Maggie's FarmWe are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for. |
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Categories
QuicksearchLinks
Blog Administration |
Monday, December 12. 2016Monday morning linksGlobal warming fails the random natural variation contest Neocon is thinking about Suzanne Farrell Fat is GOOD for you! New research says cheese and cream to PREVENT diabetes and heart risk Read Bob Dylan’s Nobel Prize Speech: ‘I Recognize That I Am in Very Rare Company’ Patti Smith's performance of "A Hard Rain's A-Gonna Fall" is horrifically awkward. What This Hawaiian Airlines Flight Attendant Did for a Pearl Harbor Survivor Will Be the Best Thing You Hear Today Christmastime: Z-man is done with acquisitiveness Me too. You spend half your life getting stuff, and the second half getting rid of stuff and, at the end, you get rid of yourself too. Barnard College Crybullies Demand Transgender Native American President New York Times Pioneers New Feature: 'This Week in (White) Hate' Free speech loses in Holland Freedom loses. Europeans do not value freedom the way Americans do. Reynolds: Tax the heck out of people in flood zones #BoycottTheBoycotters update: They’re moving with incredible speed Obama preaches empathy; Trump projects it RUSSIAN “MEDDLING” IN ELECTION: MOST OVERBLOWN STORY EVER? Anything to try to delegitimize the election. Throw all the shit at the wall and see if anything sticks Exactly Who In America Has This Insatiable Appetite for Somali Immigration? $125 Billion Waste Bombshell Shows Obama’s Pentagon Spending on Anything But Military Readiness Trump is FDR with the fireside tweet Will Obamacare Repeal Really Leave 30 Million without Insurance? Alphabet’s Page, Schmidt Said to Attend Trump Tech Meeting Goldberg: Trump: An opportunity for federalism Anyone care to be the Washington Post's token Trumpkin? Venezuela Seizes Nearly 4 Million Toys from Private Company to Give to Poor Children Niall Ferguson: I Was Wrong About Brexit Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
My little doodle of how this must look from the other side of the looking glass... Dismantling The EPA
"Christmastime: Z-man is done with acquisitiveness
Me too. You spend half your life getting stuff, and the second half getting rid of stuff" I have inherited some fine family items over the years. The hardest realization for me is that no one will want them when I'm dead! I am the last stop for them--silverware, china, handmade quilts from long ago, jewelry and personal items. We have a big house full of do-it-yourself antiques. Some fine furniture, china, silverware, jewelry and other stuff, bought mid-fifties, much overseas, and given TLC since. Our six (AARP-eligible) kids grew up with that stuff. They constantly bicker over who gets what. My wife finally brokered a deal and there is a detailed list of who gets what in our wills, so (hopefully) the bickering will end when the last one of us moves into that pine condo.
My wife and I have stopped giving major stuff for birthdays and holidays, it just started getting to be too much. Now just a couple of small token items.
Fat is GOOD for you! New research says cheese and cream to PREVENT diabetes and heart risk
He shouted, happily. And yet like they, you leave unemphasized the three fine print disclaimers that render this nonsense nonsense. It's almost like you have a bias to confirm, eh BD? "RUSSIAN 'MEDDLING' IN ELECTION: MOST OVERBLOWN STORY EVER?"
Hey, when all else fails, a tidy little conspiracy theory is always preferable to facing reality and moving on. JJM: Hey, when all else fails, a tidy little conspiracy theory is always preferable to facing reality and moving on.
In fact, there is strong evidence of Russian hacking. This has been supported by multiple U.S. intelligence agencies, as well as private cyber-organizations. For instance, Podesta's email were hacked using an email spoof that can be traced to Fancy Bear, a Russian organization with known ties to the Kremlin. That the emails were released for maximum political effect is patent. To disregard evidence concerning interference from a foreign power with a known history of subterfuge to the detriment of other nations is to disarm yourself. Again you misuse the word "fact". There are claims, all unsubstantiated, and many contradicted by other sources.
Your fallacious assertion streak continues. DrTorch: Again you misuse the word "fact".
All you are doing is handwaving. Even private organizations have traced the hack to Russian groups with ties to the Kremlin. The Podesta email spoof, for instance used a Bitly address which allowed investigators to determine the source. Once again you fail to understand a common term in logic.
