In which @emptywheel explains "Why Accuracy about Wikileaks Matters." https://www.emptywheel.net/2017/05/07/why-accuracy-about-wikileaks-matters/ …
Which I don't dispute in the piece. The problem is "WL sharing" doesn't mean "people sharing WL bc support leak" at all.
-
-
Having millions of FF,being known for sharing leaks,and sharing FAKES about a candidate just before an election, is no coincidence
-
2-Furthrmore not only they endorsed the leaks saying they weren't fake, but also suppressed,in their link,info pointing towards the Russianspic.twitter.com/g86UMnPwBu
-
Sure. Even assuming that's true it's utterly irrelevant to my point.
-
It is theSubstance that is relevant,in this case the point being the deliberate intended harm,via fakes,toward Macron,the rest is irrelevant
-
Actually, that's precisely where you don't understand what you're talking about. But again, keep showing you don't understand this.
-
I know exactly what I'm talking about.I'm from Ecuador,w an authoritarian regime-endorsed byAssange-which censorsReal Info &propagates FAKES
-
The fact that U don't agree with someone,doesn't mean that they know what they are talking about.They just have a different opinion than U
-
Sure. But it's not that I disagree with you. It's that you have not--even remotely--addressed my point.
- 14 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.