-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 03/08/2017 12:59 PM, Razer wrote:

From a DailyDot 'staff writer'.

...

Unfortunate that poorly written explainations by WikiLeaks & NYTimes forced so many reporters to waste time clarifying this today.

Thread: https://twitter.com/dellcam/status/839280333732315136

Most amusing that /anyone/ would doubt the capability of the NSA & Co. to root a "smart phone" and set it up to capture voice and text content before it gets encrypted for "secure" transmission.

DailyDot and Wikileaks aren't exactly on friendly terms because the Dot fronted the cold war trope for US interests that Wikileaks redacted Syria papers about Russian involvement.

http://www.theverge.com/2016/9/9/12864328/wikileaks-threat-reporters-s yria-russia-emails

So...

I went looking for any evidence that this actually happened, vs. an unsupported allegation that Wikileaks withheld a document indicating the transfer of $2.4 billion from the Syrian government to a Russian bank at about the time U.S. sponsored mercenaries arrived and commenced regime change operations. No evidence was presented in the Verge story, but the original Daily Dot propaganda piece does offer this in the way of unattributed weasel words:

(At the request of a source familiar with RevoluSec members, the Daily Dot has decided not to publish the documents concerning RevoluSec’s activities at this time out of concern the hackers may be identified, captured, and possibly harmed in their home countries, which include Yemen and Syria.)

"Sealed documents" allegedly leaked by an anonymous source - but not published or quoted from by the press outlet they were handed to - are the only indication that Wikileaks failed to publish an important historical document that would have grabbed news headlines. So in short, this story can be confidently evaluated as a lie from end to end. Before someone jumps in with "prove it didn't happen!", a reminder that this is a classic propaganda technique: Argument From Ignorance: Your failure to prove my unsubstantiated assertion false, proves that it is true. The U.S. sponsored smear campaign asserting that Wikileaks is a Russian controlled propaganda asset accounts for this apparent Big Lie better than any alternative explanation. But the reported threat by Wikileaks to "respond in kind" to this smear story does sound like Assange to me. And if so, he means it: As soon as someone hands Wikileaks anything embarrassing to the Daily Dot, it will be published and promoted - because the smear story /makes/ any subsequent fallout "materials of legitimate public interest." So do any Mendax fans out there feel like digging around the Dot to see what might turn up? At minimum they are a mouthpiece for at least one U.S. political warfare shop, at best that shop has something to blackmail them with that others could find if they looked. :o) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJYwHPbAAoJEECU6c5XzmuqAugH/RmWh1je4M8T6VwGCrEdslf4 BwVQJHeKHIqtQ27Wsab4lrEESjeDMeVRhX+FDcEt9LCz87Vs+kKTB/ivjwlLc+9R 9S3J4DciO5oMFDXE/Jb+rx7G8EEKYpIr0UtADFnbWRAIzt4ZWe08sAP04d1v7WoL XF2w/uahPE85xT14/XZF+/+lI8j4r2vn3fQRhvXX+vz7q5T7xEiHtv/ELtriNLKs T249hUoibHbXzJfwR8GOYwHw7gzxw0s70Yg3EvkmRGzqoKWbwpEtj8ovOIS71KvY Df70Huc3E0D60nOpPfQey7LN/1Ng6sjqEi8MApNnXvZnHKxwdjJyBB5L1T+8N94= =W2MT -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----