QUOTE (bmags @ Apr 7, 2016 -> 11:15 PM)
It doesn't remotely hold any water. Even if the leaks were motivated (as if Snowden's werent), has there been any pushback whatsoever that this information is forged or untrue? Cameron has admitted his involvement. The Icelandic PM has admitted their involvement. But a US businessman was willing to throw 2 allies under the bus to cause mild discomfort to Putin?
This information has been spread to multiple news sources nad the actual docs are with the Suddeutsche Zeitung and 5 other news orgs, with only one org that has Soros as a contributor to the non-profit company.
I don't think they're saying it's untrue (unless I missed that) and I don't think the Soros connection is the story here. It's more that the most transparent organization out there is being ridiculously critical of the biggest leak of our time when you'd think they'd for it. In fact it seemed like a week ago they were, which is why I was surprised reading their tweets tonight (from the last couple days). Wikileaks has either been overcome with extreme jealousy they didnt break a story right up their alley, become a Russian puppet themselves after securing Snowden's transfer or they have a point and these docs should flat out be dumped and released Wikileaks style. I don't completely agree with the latter since there is going to be a ton of personal data involved here but at the same time I don't trust the journalists to come out with this story in a timely and orderly fashion with so much data out there. They are releasing some so far but it's basically a grain of sand compared to a beach of documents. I believe there's a large release set for May although I'm not sure if that similar to the 150 we've seen so far. I'd much prefer they just vet documents for personal info then mass release as much as possible, letting the public write the stories. That'd be both timelier and would eliminate any uncertainty of the vetting of these documents.