No one provides proof Assange is dead > 1 month now

[Razer]

On 12/16/2016 10:02 AM, jim bell wrote:
>
>
> *From:* Razer <rayzer at riseup.net>
>
> On 12/15/2016 11:48 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
>> Julian Assange: ‘Our Source Is Not the Russian Government’
>>
>
> >He said that MONTHS ago.
>
> >He was just repeating it for the illiterates who need to see it on a
> Right-Wing TeeVee channel.
>
> >Ps. Handjob & braitfart are a little slow. Like most lIbertards and
> Fascist alt-Righturds
>
> >Vicious, but really, REALLY slow.
>
> > http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4034038/Ex-British-ambassador-WikiLeaks-operative-claims-Russia-did-NOT-provide-Clinton-emails-handed-D-C-park-intermediary-disgusted-Democratic-insiders.html
>
> If anything, I don't think it's primarily the right-wing who are
> actually believing the "Russia hacked the election" story.  I think
> that story is at least designed, in part, for such people as an
> audience, hoping that they will 'bite'.  Instead, I think it is the
> Hillary-supporters and other left-wingers who are putting out this
> implausible story.
>
>


I think you're confusing Progressive-Liberals with "Left-Wing".
Progressive-Liberals aren't to the 'left' of anything except perhaps
John McCain. It's mainly the Clinton crowd hanging onto the "Russia did
it" trope. Hillary Clinton is certainly NOT "Left". She's a corporatist
warmonger. Most of the people I know who I consider 'left' consider
elections a sham that reinforces existing systems and don't participate.
Others may have voted in the primaries for Sanders, and disillusioned
despite warnings from anyone who knew anything about the Democrats and
Bernie (just ask anyone in Vermont how 'left' Sanders is), stood down
and didn't vote, or perhaps voted for Stein.

>
> I don't mean that it is entirely implausible that Russia (or many
> others) hacked the DNC/Podesta sources.  But Russia as the ONLY
> potential bogey-man, and as if we can ignore other sources, that's
> currently a left-wing story.   The MSM repeats this daily, even
> hourly.  They've been looking for things to blame Hillary's loss on
> for weeks, and have generally given up other stories.  
>
> It will probably be eventually  found that some state-supported person
> within Russia had the capability to obtain these emails, and quite
> possibly did so, and would have been willing to release them to
> Wikileaks (or others). 


I don't really think the Russian government cares whose president of the
US at all as long as the person isn't nutjob enough to push the button
as soon as they're inaugurated. They have their own country to run. I
also just read that Russia is no longer in the big five military
spenders. They aren't looking to stir up a war. That's the US modus.

Rr


> But that is not inconsistent with the idea that Wikileaks eventually,
> and actually, got these emails from a different source:  The current
> claim that people within the DNC did that, is quite plausible.   
>
>             Jim Bell
>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 10378 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20161216/13620e59/attachment.txt>