A Drop In The Ocean



Good times.

More as they leak it

The Podesta Emails (Wikileaks)

If Beijing can claim South China Sea, US can call Pacific ‘American Sea’, says Clinton in leaked speech (South China Morning Post)

Yesterday: In The Dumps




“It’s obvious something is happening to YouTube…”

Researcher David Seaman highlights connections between Google and Hillary Clinton (via Wikileaks) and its possible effect on recent You Tube algorithms.

Evil, dude.



60 thoughts on “A Drop In The Ocean

  1. blueswannabe

    In fairness, who thinks the US should let China support the North Koreans while they develop their nuclear capabilities with no consequences? Sanctions and peace talks have gotten them nowhere, now it’s time for THAAD, the US are hardly war-mongering in the Korean peninsula.

    1. classter

      Agreed, there has been nothing really incriminating in these emails (at least so far).

      Even, the Clinton Foundation stuff is already out there. One of HRC’s biggest weakness is herself & Bill’s interest in money and comfort with wealthy people. It is not surprising that some of her campaign advisors were warning her about how bad it looked that she was giving paid speeches to banks in a world still recovering from the financial crash.

      1. rory

        One thing that worries me about Hillary is her support for a No Fly Zone in Syria*, which she reiterated at the last debate. No hacking necessary for that info, though the leaks do add some interesting detail.**

        *Russia currently have a significant presence in Syrian airspace; they would likely veto the implementation of a no fly zone at the UN security council, even if said zone was on humanitarian grounds, because such a zone would be a boost to anti-Assad fighters.
        If the U.S. were to enforce a no fly zone anyway, and Russian fighter planes decided to enter said zone, it could trigger a war between the U.S. and Russia.

        **The detail referred to previously:
        (Source here: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3130829-HRC-Paid-Speeches-Flags.html )

  2. Kolmo

    Why is it the election cycle and related hysteria lasts a year or two in the US and a month or two in the rest of the world – no wonder they need to be bankrolled by the corporations they are supposed to be regulating.
    It’s the most boring and mind-melting delusion of a democracy on earth.

  3. human

    Hilary Clinton is a brain damaged chicken hawk.

    The left getting behind her is a real sign of its decline.


      1. human

        I must conform to the hive mind.

        Vote Hillary, Pro Europe, Stronger Together, Star wars: Rogue One trailers…. Feel good posts in my Facebook feed.

        1. C Sharp

          We are all in the hive but some of us are looking at the star spangled banner.


      1. classter

        Yup & Cruz and Carson.

        On the basis that they would more openly espouse the extreme positions that the Republicans have been pushing for decades.

        If they did give that advice (‘to take them seriously’) to the media, then it would have been good advice because Trump came first & Cruz came second.By all accounts, the extreme positions are the mainstream of the Republican Party.

        Even many of the more ‘moderate’ candidates are moderate in tone / personality rather than in terms of policy/positions.

    1. Tony

      Also BS posting neckbeard YouTube videos now? Looks like someone’s trying to impress Zuppy. Swit swooo!

        1. Kieran NYC

          Glad more people are recognizing this.

          They went full fetish on the Freemen and Anti-Vax stuff for a while before the water protests came along to distract from it.

          Remember the False Flag crap they’ve posted around all the attacks in France?

          But yet they’re trying to be a bastion of journalism… They’re doing a disservice to the real stories.

      1. classter

        Yup, the Obama regime has had a clear policy of containment & has worked hard to shore up alliances with almost all of the nations surrounding China.

  4. Mani

    In the end Broadsheet will be Bodger and a laptop in a bedsit, the scent of marijuana and glade plug-ins in the air and a comments board populated by Zuppy repeatedly answering his own posts, becoming more and more furious with himself for being a mindless drone.

    I’m quite looking forward to it.

  5. Shelbyville Manhattan

    When I saw David Seaman there, I thought another goalkeeper had gone the way of David Icke.

  6. some old queen

    David Seaman is wondering why wikileaks is not getting the media coverage it should?

    Well the answer to that should be obvious. The information was obtained illegally therefore a criminal act. Probably funded and controlled by a foreign and hostile power attempting to subvert the American electoral process. It is no surprise that the mainstream media would not want to promote this kind of espionage and if they did, it would be reasonable for government to question their intent.

    No big conspiracy, just common sense.

    1. DubLoony

      Mainstream media busy with Trump’s latest implosions.

      Conspiracy nuts wondering why their latest conspiracies are not being covered. Maybe the story of the GOP disintegration caused by a madman hell bent on taking them all down in flames is a bigger one.

      This campaign is a disgrace to democracy.

    2. f_lawless

      mustn’t be familiar with the concept of whistleblowing..
      Funny that you assert common sense trumps(excuse the pun) big conspiracies while at the same time alleging your own! “Probably funded and controlled by a foreign and hostile power attempting to subvert the American electoral process.”

      1. C Sharp

        In the case of “his own”, there is a common sense logic to that theory, one that is backed up by fact.
        It is plain as day that Putin favours a Trump win and is using his social media propaganda infrastructure to promote such an outcome.

        Further, the US government only this week announced that Russia was responsible for the recent political hacking – a hostile and illegal act if true*.

        This thread is heavy with the unwitting automotons who suspect the West at every turn but for whom the orchestrator of Grozny’s destruction can do no wrong. They are utterly blinded to the disinformation that is his thing as it is Trump’s (“I never said that”, “It was shot down from gov controlled territory”).