I have handwaived nothing. I expect (credible) evidence for claims, and none has been provided. Certainly not by you which is typical.
#4.1.1.1.1
DrTorch
on
2016-12-12 16:58
(Reply)
We provide authoritative sources, as well as provided how a particular hack was made and how it was uncovered.
#4.1.1.1.1.1
Zachriel
on
2016-12-12 17:06
(Reply)
What exactly are you claiming they did? Hack voting machines...send in absentee ballots??? What?
Dale: What exactly are you claiming they did?
Russian hackers with close ties to the Kremlin broke U.S. and international law by hacking into the DNC and others, then released the information in a manner to maximize disruption of the U.S. elections. The truth hurts: regardless of how the emails were leaked, the actions and remarks contained in them were true and gave the American people a view of exactly what their would-be masters think of them. Indeed, what they think of each other. Had Bernie Sanders not been unfairly (and probably illegally) cheated of his chance at the nomination, the leaks would have had no effect. Had Podesta's emails not revealed the essential racism of the DNC, there would have been no effect. Had there not been vile, illegal, wrong-doing exposed by the leaks, there would have been no effect. Focusing on an unproven claim that "Russia did it!", distracts attention from the basic truth: if the Democrats hadn't done all that evil shite, no one would have cared about the leaks. It wasn't the leak, it was what the leak revealed.
#4.1.2.1.1
Ike
on
2016-12-12 10:10
(Reply)
Ike: The truth hurts: regardless of how the emails were leaked, the actions and remarks contained in them were true and gave the American people a view of exactly what their would-be masters think of them.
Leaks of the RNC emails would have almost certainly revealed many of the same sorts of things. However, those were never leaked because doing so would not have furthered Russian political aims, which were to help elect Trump, or at least weaken Clinton. You've been played. Ike: Had Bernie Sanders not been unfairly (and probably illegally) cheated of his chance at the nomination, the leaks would have had no effect. There was nothing illegal about the DNC actions. It's typical, albeit unseemly, for the party to steer the process. In any case, we note that you support Russian hacking. So does your President Elect.
#4.1.2.1.1.1
Zachriel
on
2016-12-12 10:15
(Reply)
I've been seeing this argument lately: sure, all the Russians did was make public completely true information about the DNC that made people think the DNC was scummier than they'd imagined, but we can concoct out of whole cloth the speculation that the Russians did or might have found bad stuff on the RNC, too, and unfairly failed to publicize it, which would have been OK because that was bad R stuff. So hacking.
It's such a shoddy mental process. In the past I'd have worried that voters would be influenced by it, because they'd be so unlikely to hear the opposing view, but I don't know--this last election makes me think voters are finally wise to the garbage that's being spewed at them by the press. And Z is helping, so thanks, Z. Keep it up. The voters love your kind of stuff. It totally makes them trust the progressive movement and want to give it more power over their lives.
#4.1.2.1.1.1.1
Texan99
on
2016-12-12 12:53
(Reply)
Texan99: all the Russians did was make public completely true information about the DNC
What they did was hack into private emails, then used that information in an attempt to disrupt the U.S. election.
#4.1.2.1.1.1.1.1
Zachriel
on
2016-12-12 13:36
(Reply)
Except they didn't.
That's what you are ACCUSING them of doing. And you have no evidence to support it. It's not true. It's not even truthy.
#4.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1
DrTorch
on
2016-12-12 13:43
(Reply)
DrTorch: Except they didn't.
Multiple U.S. intelligence agencies, and independent cyber-organizations who have studied the situation disagree with your handwaving dismissal.
#4.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
Zachriel
on
2016-12-12 13:45
(Reply)
Those agencies provide no evidence.
And multiple agencies AGREE with my assessment. So you have failed twice. Typical
#4.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
DrTorch
on
2016-12-12 16:56
(Reply)
DrTorch: We provide authoritative sources, as well as provided how a particular hack was made and how it was uncovered.
No. They provided their conclusions based on the evidence they collected. However, this is additionally supported by independent agencies.
#4.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
Zachriel
on
2016-12-12 17:09
(Reply)
According to the RNC, they had the FBI investigate and they were not hacked. Try again. If that claim by the RNC were false, I suspect that the MSM would be all over it, shouting from the rooftops. Since they are not, then I take it as true.
