Jump to content
LOTROCommunity
LasraelLarson

Have you voted? ;)

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, cossieuk said:

What evidence do you want, video evidence of Putin ordering the hacks.

They will not publish all of the evidence, at least not for a while, as they will most likely be looking for ways to stop it happening again, or at least they should.

However I guarantee that all the evidence has been presented to Obama, and will in time be given to Trump 

Or, this is all something being misrepresented by the media, and there's no evidence linking it at all. From what I've seen of both their official joint report and of the conclusions of independent security firms, they're saying that at least two phishing attempts were successful, one in 2015 and one in 2016, with neither group being aware of the other (something Putin would be aware of if it was coming from the top), and the assessment that these hackers are connected to Russian intelligence agencies simply because of who these groups have targeted in the past (Russian enemies). That's a bit flimsy, and of course not something the media will want to mention, to keep up this whole "omg Ruskies hacked elections" nonsense.

Now, if they have more detailed information as to how they're connected, they won't reveal it because *dun dun duuuuuun* it would show that the US has been hacking the Russian government. Knowing both sides are hacking each other would mean they can't continue to hack Russia without being found, and they'd have no moral high-ground to point fingers from (not that they have much of that to start with, what with the whole NSA spying on everyone in the world). So instead of this being a simple case of hacking and something that happens all of the time, they're now conflating two separate issues: being hacked with the DNC leak.

Assange and his team have said multiple times that this was a leak and not a hack. They vet their sources, so he knows who it is and he knows who it isn't. There is nothing Obama's been presented that will tell him who ultimately gave the information to WikiLeaks, and yet they're still operating under this false premise that Russians influenced the elections, otherwise they have nothing they can use to discredit Trump and try to interfere with his plans of a closer US/Russia relationship. It's an assumption they've made, and a petty one at that, considering just how much money Clinton gets from foreign nations (which must surely count as attempting to influence an election). Again, when it comes to Clinton, it's not a problem because she's a democrat.

The whole thing just smacks of classic US government hypocrisy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with Doro, more importantly so are pretty much all independent software security experts. Not saying whether it is likely or my opinion that the Russian government is behind those data thefts, the evidence is ridiculous.

The FBI also doesn't have a good record when it comes to computer security. The CIA is saying they have a person that testified toward some of the allegations, but I didn't see a specific account. There also was a heavy mixup of Fake News and data thefts, those two have nothing to do with each other. Some of the reasoning blaming Russia is based on German reports after the Bundestag break-in which was very lame evidence, too. Basically they looked at the code of the malware and declared they recognized a particular programmer's handwriting. While that is not all that far-fetched this doesn't allow you to conclude that the person who programmed the software used it in that particular instance. Very few of us here write their own operating systems. That's assuming that programmer is a Russian government employee in the first place, which is very hard to establish. Most good computer security people either work for a specialized organization or they contract. Those people don't do well as government employees.

Last, anybody who uses "cyber" as a word cannot possibly be competent in computer technology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/31/2016 at 2:36 PM, cossieuk said:

What evidence do you want, video evidence of Putin ordering the hacks.

you and i both know if they had that, we'd have seen it already.

On 12/31/2016 at 2:36 PM, cossieuk said:

They will not publish all of the evidence, at least not for a while, as they will most likely be looking for ways to stop it happening again, or at least they should.

However I guarantee that all the evidence has been presented to Obama, and will in time be given to Trump 

at best they could show a basic trace-route, or some indication of the actual source of the attack... they didn't even do that.

but Doro nailed it, to provide more than that, they would expose their own hacking.  and that assumes they actually have determinate evidence this was ordered at the level of the Russian government.  i do not believe this to be the case as if it was, they would have acted back in early October BEFORE the election.  but the assessment was NEVER conclusive, nor were the conclusions shared unanimously amoungst US intelligence agencies.

the release is nothing more than a propaganda piece cooked up for the Press.  Wikipedia is more informative.