        Anna Politkovskaya might not find favour with the situation.

        * Of course you may dispute this, but even discounting this does not change the reality of the very visible disinformation campaign.

          1. C Sharp

            Saw that before.
            GG does great work. though I may sometimes disagree with his take on things.

            My point is that it is not black and white, but some things are obvious.
            No one is saying Dems are flawless or immune to corruption. There is always corruption to be found to some extent.

            Trump and Putin don’t need to be in actual cahoots for them to be of benefit to one another, and they most certainly are the latter. Donald has taken full advantage of Putin’s messaging and of the questionable hacking that he explicitly called for.

            Call out the Clinton democrats for any wrongdoings, but please take off the blinkers when it comes to the information war that did not just start when Trump announced.

        1. Serval

          There is also common sense and logic in relation to the real reason Building 7 fell, backed up by the fact that no steel framed building ever collapsed due to fire but we can sweep all of that under the carpet and call it a conspiracy theory.

    3. classter

      Tbf, the information being initially obtained illegally (side-stepping a debate on the actual illegality of such acts) is not actually a good reason why something would not get more coverage. Newspapers (online & offline) are full of ‘illegally’ obtained information – leaked or hacked – all the time.

      I detest Trump & hope Clinton wins as she is by far the better of the two candidates. It seems unlikely but is not impossible that Google, as a private company, does manipulate search results in such a fashion. We have become dependent on foreign, privately-owned companies with whom our interests will not always be aligned.

  7. rory

    This is probably old hat for some people, but perhaps it’s worth noting the little reminders in the email leaks of the U.S.’s relationship with Saudi Arabia and Quatar:

    Hillary Clinton acknowledges Saudi and Quatar are financing ISIL in hacked email, hinting at tougher approach:

    Meanwhile, the U.S. supplies Saudi Arabia with more than $20 billion worth of weapons during its Yemen campaign.

    (Not forgetting the British government, who signed off on £3.3bn of arms exports to Saudi Arabia in first year of “brutal Yemen bombardment”:
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/british-government-arms-sales-saudi-arabia-yemen-3-billion-bombs-missiles-war-crimes-houthi-a7157856.html )

    Also, Bill Clinton gets $1m from Qatar in a 5 minute meeting in 2012:

    1. Dόn Pídgéόní

      The Saudis have us by the cojones really but to say this is new just means people haven’t been paying attention.

        1. Dόn Pídgéόní

          As you were then. I guess my point is if easy to comment on international relations when you aren’t privy to information and don’t see all the connections in between and how to balance these, including making deals with horrible people for the greater good. Unless you’re assange and then of course you know better.

          1. rory

            What you’re saying sounds similar to excuses made by Neo Cons to legitimise the U.S.’s previous involvement with Saddam Hussein during the Iran – Iraq war.

            Your reaction comes across as: Assume there’s nothing to see here, assume there’s no criticism to be made. You’re taking a leap of faith there.

            Can you come up with possible reasons that would make the info raised in my first post irrelevent?

          2. Dόn Pídgéόní

            I didn’t say your points were irrelevant, nor do I support the us involvement in a way that happened when I was a child, just in case that needs to be pointed out. I do however think releasing information wily nily without thinking about it is dangerous and irresponsible. What is “neo-con” about that?

          3. rory

            “I do however think releasing information wily nily without thinking about it is dangerous and irresponsible.”
            What is “neo-con” about that?

            Well with this particular argument, which is different to the one where I brought up Neo Cons, I wouldn’t just categorise that argument as a ‘Neo Cons only’ trait.

            But staying with them for a minute; did you consider the possibility that American Neo Con’s in the Bush administration might have used that excuse to stall important info coming to light, such as human rights violations during the war on terror?

            Or that the line you’re now taking is the same line taken by the Obama administration after the diplomatic cable leaks.

            Note the BBC correspondents response to such a line:
            “They will always cry havoc if their reports are revealed. My experience is that leaks rarely lead to any lasting damage and often have beneficial effects.”

          4. Dόn Pídgéόní

            I’m not sure what role you think I’m playing in international politics here rory or why you think I fully support every foreign policy decision made by the us. I’m genuinely puzzled about what point you are trying make other than America=bad. Life is way more complicated than that and it’s naive to think otherwise.

            How do you feel about releasing the names of people working with the Americans, LGBT people in the middle East and rape victims without thought? You’re fine with that?

          5. rory

            I don’t agree with your first paragraph, but I think you’re right about the lgbt and rape victims in your second paragraph. I was not aware of the AP article that highlighted this in August.
            Though wikileaks has argued that they were indexing public Saudi data that was already on the internet, it does appear that wikileaks has become increasingly lax when it comes to curation of sensitive data in their leaks.
            I take back my last comment.

  8. sǝɯǝɯʇɐpɐq

    We can spend the rest of our days arguing about the rights and wrongs of Wikileaks.
    We can argue for their apparent honesty, or against their nefarious practices.
    – None of it matters.

    This is the 21st Century.
    This is how it works from now on.

    Suck it and see.
    Nobody cares what you think.

  9. Kieran NYC

    As annoying as this stuff is, the real damage it does is demean the Mary Boyle and other important stories that Broadsheet has done over the last few years.

    “Come to Broadsheet for the truth in the Mary Boyle case! And Leather Jacket Guy! Oh yeah, something, something Hillary Flouride!”

Comments are closed.