo you be the judge re: authenticity of post and info. contained in.



Apologies if the pic doesn't show up...can't check via preview and this is my first attempt at including a pic. If it doesn't appear, then original image can be found here:

twitter.com...

a reply to: butcherguy

Come on now,maybe after he was dead,most men wouldn't touch her with a 20 ft pole,doubt he is any different

What I got from this thread is that ATS is infested with payed intrest group, that are trying to seed distrust and confusion to a point where people will ignore the material.
Its the same people repeating themself and they reply to each other to make the ball roll.
Try and skim the first 3 pages and you will see it

Let’s see what comes out in next 24 hours.
The Killary and Bin Laden affair sounds as preposterous as the Trump Dossier stating the future president hired hookers to have a piss party in his room.

originally posted by: Spacespider
What I got from this thread is that ATS is infested with payed intrest group, that are trying to seed distrust and confusion to a point where people will ignore the material.
Its the same people repeating themself and they reply to each other to make the ball roll.
Try and skim the first 3 pages and you will see it

Not entirely new, but good on you for picking up on that

a reply to: purplemer

So ?? Where's the scoop? Where's the big take down? Should I check back say... next Wednesday?

There will probably be another Assange thread started by then.

a reply to: Perfectenemy

I'm all tingles.


rolls eyes...

I think this is probably chaff thrown out by the clowns in order to dilute something else that is (or about to be) going down.

a reply to: Sillyolme


Another post that has nothing to do with the topic and is only meant to start a war of words instead of keeping people on the subject. I honestly don't know why this person is allowed to post all these horrible, non-topic posts in every thread I go to read. This is why ATS is turning into nothing more than a Yahoo chat room, and it's a shame. Posts like this used to be banned within 5 minutes with the user being warned to stop going off topic or ban. What has happened to that? ATS like this kind of meaningless garbage #-posting?

Back on topic. If people haven't learned by now that Assange has massive information, especially after the DNC wikileak dump, then they're simply slow. That's all. Hillary wanted to Assange killed, and he knew it. There is a reason why, it's because she knew he has something on her. If Hillary would have won, you can bet your ass Assange would be dead right now via suicide to the back of the head with 40 shots.

originally posted by: Nyiah
Chronicle.su? isn't that a satire site?? Are you folks REALLY that desperate for something to gnaw on that you'd buy this hoax full stop? If Assange had ACTUALLY done this, it's a credibility killer, like agreeing to release info through the Onion. WTF, wise up & stop being so gullible.

Nothing you said here is fact. You're going around calling other people out for something you can't even prove yourself. I don't care if Assange went to CNN, which is just satire like Onion, and released his news. As long as what he says is true, it does not matter.

originally posted by: Spacespider
What I got from this thread is that ATS is infested with payed intrest group, that are trying to seed distrust and confusion to a point where people will ignore the material.
Its the same people repeating themself and they reply to each other to make the ball roll.
Try and skim the first 3 pages and you will see it

That's happening on slashdot as well. The start of any topic always seems to be a bunch of anonymous cowards flamebaiting and trolling each other.

originally posted by: purplemer

originally posted by: stormcell

originally posted by: Grambler
I know next to nothing about computers.

So I was wondering is 65gb a large number? How does this compare to other wikileaks dumps?

This is small compared to their previous leaks:
www.ibtimes.com...

About a third might be database information. while the rest is either basic text (1 byte = 1 character, 2k = 1 page, 2mbytes=1000 pages, etc...) or scanned in data in JPG/PNG format which is compressed.

Thats the small file. The big one is massive 700 Terabytes Thats massive. would take me a very long time to DL that.

It's satire. 700 Terabytes is well beyond the capacity of most high-end server hard disk drives (they max out at 8 Terabytes).

"Dr. Troubador also promised more information is forthcoming detailing an intimate relationship between President Barack Hussein Obama and his uncle Saddam Hussein, in which the Iraqi dictator groomed Obama for leadership of the United States at the behest of the CIA. In exchange for his service, Saddam was given a huge stockpile of Sarin gas which he immediately deployed on the Kurds."

originally posted by: Kettu
Someone should hit the "alert" button about this thread and inform the moderators this is a HOAX story so it can be moved to the HOAX forum. . .

Completely agree...

I find it pretty troubling that some are reading this and then pondering the Hillary/Bin Laden story to decide if it has merit.

Uhm... lemme help ya out... NO... this website doesn't have to work very hard to prove it is a gag site... takes a few seconds to determine.

HOAX HOAX HOAX HOAX HOAX HOAX

a reply to: purplemer

This is BS.

The Deep State isn't partisan.

This is clickbait for all the Trump worshipers.

Quite the feeding frenzy I see, did they lock Hillary up yet?

Let me know once they do...

ETA:

LMFAO!

originally posted by: TheGOAT

originally posted by: Nyiah
Chronicle.su? isn't that a satire site?? Are you folks REALLY that desperate for something to gnaw on that you'd buy this hoax full stop? If Assange had ACTUALLY done this, it's a credibility killer, like agreeing to release info through the Onion. WTF, wise up & stop being so gullible.

Nothing you said here is fact. You're going around calling other people out for something you can't even prove yourself. I don't care if Assange went to CNN, which is just satire like Onion, and released his news. As long as what he says is true, it does not matter.

So... you really think Hillary Clinton and Osama Bin Laden were having an affair and planned 9/11 together?

Good lord.

As much as I would love to see both Clintons and most of the principles of the last administration in jail... this OP is COMPLETE HOGWASH at a minimum... or a deliberate effort to muddy the pond in advance of a REAL Wikileaks drop

originally posted by: stormcell

originally posted by: purplemer

originally posted by: stormcell

originally posted by: Grambler
I know next to nothing about computers.