Whether what the DNC and other Democrats did was legal or not, it was dirty, slimy and utterly inconsistent with their long-standing claims of honesty, transparency and fairness. Doesn't change the point of my remark, that what they did was wrong. And they knew it was wrong, which is why the fake outrage and red herring trails about the supposed interference in the election by the Russians. Simply because you disagree with what I wrote, Zachriel, doesn't mean you shouldn't read it. Nowhere in my post do I say anything even approaching "The Russians hacked the DNC and I like it." I did say that I doubted the claim because of a lack of proof, which hardly constitutes approving of what wasn't and still isn't established by evidence. And whether Mr. Trump approves of the supposed Russian actions isn't relevant to what I wrote, nor do I mention it. Try throwing stuff at the target. Nor am I a Trump partisan, as if that mattered. I could just as likely accuse you of supporting the criminal actions of Mrs. Clinton, based on your posts, and would be just as incorrect and wrong as you are in your remarks. No matter what the smoke and feathers and all the fussing is about, one simple fact remains. The election of the President is decided in the Electoral College by the selection of slates of electors committed to voting for one candidate or another. That selection is done by the popular vote, but the popular vote doesn't decide the election directly. That has been true since the beginning of the Republic and every person involved in this recent election knew that. Hillary lost, Trump won. To say, "Well, she won the popular vote!" is like my saying that the Dallas Cowboys made more yardage on offense than the NY Giants did in last night's football game - which the Giants won. It is, purely and simply, an attempt to make Mr. Trump's victory seem illegitimate, which it is not, as it was accomplished under the rules always used for the election of Presidents. Nothing that any idiot in the print or TV media writes or says will change that. If the Democrats and their fellow-travelers (and I use that phrase consciously and deliberately) succeed in de-legitimatizing Trump's presidency and thereby create open disobedience and more violence, you and all the other apologists for the Left will bitterly rue the day you helped them, because the ruin of this nation will encompass all of us, not only those who believe themselves to be justified by their moral and intellectual superiority and therefore immune from the results of their foolish rage.
#4.1.2.1.1.1.2
Ike
on
2016-12-12 14:55
(Reply)
Ike: According to the RNC, they had the FBI investigate and they were not hacked.
“We now have high confidence that they hacked the D.N.C. and the R.N.C., and conspicuously released no documents” from the Republican organization according to intelligence sources. However, this is based on unnamed "senior officials". We'll have to wait and see. Meanwhile ... Joint Statement from the Department of Homeland Security and Office of the Director of National Intelligence: "The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations."
#4.1.2.1.1.1.2.1
Zachriel
on
2016-12-12 15:46
(Reply)
Ike: Had Podesta's emails not revealed the essential racism of the DNC, there would have been no effect.
Just curious. To what "essential racism" are you referring?
#4.1.2.1.1.2
Zachriel
on
2016-12-12 10:19
(Reply)
Calling Hispanics 'taco bowls,' listing people by 'food group' (i.e. minority group), giving Obama lists of potential cabinet picks grouped by sex and ethnic background. That kind of racist crap.
Oh, and don't forget the complete trashing of Catholicism.
#4.1.2.1.1.2.1
MissT
on
2016-12-12 14:42
(Reply)
MissT: Calling Hispanics 'taco bowls,'
Nope. That is in reference to Trump tweet "Happy #CincoDeMayo! The best taco bowls are made in Trump Tower Grill. I love Hispanics!" MissT: don't forget the complete trashing of Catholicism. You really ought to look for primary sources, instead of just echoing what you hear in the echochamber.
#4.1.2.1.1.2.1.1
Zachriel
on
2016-12-12 14:47
(Reply)
The "Russians" simply exposed the truth the mainstream media were covering up.
Totally fair game.
#4.1.2.1.2
Jim
on
2016-12-12 13:39
(Reply)
Jim: The "Russians" simply exposed the truth the mainstream media were covering up.
So there you are. You support foreign adversaries hacking into the private emails of American citizens, then using that information in an attempt to disrupt the U.S. elections.
#4.1.2.1.2.1
Zachriel
on
2016-12-12 13:41
(Reply)
You're really stuck on that. It doesn't seem like a petty preoccupation, or a pretext to ignore the ignominy exposed in the DNC? No wonder you can't understand why your party lost the election. You have no idea what's important.
