A trove of hacked emails published by WikiLeaks in 2012 excludes records of a €2 billion transaction between the Syrian regime and a government-owned Russian bank, according to leaked U.S. court documents obtained by the Daily Dot.
The court records, placed under seal by a Manhattan federal court and obtained by the Daily Dot through an anonymous source, show in detail how a group of hacktivists breached the Syrian government's networks on the eve of the country's civil war and extracted emails about major bank transactions the Syrian regime was hurriedly making amid a host of economic sanctions. In the spring of 2012, most of the emails found their way into a WikiLeaks database.
But one set of emails in particular didn't make it into the cache of documents published by WikiLeaks in July 2012 as "The Syria Files," despite the fact that the hackers themselves were ecstatic at their discovery. The correspondence, which WikiLeaks has denied withholding, describes "more than" €2 billion ($2.4 billion, at current exchange rates) moving from the Central Bank of Syria to Russia's VTB Bank.
http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/wikileaks-syria-files-syria-russia-bank-2-billion/
(Score: 0, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 11 2016, @02:48AM
Maybe it didn't start that way, but now the Russians are the ones that feed and protect the piper.
So they call the tune.
When Assange was asked why he never leaks anything about Trump or the Republicans, he answered something like "There is no need because Trump says so many stupid things."
Case closed.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 11 2016, @02:56AM
Sexy!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 11 2016, @02:36PM
Trump is Putin's goatsie.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 11 2016, @02:58AM
When Assange was asked why he never leaks anything about Trump or the Republicans, he answered something like "There is no need because Trump says so many stupid things."
Actually, the quote [breitbart.com] is "the information they have on Donald Trump is not 'more controversial material than what comes out of Donald Trump’s mouth every second day.'"
So, they don't leak on Trump because they don't have anything interesting to leak.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 11 2016, @03:01AM
That's the same thing. They don't leak anything about Trump b/c "it wouldn't add to the discussion".
(Score: 4, Informative) by NotSanguine on Sunday September 11 2016, @04:30AM
That's the same thing. They don't leak anything about Trump b/c "it wouldn't be likely to damage the candidacy of Hillary Clinton and tarnish the image of Barack Obama, who Assange hates because he blames them for being stuck in a building with Ecuadorians for years".
There. FTFY.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 11 2016, @04:15AM
> So, they don't leak on Trump because they don't have anything interesting to leak.
I don't find his reasoning persuasive. They've leaked tons of dullshit in the past. Just because we've all got outrage fatigue from all the bullshit Trump says in public doesn't mean anything less outrageous is automatically less important.