Can r/conspiracy take Self-criticism?
0 2015-01-09 by Gollazio
I was hoping someone else would make a post like this, but since it didn't happen I will.
A few days ago the top 2 posts within this subreddit was as follows:
and
- Is This a Joke: Obama seems to be the only one who didn't get the memo that North Korea didn't do it
Many sources are now claiming that FBI has proof, including such basic ones that IP addressing that directly incriminates North Korea. So the FBI says so, the government says so and is acting upon it and as we know the hackers only demands was in the interest of North Korea.. No money demands.. Just "Don't show it"
I think even the most skeptical ones can at this point say its likely it was in fact North Korea sponsored cyber crimes.
Some conspiracies are obv real with legitimate Merits, but unfortunately some opinions or assumptions gets put within the same category. This takes away focus and credibility from the real issues, such as privacy and corporate and political corruption which is so important to reveal for all of our futures.
I wish r/conspiracy/ members were more fact focused and selective with what it gives the spotlight to and not upvoting loaded posts based on pure personal emotions, opinions and/or at best guesswork.
By not doing so, it directly harms the important issues of the day which so many are blind to and also it directly plays into the hands of the very people who are actually involved in conspiracies.
statements like "deranged obama" etc while drawing conclusions a subject with basically ZERO insight, is embarrassing for any skeptical thinker. What makes anyone here think they are in a better position than Obama to draw conclusions on this? How do anyone here know who hacked Sony? And even so, who cares about a stupid movie, why give it this much attention?
To no ones surprise it turns out it was North Korea after all, easily proven by novice mistakes repeatedly made. Surprisingly it turns out that our government who basically spies on everyone is able solve a cyber crime of national interest...
If there is any "conspiracy" worth attention here, its the fact that after all these sanctions and demonizing of North Korea over the years, they have all these years until now been allowed to use the US banking system to sell and buy weapons!..
Edit:
Edit2:
Can r/conspiracy take Self-criticism? Apparently not.
47 comments
2 strokethekitty 2015-01-09
Has the "evidence" been publicized? I dont follow this particular story, to be honest. But i do know that sometimes, when a theory (such as the one you are blasting) seems to be obviously wrong, or whatever, but you still have theorists saying the official story isnt right, its not because the theorists are stupid, or arrogant.
Sometimes they cant convey their thoughts clearly, but a lot of the time its about the issue that (for example, this FBI dude you speak of) someone high in power says something, but doesnt actually show the evidence.
You see, conspiracy theories arise because the People dont trust their government. And when the top guys in government make a claim that results in actions that the People are less than thrilled about, and when they make that claim without providing evidence, it becomes suspicious.
Its literally the top guys are saying, "Trust me. Im a Big Wig. I know North Korea did this because we have evidence that we wont show anybody."
Just like they had "evidence" of WMDs not too long ago... You see where im going with this?
Of course, there are plenty of folks here who cant take criticism at all. But, overall, i think most of the time theres a bug in the official story that would be easily fixed if the Big Wigs would lift a finger and allow the "evidence" to be publicized. And like, immediately. When they dont, its not farfetched to assume they are hiding something...
2 Gollazio 2015-01-09
good point, thanks for valuable input.
I would add to that tho, that in this case we have something more, the fact that their sole motive turned out to be doing damage to Sony and stop a particular movie (as proven by their actions). This removes a lot of variables and by itself is pretty deeming evidence that it was NK sponsored
2 strokethekitty 2015-01-09
I agree 100%.
But "sponsored" is different from actually carrying out the attacks... This is what i was trying to get at in my other comment (i hope i wasnt offending you).
2 Gollazio 2015-01-09
True, hehe no worries ;)
2 Kuleaid 2015-01-09
Just a couple of links that show the FBI can lie to the public. Though they are considered public servants, they don't work for you and me.