#4.1.2.1.2.1.1
Texan99
on
2016-12-13 01:34
(Reply)
Texan99: No wonder you can't understand why your party lost the election.
We're not a member of any political party. Our comments reflect facts to the best of our knowledge.
#4.1.2.1.2.1.1.1
Zachriel
on
2016-12-13 07:37
(Reply)
I think that I would trust Assange's word that the information he had was not from Russia than whatever sources you are using to say that it was Russia.
#4.1.2.1.3
ron snyder
on
2016-12-12 15:12
(Reply)
ron snyder: I think that I would trust Assange's word that the information he had was not from Russia than whatever sources you are using to say that it was Russia.
Our source: Joint Statement from the Department of Homeland Security and Office of the Director of National Intelligence: "The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations."
#4.1.2.1.3.1
Zachriel
on
2016-12-12 15:47
(Reply)
Is true. All of it. We hacked your voting machines and elected your president Trump.
#4.1.2.1.4
Boris Badenov
on
2016-12-12 15:25
(Reply)
There is no strong evidence of the kind, only the Democrats making stuff up to fit the narrative of why Ms. Rodham got beat. Just because THEY are telling you this rhetoric and you pretending it is real and spinning it as truth does not make it so.
Just another example of the failed presidency and the lies he makes up as he goes along. 1-20-17. Joe Luke: There is no strong evidence of the kind, only the Democrats making stuff up
That is incorrect. Multiple U.S. intelligence agencies, as well as private cyber-organizations, have independently determined the Russians hacked the DNC and others in the Democratic Party. Pretending it didn't happen doesn't make it go away. truthy.
No evidence exists that whatever the Russians did (and I'm fairly certain they did something. Why wouldn't they at least attempt it?) made any difference in the outcome.
#4.1.3.1.1
Christopher B
on
2016-12-12 09:51
(Reply)
Christopher B: No evidence exists that whatever the Russians did (and I'm fairly certain they did something. Why wouldn't they at least attempt it?) made any difference in the outcome.
If a foreign adversary broke the law and hacked the political parties in order to disrupt the election, then certainly it matters to anyone who thinks U.S. elections should be free of illegal foreign interference.
#4.1.3.1.1.1
Zachriel
on
2016-12-12 09:57
(Reply)
Hey Zackie Baby, Obama had his play at wrecking the Israeli vote and Brexit. He is the definition of hackster. You betcha Assange knows a heck of a lot more about who did what vs. you…and he says no Putin-led Russians.
#4.1.3.1.1.1.1
jma
on
2016-12-12 11:10
(Reply)
jma: Obama had his play at wrecking the Israeli vote and Brexit.
Obama's statements on Brexit were legal and public, not based on an illegal email hack. There is no evidence that Obama interfered in the Israeli election. There was some money that was allocated for one purpose that was used for political purposes. That resulted in a change in policy to prevent a recurrence. Even then, it was not based on an illegal email hack. jma: he says no Putin-led Russians. Demonstrable facts point to Russia as the source of the hacks.
#4.1.3.1.1.1.1.1
Zachriel
on
2016-12-12 11:13
(Reply)
Christopher B: (and I'm fairly certain they did something. Why wouldn't they at least attempt it?)
Hacking is one thing. Leaking those hacks to create maximum political disruption is another.
#4.1.3.1.1.2
Zachriel
on
2016-12-12 09:58
(Reply)
Chrisopher B: truthy.
Add truthiness to the list of concepts you don't understand.
#4.1.3.1.1.3
Zachriel
on
2016-12-12 10:00
(Reply)
Are you calling Assange a liar?
#4.1.3.1.1.3.1
mudbug
on
2016-12-12 10:28
(Reply)
mudbug: Are you calling Assange a liar?
Are you replying to the comment about "truthiness"? The claim concerned multiple U.S. intelligence agencies, as well as private cyber-organizations, having independently determined the Russians hacked the DNC and others in the Democratic Party. Is this claim not an incontestable fact, that multiple agencies did make this determination? Or are you contesting the findings themselves? Assange may well be lying or simply misled, but the finding stand on their own.
#4.1.3.1.1.3.1.1
Zachriel
on
2016-12-12 10:36
(Reply)
Interesting answer to a simple direct question.