5 minutes ago, cossieuk said:

Will be interesting to see what this report says

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38521503

you need a bullshit detector ASAP!  here is the Obama appointed Director of National Intelligence General, James Clapper mincing words in testimony before congress:

an exegesis on Putins motives, will still not be proof.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For one thing, anyone who's password is.... 'password' is just an idiot.

Regardless I don't give a stuff if Russia is behind it or not (and given that no evidence has been produced, one has to wonder).  There was nothing fabricated in those leaks.  It laid bare just how horrible and corrupt the DNC process was.  This is the sort of thing mainstream media should have been exposing themselves, but they were so far up the asshole of the Clinton camp there was never a chance of that happening.

There were plenty of damaging things 'leaked' about Donald Trump before the election.  I just don't see much difference between some butt hurt regressive lefty leaking Trumps private conversations to make him look bad to the leaks of the DNC (with Podesta's ridiculous password and falling for a phishing scam). 

None of it was fabricated.  Honestly I'm all for the public having as much information about the candidates as possible.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, JRonnie said:

For one thing, anyone who's password is.... 'password' is just an idiot.

Regardless I don't give a stuff if Russia is behind it or not (and given that no evidence has been produced, one has to wonder).  There was nothing fabricated in those leaks.  It laid bare just how horrible and corrupt the DNC process was.  This is the sort of thing mainstream media should have been exposing themselves, but they were so far up the asshole of the Clinton camp there was never a chance of that happening.

There were plenty of damaging things 'leaked' about Donald Trump before the election.  I just don't see much difference between some butt hurt regressive lefty leaking Trumps private conversations to make him look bad to the leaks of the DNC (with Podesta's ridiculous password and falling for a phishing scam). 

None of it was fabricated.  Honestly I'm all for the public having as much information about the candidates as possible.

Agree.

As for information being leaked about Trump... Every country in the world has an interest in the USA government and had a preference between Trump or Clinton as they were on such different sides of most issues. For Canada we are wary of the possible changes to NAFTA and other trade policies Trump represents so I am sure our government preferred Clinton.

If the media had done it's job to inform the public rather than acting as an unofficial arm of the DNC they might have some credibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's getting so much better. A new report is out where they just start stating Putin ordered a campaign to influence the elections, just saying shit like it's fact but without giving any evidence (because it's all true, fuck you, don't question it, why would we lie, 3 agencies man).

My favourite is the suggestion that Putin influenced the elections because he wasn't publically favourable to Clinton. Really? That shit needed 3 agencies to write a report about? Oh no, a foreign leader liked a candidate that the US voters also liked. What a fucking travesty /sarc

Or that somehow it's Russia's fault that Trump won because they paid trolls to insult people online. We're getting into desperate territory to want to claiming insulting individuals online is an overthrow of democracy. The US media can drag Trump over the coals, but trolls online are a no no (if they even were paid, because if they were then where the hell is my paycheck for pointing this shit out?).

And, for the icing on the cake, that Russia wanted to undermine Clinton's presidency and voters' faith in democracy... the irony being that's exactly what they're doing with Trump by wasting time on these reports. I can't stand this hypocrisy when there's no big media outlet is out there debunking it all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Either the intelligence services are right, and Putin ordered his people to interfere in the election, which is bad for Trump.  The press will use this to make him look weak and that he only one because of Russia.  What happens if Russia does something that rings the condemnation from the international community, like when the annex part or Ukraine.  Trump would have to go all out in his condemnation or it could look like he is being weak on Russia as they helped him get elected

Or the entire intelligence community in the US is part of a large conspiracy against Trump, again this is not good for Trump either.  He would have to completely clean house and then any bad decisions that come from the Intelligence services would be totally on his head as he will have appointed the people in all departments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, cossieuk said:

Or the entire intelligence community in the US is part of a large conspiracy against Trump...

you are a special case fam.  the entire intelligence community?  how bout Obamas appointments & a few neocons (same as #neverTRUMPers.)  it most certainly is NOT the entire intelligence community.  the whole reason James Comey even pressed the Clinton investigation is because of threats in the form of mass letters of resignation.  if you think the intelligence community unanimously backs this assessment, you are frankly a fool.

