I am uncomfortable with the idea of being held responsible for them circulating this data - if they did not illegally obtain it, can it be said to be the case that they are violating rights by presenting it…? Unless, of course, they believed they were functioning passwords and it was part of a further operation to continue using the information to breach the company’s data.

It could potentially be seen simply as verification of some element of a news story - like how we have seen the publication of names / email addresses / passwords etc. of Nazi websites be leaked, often after the sites have been taken down, simply as part of verifying that the site was legit taken down, the site was populated by actual people, etc.

I also do not think it is good to take down “far right” news media that isn’t even really far right. OAN, Newsmax, etc., are certainly conservative, but what would we really be even doing if we were to take down mid-stream conservative Trumpist outlets…? Driving more people towards news sites like Unz and platforms like Gab. Make it impossible for them to have larger networks in the free marketplace of ideas, and then you drive them into the arms of smaller & more radical networks.

I am not a Leftist, but I wouldn’t think of this as a leftist W unless your idea of a W is serving the short-term interests of the DNC.

I don’t know if any one here has ever read the book, but seeing as to the company, I think probably maybe some; but consider the following quote from the left hand of darkness:

“I’m afraid that Argaven also believes you. But he does not trust you. In part because he no longer trusts me. I have made mistakes, been careless. I cannot ask for your trust any longer, either, having put you in jeopardy. I forgot what a king is, forgot that the king in his own eyes is Karhide, forgot what patriotism is and that he is, of necessity, the perfect patriot. Let me ask you this, Mr. Ai: do you know, by your own experience, what patriotism is?”

“No,” I said, shaken by the force of that intense personality suddenly turning itself wholly upon me. “I don’t think I do. If by patriotism you don’t mean the love of one’s homeland, for that I do know.”

“No, I don’t mean love, when I say patriotism. I mean fear. The fear of the other. And its expressions are political, not poetical: hate, rivalry, aggression. It grows in us, that fear. It grows in us year by year. We’ve followed our road too far. And you, who come from a world that outgrew nations centuries ago, who hardly know what I’m talking about, who show us the new road—” He broke off. After a while he went on, in control again, cool and polite: “It’s because of fear that I refuse to urge your cause with the king, now. But not fear for myself, Mr. Ai. I’m not acting patriotically. There are, after all, other nations on Gethen.”

If you want to have a fighting chance against an opponent, you need to understand them. To predict what these people, and their followers, how they will conduct themselves, you must understand, that they themselves, in their minds, they are the ‘state’, the ‘law’, the ‘perfect patriot’. This principal extends to all aspects of their morality. What is moral is defined by what they themselves do.