But that is burying the lead again. Are the attacks unsubstantiated because legitimate victims simply cannot prove definitively that they were assaulted or put in a position of discomfort, or are the attacks unsubstantiated because they were made by a clearly partisan political actor? If you really don’t want to use the words “politically motivated”, you’d have to add to your headline that they were made by a pro-Israel, Ladies-for-Kavanaugh founder in order to accurately portray these attacks.

I don’t know of you’re aware yet, but the fediverse discerns between two different types of content: local and federated. Local content is hosted on your instance, lemmy.world. Federated content is hosted on another instance and federated with your server. You can distinguish between the two (on the web client) by checking if the community/thread/user has an @[instance] behind it. My guess would be that you stumbled into a @lemmy.ml community. There you’ll find a rigorously enforced “alternative” world view, as you decribed.

That more young people are needed to contribute tax money to the retirement fund is a hoax anyways. Governments could choose to fund retirement funds through any number of ways. A wealth tax for example.

Wasn’t the UK also hosting a large chinese embassy that is used as a secret police headquarter? Seems like UK politicians had to find a new strong-man to suck up to, after russian oligarcsh became unfavorable to have around.

I mean, it’s hip and cool to shit on russia at the moment, but I can’t not notice

> Regressive, separatist movement
> looks inside
> Supported by rusdian social media campaign

uMatrix once again to the rescue. It can block cookies. The only downside to uMatrix is that it dis-/allows based on su domain, so you can’t accept a log-in cookie and reject the tracking cookie, if they are served by the same subdomain.

While I wouldn’t mind the UK getting back into the EU, we should definitely wait out the next all but guaranteed Reform government. We don’t need whiplash from Farrage shitting all over the floor.

Why does the article flip-flop between calling the guy a hacker and a researcher?

I remember the GrapheneOS team saying that they won’t bring their OS to Fairphone, because the Fairphones don’t bring hardware support for security measures the GrapheneOS team doesn’t want to compromise on.

Guillotines. Guillotines for all of them. Democracy needs to be defended decisively.

Good choice, but sadly, I already know and read that one. And it’s lately falling into the will-they-wont-they trap

Oh yeah? Then name me an action manga that also has a proper romance and no will-the-wont-they bullshit.

Removed by mod

Dude, you keep arguing as if the Snowden leaks haven’t been scrutinized to hell and back. I need to only search once for the US reading the communication of americans and it brings up countless articles like this one making reference to the Snowden leaks. You keep dissing Snowden and Greenwald, as if those two were the only ones analyzing the files. In truth, entire teams of journalists from multiple outlets worked on different parts of those stories. Do I trust you, who can’t even provide a source, or hundreds of journalists and the obviously scummy and sometimes downright illegal behavior of the US government to shut those journalists down? And just because it isn’t “illegal”, because the government gave itself the right to fuck you over, doesn’t mean that it is morally permissible. You didn’t even address the fact that the US forced the plane of the president of Ecuador to land in Europe due to pressure from the US, because it flies in the face of your narrative that the US is a righteous place where you can trust the law, even when the government itself wants to silence you. You know how they got around not being able to spy on Americans? They got the brits and other countries to do it for them. That is what the Five-Eyes organization is all about. The Wikipedia article I linked detailing the Snowden leaks even break down in which direction the data transfer went between the different spy agencies.

I don’t see how your edit changes anything. You just claim stuff without any sources. I for one didn’t find anything relating to Snowden misinterpreting PRISM. Just a bunch of newspapers explaining how PRISM works based on the data Snowden released. And why exactly should he trust the US whistleblower laws, when the US government is the one breaking the law and Snowden is the one exposing them? The US has prosecuted plenty of whistleblowers trying to expose government wrongdoing. He was right not to trust the US government and he was proven right by the US even going to so far as to force a plane carrying the Bolivian president to land, because they suspected Snowden on board. Him having to live in Russia is more a testament to how far the US is willing to go to catch him, rather than him being naive or “stupid”.

Like I said, different definitions of what it means to be patriotic. But don’t call Snowden simple-minded, that is just plain stupid.

Thing with patriotism is that everyone understands something different. Some may think that not questioning your leaders and doing what they tell you is what it means to be patriotic. Others may think that fighting injustice and corruption in your own country, so that every citizen may live in a free and just society, is what being patriotic is about. Some may even go so far as to say that fighting for your country to be fair and honest not only to your own citizens, but also other countries is patriotic. Snowden is part the latter group. You seem to be part of the first.

And of course leaking that amount of material is not a spur-of-the-moment decision. He clearly planned carefully for a long time. How is this even a point you are trying to make? He did exactly what conscientious whistleblower should do.

And calling Snowden simple-minded truly betrays your ignorance. It is you, in fact, who is simple-minded, as you jump to conclusions based on conjecture devoid of facts.

The conspiracy-brain is strong in you. But there are perfectly rational arguments for all your allegations. Snowden went to Hong Kong, because it offers comparably high living standards to the US and was still somewhat free back then, while being squarely outside of the US sphere of influence. So he didn’t need to fear being extradited or kidnapped while being able to take advantage of the freedom of the press that existed back then in Hong Kong.

He absolutely had some idea of what information he had at hand, as he was able to give the journalists pointers on what to report on first. Furthermore, the first reporting that SCMP did that you linked was on June 13th. The first reporting done on the leaked material was done by the Guardian on June 5th, so by the time Snowden gave the interview to SCMP, he and the journalists had to have dug through the material already.

The SCMP is, as you said, a chinese newspaper. So it absolutely makes sense that they’d ask China-focussed questions like “Were there chinese systems compromised?”

There has been absolutely no reporting on Snowden meeting with chinese officials.

Those sources still don’t say that Snowden gave information to china. He talked to a newspaper. And to that newspaper he confirmed that, among other places, the NSA hacked chinese computers. No mention of a quid pro quo.

Yes. The Snowden leaks happened in the pre-brain-snap era. Back then Greenwald was a respected investigative journalist.