Trust them if it makes you feel better though.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/fbi-suicide-note-dr-martin-luther-king-jr-revealed-article-1.2009368
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/fbi-lied-about-how-it-obtained-silk-road-server-location-says-security-expert-1464552
http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2013/06/fbi-lied-to-congress-about-fla-saudi-familys-ties-to-911-hijackers/
1 JSploosh 2015-01-09
When did it turn out to actually be NK?
-1 Gollazio 2015-01-09
http://www.wired.com/2015/01/fbi-director-says-north-korean-hackers-sometimes-failed-use-proxies-sony-hack/
Among many other credible sources
7 JSploosh 2015-01-09
I don't believe the FBI is a credible source for truth on any matter.
Plus that article was barely even sourced.
Not conclusive proof in this skeptic's eyes.
-1 Gollazio 2015-01-09
There are countless articles on this matter from various sources.
Thank you for your opinion tho
8 shadowofashadow 2015-01-09
No, all of the sources go back to the FBI. Are you actually suggesting that independent analysts have figured out that it was NK? What "various" sources are you talking about?
0 shadowofashadow 2015-01-09
Isn't that the exact same thing they've been saying all along? They are using IPs that they don't even know belong to NKs to identify the hackers?
Bullshit.
Look up why they think those IPs are from NK. It's not a science. They need to offer up better proof.
1 Gollazio 2015-01-09
Hi, thank your for commenting.
It has been proven that those IP's has been used by North Korea previously.
I think its safe to assume that when the FBI provides public proof for a crime it holds up. I also don't believe you are better technically adept than the FBI's cyber crime departments, unfortunately.
are those IP's the only proof they have? Obv not, but its the one proof that people would understand and it would not hurt future efforts. FBI could have made a detailed presentation on how it analyzed the traffic and whatever, but for what purpose? Why educate the criminals when it can easily be proven by the most basic means available.
3 shadowofashadow 2015-01-09
How?
And we can debate all of this to the end but my point is that I don't trust the government without some evidence.
Wow. Just wow.
-1 Gollazio 2015-01-09
By evidence FBI claims it has.
Good point, on "why trust" however at this point you can logically say that its reasonable to believe that it was North Korea, based on the fact that 1. The FBI says so and B. US is taking actions vs North Korea and C. The hackers ONLY demand was exactly inline with North Koreas wishes.
2 strokethekitty 2015-01-09
Sorry to interject, but that was a fairly poor argument.
Your point is essentially, "We should believe the claim made by the FBI because the FBI made that claim."
The US took actions on Afghanistan and Iraq, too. But that doesnt mean there was WMDs there.
Correlation =/= Causation.
True, all these things indicate that NK was the perpetrator. But, its not proof.
Like i said before, i havent been following this story much at all, so i dont know what info is out there, for or against your claim. Id actually like to see you strengthen your argument for your claim, but to ask you to do so would be disingenuous of me as i would essentially be asking you to do my own research for me.
2 Gollazio 2015-01-09
True its not "proof" in the sense of video of the incident. But it makes a pretty strong argument, enough so that top voted posts such as "deranged obama.." was uncalled for and retarded. Based on that, and also the fact that people were arguing the fact based on almost nothing, but still making grandiose claims.
Btw, credit to you for making one of the first replys that actually makes sense
Edit,
You actually made that other reply that also maked sense. hehe. so you are alone in that. Creds to you
2 strokethekitty 2015-01-09
This certainly is an issue. Here in r/conspiracy as well as everywhere else in the world. Especially politics. And true, it would be unethical to be dropping names on people (e.g. "deranged Obama," as you have pointed out), and i dont condone that behavior much when it is based on a claim that hasnt yet been proven either way.
Although i dont like Obama at all, i still gotta call whats fair, fair. In fact, even if all the "obama theories" were to be true, id think that this would make him quite a genius. An asshole, but a genius. But i guess thats a different discussion entirely...
1 holocauster-ride 2015-01-09
The FBI and U.S. have in the recent past lied significantly to start wars, any real hacker would cover their tracks by making it appear that the attack originated somewhere else ("they got sloppy" makes me incredulous.