Assange said that the source for the emails he released was not the Russian government. Are you calling him a liar?
#4.1.3.1.1.3.1.1.1
mudbug
on
2016-12-12 11:02
(Reply)
mudbug: Are you calling him a liar?
Asked and answered. He could be lying or simply misled, but the findings stand on their own.
#4.1.3.1.1.3.1.1.1.1
Zachriel
on
2016-12-12 11:09
(Reply)
Dollink, all is true. We hacked your elections.
#4.1.3.1.1.3.1.1.1.1.1
Natasha Fatale
on
2016-12-12 15:30
(Reply)
There is indeed strong evidence of Russian hacking and Chinese hacking and every Eastern European country hacking and yet the Democrats tell us that Hillary won the popular vote. The hacking has been going on for over a decade, perhaps two and yet we never challenged any other elections. The hacking will continue because no one really takes it seriously.
The fake question is; did Russia actually hack any voting machines. The real question is why in the hell are voting machines connected in any way to the web? Why are any systems with critical information connected to the web? This tempest in a tea pot looks like a false flag attempt from the left to get by trickery what they couldn't get honestly. SweetPea: The hacking will continue because no one really takes it seriously.
That's right — including the President Elect. SweetPea: did Russia actually hack any voting machines. There is evidence that the political parties were hacked, and the information released to maximize political disruption. There is evidence of domestic voter suppression. There is evidence that fake news had an inordinate impact. But there is no evidence that the voting process was hacked. "There is evidence that the political parties were hacked, and the information released to maximize political disruption."
Ahhh! But you didn't say that there was "evidence" that Russians hacked the DNC and that Russians released that information. You are playing with words. Regardless, the DNC was hacked and the email of a number of Democrats was hacked and surprise/surprise Hillary's private server email was hacked (by everyone except for the DOJ). AND indeed horrible stuff was released. I repeat HORRIBLE stuff was released.... Let that sink in as you realize - but it was all true!!! The Democrats sent horrible emails that embarrassed them when they were made public. Horrible disgusting things. Lies, slurs, slander, pedophilia, dirty tricks, crimes they committed, money they stole and hid. Oh the list goes on and on. Oh! But wait! You don't care that the emails were true!!! YOU are OUTRAGED that they were made public.
#4.1.4.1.1
SweetPea
on
2016-12-12 14:55
(Reply)
SweetPea: you didn't say that there was "evidence" that Russians hacked the DNC and that Russians released that information.
Joint Statement from the Department of Homeland Security and Office of the Director of National Intelligence: "The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations."
#4.1.4.1.1.1
Zachriel
on
2016-12-12 15:40
(Reply)
Please refrain from patronizing me. Given my background, it is quite likely I might have a better grip on this sort of thing than you do.
It is not the activities of Russian (or Chinese) hackers per se that is the issue here: no one doubts that. Such hacking by various foreign agencies and private groups is hardly news. It's taking that issue and developing a full-blown theory on the scale of the 9/11 Truthers that pushes credibility. JJM: Given my background, it is quite likely I might have a better grip on this sort of thing than you do.
Perhaps — we're more than willing to learn —, but that's best determined by the substantive content of your posts, wouldn't you say? JJM: It is not the activities of Russian (or Chinese) hackers per se that is the issue here: no one doubts that. Indeed, it's been disputed by the President Elect, and by others on this very thread. JJM: It's taking that issue and developing a full-blown theory on the scale of the 9/11 Truthers that pushes credibility. Where and what is that "full-blown theory"? Tell me, please, what evidence did these multiple sources use to confirm this? Did they all have the ability to do their own independent forensic analysis? I don't remember hearing about any of this. Nor do I remember anyone releasing this forensic analysis, or even an explanation of how they know for a fact it is Putin/Russia.
Wikileaks itself, plus a UK Ambassador, have said it was NOT the Russians. The UK Ambassador went so far as to say it was an insider. It is very dangerous to push a false story that could have international implications. Remember that. We will eventually know the source, and then you will see how corrupt our government has become. MissT: what evidence did these multiple sources use to confirm this?
For Podesta's Gmail, the hackers created a phishing URL through Bitly with an account that has been traced to Fancy Bear, a Russian organization with ties to the Kremlin. According to Bitly statistics, the link was clicked just twice in March 2016. According to SecureWorks, Fancy Bear has created thousands of such links, which include the email and name of the target encoded and embedded in the URL. It is really hard to know when Assange is a hero and when he is not.