1 hour ago, cossieuk said:

The press will use this to make him look weak...

i could not give a rats ass what the press does, they have lost credibility entirely.  fake-news mainstream media is in the pocket of parties like Carlos Slim (owner of NYT) or George Soros (media matters) or any other number of big money funding, who also donated heavily to the Clinton Foundation &/or campaigner.  they are agenda driven hacks.


it is profound just how many want another war on the left (all that military industrial complex funding i guess) but how do you think that will go?  Russia vs. America?  please, without Great Britain and France getting drawn in?  you think China will sit on the sidelines?

wars begin when you will, but they do not end when you please.

but the lost left don't even see the civil war that would preclude such nonsense.  & if the remote chance Trump failed to be inaugurated?  not gonna happen, but what side does #Blue Lives Matter fall on?  overwhelmingly that is...  same goes for firefighters.

trump-pittsburgh-2016.JPG

 

then there is the military:

Obama-military-farewell-MSNBC-768x415.jp

Trump really does have the support of the Military, (not to mention all those appointed generals.)

what about all those militias?  you know, the citizens with the guns & the training/practice at using them...

& if you think the intelligence service is a united front, they have their own little internal civil war happening...

it would be over in under 12 hours.

this course of action by parties tied to the Democrats is one of scapegoating, rather than reflection & it is why they will continue to lose in the coming years.  it is a farce & one that has taken a massive dump on common sense & unnecessarily strained international relations with the only country with more nukes than the US.

ngbbs585d39ebb0934.png

how any sane person could pursue this foolishness...

& now that Donald Trump has seen the actual classified materials:

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

20 hours ago, JRonnie said:

There was nothing fabricated in those leaks.  

There were plenty of damaging things 'leaked' about Donald Trump before the election. 

 

1. No one knows if the leaked materials were altered in anyway.  

2. Except those leaks weren't initiated by an adversarial foreign government with it's own agenda.

 

1 hour ago, LasraelLarson said:

1. If you think the intelligence community unanimously backs this assessment, you are frankly a fool.

 


2. it is profound just how many want another war on the left (all that military industrial complex funding i guess) but how do you think that will go?  

3. & now that Donald Trump has seen the actual classified materials:

 

1. And if you think it is only the Obama appointees and neo-cons who back up the assessment, you are equally a fool.

2. So wanting to punish a foreign country for a cyber-attack against the United States is a call for war?  Sigh...I guess we should just bend over and take it then. Is it okay to ask for some lube and a reach around?

3. Actually the intelligence report says it specifically did not assess if the hacking affected the election results--because that was NOT the mandate of the investigation.  But hey, Trump said it so it must be true.  For fuck sake--go read the report and educate yourself.

8 hours ago, Doro said:

...just saying shit like it's fact but without giving any evidence... .

So you want them to release classified information that could endanger lives and/or current intelligence operations.  Ok....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The DNC is a civilian organization... Podesta is a civilian... This is not a hack of Department Of Defense (although I am sure they have been hacked by Russia, China and others) and this doesn't even meet the level of Corporate Espionage where there are billions of dollars at stake. No this is a "no harm" hacking, IMO, where information was released to "the people" that the civilians involved would rather it had never seen the light of day or, in other words, public scrutiny.

The people involved have not claimed the information was manufactured or untrue they simply refused to confirm it's validity. So it is true, unaltered information from civilians who used the internet for communicating things they didn't want to be common knowledge... lions and tigers and bears, Oh my! This information was then made public by people who had an interest in making this information common knowledge.

I can't help but wonder if there were National Security issues revealed in the emails that the hackers purposefully withheld (selectively and en-masse) in order to avoid an escalated shit-storm and making even greater enemies. I know that I sure would've liked to have seen the 33,000 emails Clinton deleted form her "home server" that actually was being used as an official US Government Secretary Of State server. Which is the greater crime?

