10

7 comments

[–] jobes 1 points (+1|-0) Edited

I have seen calls to disregard what exists on an archive site as 'fraudlant' a few years ago because it documented what the accused deleted. I'm not reality feeling like pushing out a bunch of links right now, but you can't memory hole a bad article or radical opinion that wants to be disappeared when it turns out you have to delete it to save face.

Imagine if archive sites were storing videos of news documenting building 7's collapse on 9/11....oh wait they were and no one cares

Edit:was eating dinner and came back to this a few times and it doesn't make much sense. Maybe you should archive it and use it against me later.

[–] [Deleted] 1 points (+1|-0)

Maybe you should archive it and use it against me later.

I would but it will be deleted by the NSA.

[–] jobes 1 points (+1|-0)

If the NSA actually comes after then you've gone soft. The CIA should have been peeing all over your corpse by then. The actual real intelligence agency would have kept you alive for information.