So I was wondering is 65gb a large number? How does this compare to other wikileaks dumps?

This is small compared to their previous leaks:
www.ibtimes.com...

About a third might be database information. while the rest is either basic text (1 byte = 1 character, 2k = 1 page, 2mbytes=1000 pages, etc...) or scanned in data in JPG/PNG format which is compressed.

Thats the small file. The big one is massive 700 Terabytes Thats massive. would take me a very long time to DL that.

It's satire. 700 Terabytes is well beyond the capacity of most high-end server hard disk drives (they max out at 8 Terabytes).

"Dr. Troubador also promised more information is forthcoming detailing an intimate relationship between President Barack Hussein Obama and his uncle Saddam Hussein, in which the Iraqi dictator groomed Obama for leadership of the United States at the behest of the CIA. In exchange for his service, Saddam was given a huge stockpile of Sarin gas which he immediately deployed on the Kurds."

Actually, petabyte drives exist as do exabyte drives...just not to the general public. As far as your claim, it seems youre suggesting no server can have more than one 8TB drive attached? That would be really devastating for the government projects ive personally installed petabyte storage arrays on....

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: stormcell

originally posted by: purplemer

originally posted by: stormcell

originally posted by: Grambler
I know next to nothing about computers.

So I was wondering is 65gb a large number? How does this compare to other wikileaks dumps?

This is small compared to their previous leaks:
www.ibtimes.com...

About a third might be database information. while the rest is either basic text (1 byte = 1 character, 2k = 1 page, 2mbytes=1000 pages, etc...) or scanned in data in JPG/PNG format which is compressed.

Thats the small file. The big one is massive 700 Terabytes Thats massive. would take me a very long time to DL that.

It's satire. 700 Terabytes is well beyond the capacity of most high-end server hard disk drives (they max out at 8 Terabytes).

"Dr. Troubador also promised more information is forthcoming detailing an intimate relationship between President Barack Hussein Obama and his uncle Saddam Hussein, in which the Iraqi dictator groomed Obama for leadership of the United States at the behest of the CIA. In exchange for his service, Saddam was given a huge stockpile of Sarin gas which he immediately deployed on the Kurds."

Actually, petabyte drives exist as do exabyte drives...just not to the general public. As far as your claim, it seems youre suggesting no server can have more than one 8TB drive attached? That would be really devastating for the government projects ive personally installed petabyte storage arrays on....

I'm not even going to try to explain terabytes, petabytes, exabytes, zettabytes, etc
Let them continue to sound silly. My desktop pc has 2 terabytes.

originally posted by: Martin75

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: stormcell

originally posted by: purplemer

originally posted by: stormcell

originally posted by: Grambler
I know next to nothing about computers.

So I was wondering is 65gb a large number? How does this compare to other wikileaks dumps?

This is small compared to their previous leaks:
www.ibtimes.com...

About a third might be database information. while the rest is either basic text (1 byte = 1 character, 2k = 1 page, 2mbytes=1000 pages, etc...) or scanned in data in JPG/PNG format which is compressed.

Thats the small file. The big one is massive 700 Terabytes Thats massive. would take me a very long time to DL that.

It's satire. 700 Terabytes is well beyond the capacity of most high-end server hard disk drives (they max out at 8 Terabytes).

"Dr. Troubador also promised more information is forthcoming detailing an intimate relationship between President Barack Hussein Obama and his uncle Saddam Hussein, in which the Iraqi dictator groomed Obama for leadership of the United States at the behest of the CIA. In exchange for his service, Saddam was given a huge stockpile of Sarin gas which he immediately deployed on the Kurds."

Actually, petabyte drives exist as do exabyte drives...just not to the general public. As far as your claim, it seems youre suggesting no server can have more than one 8TB drive attached? That would be really devastating for the government projects ive personally installed petabyte storage arrays on....

I'm not even going to try to explain terabytes, petabytes, exabytes, zettabytes, etc
Let them continue to sound silly. My desktop pc has 2 terabytes.

What about the yottabyte?

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Martin75

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: stormcell

originally posted by: purplemer

originally posted by: stormcell

originally posted by: Grambler
I know next to nothing about computers.

So I was wondering is 65gb a large number? How does this compare to other wikileaks dumps?

This is small compared to their previous leaks:
www.ibtimes.com...

About a third might be database information. while the rest is either basic text (1 byte = 1 character, 2k = 1 page, 2mbytes=1000 pages, etc...) or scanned in data in JPG/PNG format which is compressed.

Thats the small file. The big one is massive 700 Terabytes Thats massive. would take me a very long time to DL that.

It's satire. 700 Terabytes is well beyond the capacity of most high-end server hard disk drives (they max out at 8 Terabytes).

"Dr. Troubador also promised more information is forthcoming detailing an intimate relationship between President Barack Hussein Obama and his uncle Saddam Hussein, in which the Iraqi dictator groomed Obama for leadership of the United States at the behest of the CIA. In exchange for his service, Saddam was given a huge stockpile of Sarin gas which he immediately deployed on the Kurds."

Actually, petabyte drives exist as do exabyte drives...just not to the general public. As far as your claim, it seems youre suggesting no server can have more than one 8TB drive attached? That would be really devastating for the government projects ive personally installed petabyte storage arrays on....

I'm not even going to try to explain terabytes, petabytes, exabytes, zettabytes, etc
Let them continue to sound silly. My desktop pc has 2 terabytes.

What about the yottabyte?

You know it was actually named after Yoda

Sorry just joining the conversation but did The Dump...... Dump yet?