Well so long as they were 33,000 emails about yoga and cake recipes I guess we can ignore it all... after all we have never had any reason to believe Clinton would want to hide her internet communications from the world. /s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, fittybolger said:

The DNC is a civilian organization... Podesta is a civilian... This is not a hack of Department Of Defense (although I am sure they have been hacked by Russia, China and others) and this doesn't even meet the level of Corporate Espionage where there are billions of dollars at stake. No this is a "no harm" hacking, IMO, where information was released to "the people" that the civilians involved would rather it had never seen the light of day or, in other words, public scrutiny.

 

You're grasping at straws here...it was done against a political organization.  Intent and motive have been established.  If you want to ignore it, fine, but downplaying it is naive (imo).  The fact that we have Republicans backing further sanctions against Russia for this is very telling.  This was done to distract, to paint one political party in a negative light. It's also important to note that RNC data was collected but not released. But of course, no one wants to acknowledge or even discuss that little nugget...

Edited by Papi
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Papi said:

You're grasping at straws here...it was done against a political organization.  Intent and motive have been established.  If you want to ignore it, fine, but downplaying it is naive (imo).  The fact that we have Republicans backing further sanctions against Russia for this is very telling.  This was done to distract, to paint one political party in a negative light. It's also important to note that RNC data was collected but not released. But of course, no one wants to acknowledge or even discuss that little nugget...

Distract? I would say focus.

Paint? There was no alteration... it was the original, unaltered artwork of the people involved.

Naive? And I suppose you prefer a world where these emails could've been deleted without seeing the light of day... trust Clinton and Co.

No one acknowledge DNC (Edit: I mean RNC)? Well I am no anarchist but I, personally, would like to see EVERYTHING put out there... burn the establishment to the ground and rebuild from the ashes. Sigh... But... that is extremely dangerous shit.

Edit: Unfortunately this whole mega-fiasco from Clinton, from the private server to the election, will result in the establishment, media and elite becoming smarter in how they hide their manipulations from the public.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Papi said:

So you want them to release classified information that could endanger lives and/or current intelligence operations.  Ok....

What lives? If the US only knows the inner workings of Russia because they're spying to such a degree on Russia that lives are at risk, then this is just more showing how hypocritical they are. They can't get all upset over one of the simplest "hacks" you can imagine against a committee email server when they've got spies and shit in the Kremlin giving them intel on actual government operations.

But if that is the case, then they would have known about the "hack" when it was first supposedly ordered and stopped it. They didn't. Why? Because they either don't have a spy in the Kremlin (which means them claiming Russia is to blame is without evidence), OR they didn't feel it necessary to risk exposing their spy by outing a low-level phishing scam when they're certain their puppet Clinton would win. And even with the latter, that's a weak explanation since it doesn't take suggestion of a spy to do a basic bit of IT security and clean up. Which strongly suggests the former is the case and that they don't have any intel.

Whatever way you slice it, they're either lying about Russia being involved for their own agendas, or they've been spying on Russia to such a degree that it makes this leak look laughable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Papi said:

 

1. No one knows if the leaked materials were altered in anyway.

Julian Assange has repeatedly claimed the leaks were unaltered.  & Wikileaks has a very good reputation when it comes to vetting that sort of thing.

4 hours ago, Papi said:

2. Except those leaks weren't initiated by an adversarial foreign government with it's own agenda.

what proof do you have of this? 

i know the assessment...  weapons of mass destruction in Iraq...  Al Shifa pharmaceuticals in Sudan... the NSA gathering data on regular Americans (video in a previous post.)...  CIA ops with  Saudi dollars in Syria...

you'll excuse me if i outright reject the assessment as nothing more than a fabrication.

4 hours ago, Papi said:

1. And if you think it is only the Obama appointees and neo-cons who back up the assessment, you are equally a fool.

oh...  & most of the democratic party, the lame-stream media & a heard of clueless celebrities.  but i am referring to the support withing the intelligence agencies & yes i stick by that claim. 

Comey didn't even come to the congressional briefing.  he is FBI director, just to clarify.