Also the hackers didn't mention The Interview until after NK was blamed. They originally asked for money.
1 Gollazio 2015-01-09
That is not true, send me a link to any credible article showing that the hackers at any time wanted money and I will tip you 1Bitcoin ($285)
From the start their sole motivation was to halt the movie release. They even started off by threatening the Sony staff and a possible "terrorist attack in movie theaters"
Why would any hacker who is after the money start throwing terrorist threats around? sounds incredible illogical.
3 holocauster-ride 2015-01-09
And then here is The Guardian article from December 9.
The Guardian is mainstream media.
Bruce Schnier is a well respected online security writer.
1C7B31eg6VoJK9eY7EQwcns8ZGQRRzMWUC
1 Gollazio 2015-01-09
Do you have a source for the money demand?
2 holocauster-ride 2015-01-09
Did you see the one I provided in The Guardian? Where it is reported that they demanded money?
1 Gollazio 2015-01-09
"The links between those going by the name God’sApslts and Guardians of Peace, who eventually carried out the attack on Sony Pictures, is unclear."
2 holocauster-ride 2015-01-09
http://www.symantec.com/connect/blogs/destover-destructive-malware-has-links-attacks-south-korea
The malware is signed by them with the same name. It seems likely the two are related (at least as likely as NK involvement based on similar types of evidence).
2 holocauster-ride 2015-01-09
Another source:
http://www.computerworld.com/article/2857272/legal/hackers-contacted-top-sony-executives-before-attack.html
0 shadowofashadow 2015-01-09
What demand was that?
These are the same thing. You can't call this two points.
2 Gollazio 2015-01-09
How can you participate in the discussion without knowing that? All they wanted was the movie not released. No demands for money was made.. Already there the evidence leans heavily towards North Korea
0 shadowofashadow 2015-01-09
That's bull. Show me some evidence. (this is getting tiring)
Everything I've seen says the first time the movie was mentioned was by the media, not by the hackers.
1 Gollazio 2015-01-09
The hackers themselves made the claims and that is one thing FBI/gov obv cant lie about. To ask for "proof" about the hackers demands is beyond retarded on so many levels.
0 shadowofashadow 2015-01-09
This is getting increasingly frustrating.
I just told you that the media mentioned the interview first, befor ethe hackers ever did.
The hackers would have mentioned it after because it was a nice little decoy story to play along with. Sends everyone on the wrong trail.
Provide me some evidence that the hackers mentioned the movie before the media did.
Ps. - if you do not respond with actual evidence I will not continue this debate as you are refusing to respond to direct questions I'm asking you, instead opting to twist my words and call me retarded.
1 Gollazio 2015-01-09
I cant believe im actually using time on talking to a retard, but I guess it could be helpful for others to see.
Proof?
If the hackers wanted money and suddenly the FBI/Gov claimed they were terrorists it would be so easy for them to publicly deny and prove that. They had a direct dialog with media (proof below)
Therefor that is one thing FBI/gov obv cant lie about. Because there is an "unknown" third part with the other half of the convo, By doing so the FBI/gov would set themselves up for failure and being ridiculed.
and as the matter of fact, the hackers did release a lot of info, leaks from the Sony servers, even movie scripts, personal emails along with many statements and badly worded sentences for example via twitter and the hacked Sony websites they controlled.
Not only that they directly communicated their desire to have the movie stopped. So we know 100% that was their desire. To even argue against that at this point is beyond retarded and shows how narrow minded and uninformed you are. Why are you even discussing matter you know nothing about?
Also, as we know a lot of Sonys unreleased movies was released by the hackers, which also further supports the fact that money was not the goal, as it would be the most valuable leverage.