How come the DNC and the government don't have better security ( ie the hack of government employee info)? How come the Russian's, or whoever, hacked the DNC but not Hillary's server? Foreign governments have been trying to influence elections and the government forever, doesn't the USA do the same thing? Bribes and such, extortion...? Exasperated: How come the DNC and the government don't have better security
It's actually a very difficult problem. Podesta had Gmail which has a lot of safeguards, but he fell for a spoof. Because it was customized for him, and never used elsewhere (something else we can determine from the data), Google and his virus protection would have been unaware of the suspect URL. Exasperated: How come the Russian's, or whoever, hacked the DNC but not Hillary's server? Don't know that they didn't, but if not, that would be very interesting, wouldn't it? Exasperated: Foreign governments have been trying to influence elections and the government forever, doesn't the USA do the same thing? But you're not supposed to sit idly by while it happens! It's not so much that the Russians hacked the emails, while illegal — it is sort of expected they will collect information —, but that they leaked the emails in such as way as to cause maximum disruption of the U.S. election. "It's not so much that the Russians hacked the emails, while illegal - it is sort of expected they will collect information -, but that they leaked the emails in such as way as to cause maximum disruption of the U.S. election."
If in fact it was a Russian government agency that did the hacking then it was patently not illegal (under Russian law, of course) - unless you are suggesting the writ of US law runs to Moscow. Or let's put it another way: it's just as "illegal" as NSA activities against Russian sites. If you use your own private server for classified government business, or your party is slack about the security of its IT systems, you're going to be hacked much easier. JJM: If in fact it was a Russian government agency that did the hacking then it was patently not illegal (under Russian law, of course) - unless you are suggesting the writ of US law runs to Moscow.
Interference in domestic elections is a prohibited intervention in the internal affairs of the U.S. and an unlawful violation of U.S. sovereignty. Consequently, the U.S. has a right to respond. Americans should be very wary of allowing foreign interference in their election — assuming they still believe in the right to self-determination.
#4.2.1.1.1
Zachriel
on
2016-12-12 11:43
(Reply)
"Interference in domestic elections is a prohibited intervention in the internal affairs of the U.S. and an unlawful violation of U.S. sovereignty."
Oh, boo-hoo. Lord, when did Americans become whiners instead of winners? Your country intervenes in the internal affairs of others in pursuit of its own national interests; other countries do the same back. That is how the cookie crumbles. Get over it. (By the way, the US intelligence community violates the sovereignty of lots of countries every minute of every day. Because you can't usefully spy on other countries without breaking their laws.) Here's some advice from a very good friend of America: it's very unbecoming for you folks to look like such hapless ninnies and cry-babies. Suck it up, accept that dear Julian in the Ecuadorean embassy and the Russkis and no doubt a few others too just exploited your IT weaknesses through your own lax security. Fix it and move on.
#4.2.1.1.1.1
JJM
on
2016-12-12 13:24
(Reply)
JJM: Lord, when did Americans become whiners instead of winners?
It has nothing to do with whining, but determining exactly what happened, and how to prevent a recurrence, including possible countermeasures.
#4.2.1.1.1.1.1
Zachriel
on
2016-12-12 13:39
(Reply)
Mexico has been doing this as well. So has Israel.
Only there is evidence for both of those, yet you haven't mentioned either of them. I would call that disingenuous, except that you're simply an outright liar.
#4.2.1.1.1.2
DrTorch
on
2016-12-12 17:01
(Reply)
"Barnard College Crybullies Demand Transgender Native American President"
"Affirmative Action", EEOC, TitleIX, ADA, political correctness, etc., have just about killed the west. QUOTE: Global warming fails the random natural variation contest Consider a random walk (with time in the horizontal dimension, and the random walk up or down incrementally in the vertical dimension). A random walk may have moved up over time, or with equal probability have moved down over time. Let's assume we look at the random walk and there has been a trend upward. Now let's assume the vertical dimension represents global mean surface temperature, which it is posited is due to the random walk, say +20°C. The claim is preposterous on its face. Mere randomness can't result in the vast amount of heat required to warm the Earth +20°C. Saying "Random Fluctuation" is physically meaningless. It's not even wrong!! Let's consider a simple example, the temperature of a pot of water. We measure the temperature at regular intervals. The results form a standard distribution about a mean. Now add a very small source of heat to the pot. There are still fluctuations, which makes the rise in temperature inconsistent, but as time progresses, we see that the moving average of our measurements slowly rises. To someone who is unaware of the source of heat, and only has access to the temperature readings, would they conclude the rise in temperature is due to a random walk? Of course not!! We have a very good understanding of heat and temperature, so the heat must be accounted for by something other than "random fluctuations". Bird Dog: Europeans do not value freedom the way Americans do.