4 hours ago, Papi said:

2. So wanting to punish a foreign country for a cyber-attack against the United States is a call for war?  Sigh...I guess we should just bend over and take it then. Is it okay to ask for some lube and a reach around?

you have NO proof it was Russia, none.

evicting 35 Russian Diplomats & closing 2 compounds used by family of Diplomats...  hasn't happened since the cold war.  it was profoundly stupid, if you can't see the ramifications...  fortunately Putin didn't accelerate, but i would not put it past Obama to make another goof at the first opportunity.

5 hours ago, Papi said:

3. Actually the intelligence report says it specifically did not assess if the hacking affected the election results--because that was NOT the mandate of the investigation.  But hey, Trump said it so it must be true.  For fuck sake--go read the report and educate yourself.

Trump has seen the classified report, you haven't.  YOU HAVE NOT SEEN the classified report, let that sink in.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 1/7/2017 at 1:02 PM, Papi said:

 For fuck sake--go read the report and educate yourself.

it is rather humorous you'd ask me to read something and fail to provide a link:

https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

the above is the declassified material, which does NOT contain any smoking guns...  unlike this bit of revelation from John Kerry:

as Christopher so eloquently put, there is EVERY reason to doubt this assessment!  it is nothing more than a cheap glancing hit piece from Obama on his way out of office.  Michelle could deliver a harder punch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I miss Hitchins. I didn't always agree with him, but his eloquence and "classical" knowledge was top class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting to hear secretary of state nominee Rex Tillerson say that it is a fair assumption that Putin was behind the US election hack and that the intellegence report is clearly troubling 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, cossieuk said:

Interesting to hear secretary of state nominee Rex Tillerson say that it is a fair assumption that Putin was behind the US election hack and that the intellegence report is clearly troubling 

Is it? Because, once again, saying things and having evidence for it are two different things. The "US election hack" (also a phrase the media is pushing to exaggerated the situation and conflate the DNC leak and hacktavist group spying as a single event all controlled by Putin) has been no more than democrats and leftist media attempting to undermine Trump's presidency. As much as I dislike Trump and some of his stances, his desire for closer Russian relations is a good thing, and this demonization of Putin over the completely untampered election results is a bad thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Doro said:

1 - Is it?..........

2 -the completely untampered election results is a bad thing.

@1 - Yes it is.

@2 - Is it?

 

 

 

 

P.S. I call it "Mirror Image Trick" ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Jedy2 said:

@1 - Yes it is.

@2 - Is it?

1 - Not from where I'm standing, it's not.

2 - Of course it is. It's a weak attempt to sabotage relations before they've even got going, and no one benefits from two large nations continuing a petty schoolyard feud.

 

"Mirror image trick" or "offering nothing of substance", depending on dialect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Doro said:

1 - Not from where I'm standing, it's not.

2 - Of course it is. It's a weak attempt to sabotage relations before they've even got going, and no one benefits from two large nations continuing a petty schoolyard feud.

 

"Mirror image trick" or "offering nothing of substance", depending on dialect.

 

Should you tire of "your assertions are baseless, mine are so oh so full of substance" pseudo discussion - let me assure you; I am fully in favour of best possible relations between nuclear superpowers. 

Let's start with giving Ukraine enough military aid to kick the Russian army from Donbas. Then discuss the way for Russia to get the fuck out of Crimea. 

You'd extend petty schoolyard to Poland soon, after all, what is this comic pseudo-ducktatorship got to do with your serious global world policy.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jedy2 said:

Should you tire of "your assertions are baseless, mine are so oh so full of substance" pseudo discussion - let me assure you; I am fully in favour of best possible relations between nuclear superpowers. 

Let's start with giving Ukraine enough military aid to kick the Russian army from Donbas. Then discuss the way for Russia to get the fuck out of Crimea. 

You'd extend petty schoolyard to Poland soon, after all, what is this comic pseudo-ducktatorship got to do with your serious global world policy.  

If you didn't want me to point out your post was emptier than an immortal's crypt, you should've included something with weight in it. I calls a spade a spade.

As for Russia/Ukraine (which is another topic entirely, so I'll keep it brief), if the citizens of Crimea want Russia to leave, then they should. But they don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Doro said:

 

, if the citizens of Crimea want Russia to leave, then they should. But they don't.

End of debate for me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×