As for the terrorist threat, the hacker group published the following statement to the public:
"We will clearly show it to you at the very time and places “The Interview” be shown, including the premiere, how bitter fate those who seek fun in terror should be doomed to. Soon all the world will see what an awful movie Sony Pictures Entertainment has made. The world will be full of fear. Remember the 11th of September 2001. We recommend you to keep yourself distant from the places at that time. (If your house is nearby, you’d better leave.) Whatever comes in the coming days is called by the greed of Sony Pictures Entertainment. All the world will denounce the SONY."
It could even be argued that the language style is North Korean'ish.
For proof, google those statements and you get 1+ million hits.
That message was released alongside personal Sony emails belonging to the Sony, proving it was a legit message from the hackers:
http://www.theverge.com/2014/12/16/7402649/sony-hackers-threaten-terror-attacks-on-people-seeing-the-interview
1 shadowofashadow 2015-01-09
http://gawker.com/a-lot-of-smart-people-think-north-korea-didnt-hack-sony-1672899940
I could try to find timestamps to prove this, but this is why it's so funny that you're getting so upset, I'm not making any claim, yet you keep asking for proof.
My claim is simply that there is no proof that NK did it. Your claim is that NK did it.
I cannot prove a negative, so you're going to be the one here to offer up some evidence to support your claim.
1 Gollazio 2015-01-09
There is a lots of strong evidence that NK did it. There is little/none evidence that suggest it was someone else.
That quote of yours is from one guy on the internet.. called Mark.
One of the first things the hackers did was request that the movie was stopped. They even threatened terrorist attacks. The hackers communicated this directly with the press. I think its safe to say they wanted the movie stopped... To argue against that is retarded.
And the argument "they first wanted money" like, what does that mean? is your theory they originally wanted money but the press mentioned the movie so then they shift goals from getting rich to stopping a movie? I dont get it..
1 Gollazio 2015-01-09
I keep asking for proofs? I did it one time after your repeatedly asked me to give you links anyone would find after a google search.
There is proof they did it. The malware used directly incriminates them, the cyber investigators are saying they can prove it and NK is the only one with a motive to stop the movie. Even before the hack NK said the movie was "an act of war"
That was a public statement made by NK.
couple weeks later Sony is hacked and the hackers demands is to stop the movie. But no, shadofshadow is on the case, a case of retard.
0 apocalypsychosis 2015-01-09
It's pretty obvious this guy's not interested in the truth - can't we just get this fucker banned?
1 Poiluv 2015-01-09
Were you not around for the crucifixion of /u/solidwhetstone?
2 Gollazio 2015-01-09
hehe apparently not, wish I knew what that is referring to.
1 Poiluv 2015-01-09
He was a mod here that went to r/conspiratard and asked for advice for how to improve this sub. Many users here see that sub as an enemy and chastised SWS for even thinking of asking them anything. After a lot of drama, he stepped down from the mod team and this sub has continued being the subject of ridicule.
We lost a great mod that day.
1 Gollazio 2015-01-09
hehe thanks, sounds interesting. #RIP
1 Canadian_POG 2015-01-09
Not true, he stepped down, willingly.
1 Poiluv 2015-01-09
Well, true. It's not like an admin stepped in and removed him. But it's also not like the other mods stood up for him. Maybe one did?
1 Canadian_POG 2015-01-09
I don't recall specifically, the mod team was somewhat different at that time. Perhaps Mr. Dong attempted to, but I'd rather not say for certain.
I'm only taking issue with your particular wording, it implies he was removed by another mod, but he indeed stepped down on his own volition.
2 Poiluv 2015-01-09
Yeah, I see how that can be seen. I'll edit it.
1 Canadian_POG 2015-01-09
It's all good.
0 Kuleaid 2015-01-09
What part of asking r/conspiratard for input falls under "self criticism"?
lol.
Drama, Drama, Drama
0 KingOfDigitalMedia 2015-01-09
It was Northrop Grumman.
3 holocauster-ride 2015-01-09
And then here is The Guardian article from December 9.
The Guardian is mainstream media.
Bruce Schnier is a well respected online security writer.
1C7B31eg6VoJK9eY7EQwcns8ZGQRRzMWUC