The first Dutch republic was founded in 1581, long before America became a republic, so they do value freedom, clearly. In any case, Europe has a history with ethnic hatred that impacts their legal system. Consider this: QUOTE: The man with the wild hair funny mustache shouts, "Do you want fewer or more Moroccans Jews in your city and in the Netherlands Germany?" The crowd chants "Fewer! Fewer! Fewer!" The mustachioed man promises, "We're going to take care of that." While more speech is usually the best answer to hate speech, it's not a panacea. re Exactly Who In America Has This Insatiable Appetite for Somali Immigration?
Follow the money. If Government wants more of something they subsidize it. I read earlier this year it was about $8500/head. QUOTE: The appetite belongs in the first place to the refugee importers, the so-called Voluntary Agencies, who get vast grants of federal money to aid them in their efforts, and who pay their executives grand salaries; and in the second place to Midwestern meatpacking and food-processing companies wanting cheap labor. It’s all a nice little money racket dressed up in humanitarian language. Hey, I'll hand it to Patti for staying true to Bob's version, rather than trying to remake it into a Patti song.
And don't you know she was weirded out by her audience? That's hardly a typical Patti audience. Zach's obviously been to an all-weekend seminar to be taught the new DNC talking points on "the Russians are coming, the Russians are coming."
What complete and total BS. The Democrats finally got caught with their pants down, screwing the American people. I really don't care who exposed it, they did us a service, and there has not been a single refutation of anything those emails show. Even my lefty son who campaigned for Sanders is pissed at how his candidate got screwed by the DNC, Hillary and a rigged primary process. And the Democrats are now engaged in a full out effort to corrupt the Electoral College, in part using this phony Russian meme. The Democrats are a cancer on our country. Jim: I really don't care who exposed it
So there you are. You support foreign adversaries hacking into the private emails of American citizens, then using that information in an attempt to disrupt the U.S. elections. QUOTE: You support foreign adversaries hacking into the private emails of American citizens, then using that information in an attempt to disrupt the U.S. elections. If it exposes to us the fact that you all [by "You All" I mean Rachel Maddow, Chris Hayes, Bernie Sanders, Zachriel, et.al.] you all share the same brain, and, in fact, only one of you can check it out at a time, then yes, I approve of the hacking... The Distributist: I approve of the hacking
That's what we thought. Thank you for clarifying that. Yeah, whatEVer!
But let's be sure not to discuss the CONTENTS of the leaked e-mails (a hack is not a leak, and time will reveal an insider leak, not a Russian hack) because advocating for a "Catholic Spring" is so in line with your agenda, no matter how unseemly "we" may think it... The Distributist: let's be sure not to discuss the CONTENTS of the leaked e-mails
As if no one ever talked about the contents of the emails. The Distributist: advocating for a "Catholic Spring" is so in line with your agenda A Catholic talking about reform within the Catholic Church is as old as, well, Martin Luther.
#10.1.1.1.1.1
Zachriel
on
2016-12-13 06:40
(Reply)
Podesta himself appears to be about as Catholic as, well, as Martin Luther...
Zach--It's sad when Russia is more honest and transparent than the government and media of our own country, isn't it? Think about that a little.
Jim: It's sad when Russia is more honest and transparent than the government and media of our own country, isn't it?
Russia's government is opaque and has tight control of the media. U.S. media is highly diverse, albeit with a tendency to focus on the newest shiny thing. What I don't understand is what advantage a Trump win would give Putin. You would think that he would want Hilliary to win. She would keep Obama's weak foreign policy in place. Advantage Russia. None of it makes sense from an agenda standpoint. But let's keep that "fake news" coming.
pocono pam: What I don't understand is what advantage a Trump win would give Putin.
Trump has indicated that he would ratify Russia's aggression in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine, and that he would weaken NATO just as Russia is making moves to disrupt the political process in the Baltics. Also, Trump has suggested he doesn't care if Russia interferes in U.S. elections, which, if allowed, would allow continued entrenchment of foreign influence. Trump's manner is transactional, meaning long term relationships have less value than short term gain, which will allow Russia to divide the U.S. from its allies. Furthermore, Trump's campaign drove a wedge into the heart of America's racial and ethnic divide, which will cause political turmoil in the U.S. for the foreseeable future. This is a hoot though it is apparently a hoax.
The Fisher-Price play bar. Comes with a pretend bar, bar stools and beer bottles. Ya gotta get a look at the bartender on the box. What a character! http://www.aol.com/article/finance/2016/12/08/controversial-happy-hour-playset-for-toddlers-causes-uproar-on/21623488/ This "Russian" thing is looking more and more like a conspiracy by Obama and the Democrats to overthrow the elections. The White House is now claiming the Russians elected Trump. And the "electors," a group led by Nancy Pelosi's daughter, is demanding "briefings" on the matter.
Jim: This "Russian" thing is looking more and more like a conspiracy by Obama and the Democrats to overthrow the elections.
"Looking like" implies evidence of some sort. What evidence do you have that the hacks are a conspiracy by Obama and the Democrats to undermine their own electoral chances? You're in no position to talk about evidence. Run along little girl.
Great thread, people. Looks like the Z-Bot(s) program, thought unplugged either since Trump or for the Holidays, has probably been upgraded to a Briggs & Stratton 16 bit processor, and to celebrate, has unleashed Handwaving v. 872.57.13.5.2.1 on the world.
Apparently this version deploys diversion* and repetition as top-level logic. Like I say, nice thread. *who knew using the official D.C. Gmail password "password" rose to the level of HACKING! HACKING WITH THE INTENT TO OVERTHROW SACRED AMERICAN DEMOCRACY?! Or that sophisticated pols should be held to account for their revealed literal subversion of said democracy itself, if you want to get actually serious about it, something Z-Bot(s) card-punchers are evidently loathe to do** Of course, I mean normal human lower-case "hacking" and normal human lower-case "democracy", but given the Z-Bot(s) earnest new software routines, who am I to ruin the spirit of things? **because, you know, what can be handw- sorry, what can be spoken into relevance is far more relevant than what's actually going on. According to said card-puncher's logic, the Democrats have finally made the appearances of things - COMMIES ARE HACKING THE FREE WORLD, PEOPLE! - more important than things themselves. Because of their sanctified integrity and because of their sanctified integrity for the last hundred years or so. This statement by the Z-bot in one of his postings here had me laughing out loud:
"Podesta had Gmail which has a lot of safeguards, but he fell for a spoof." A couple of years ago we had an ethics presentation at our firm by the head of the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (the government agency which monitors attorneys). One thing I remember her saying is that a lawyer's use of Gmail for client communications would be considered per se malpractice, because there was no reasonable expectation of privacy for users of Gmail (i.e., Gmail emails are being monitored and read by Google, material provided to vendors, etc.). Jim: One thing I remember her saying is that a lawyer's use of Gmail for client communications would be considered per se malpractice, because there was no reasonable expectation of privacy for users of Gmail
Heh. Colin Powell used AOL while Secretary of State! To be fair, though, Google strips all identifying information. They are only interested in the meta-data. And they do have a lot of security experts. Nothing Podesta was transmitting was classified, or even overly sensitive. It takes the right-wing echochamber to turn it into something else. Bounce it around a few times, add a dash of fake news from Russia, pretend you're not being playing, and voilà! — scandal of no intrinsic significance, but noise enough to drown out policy. Russian Hacking
In the spring of 2006 I got up on a Sunday morning, checked my little household c/c ($600 available) and went to pick up guests from out of state. At approximately 10:30 AM I used the card to buy 4 tickets of entry to the air museum in Seattle. At about 12:00 we went into the coffee shop at the museum and I tried to pay for coffee and treats with the same card. It was declined. When I got home at 3:00PM that day I went online again to see why my card had been declined. Our checking, savings, credit, and lines of credit had been wiped out. I immediately calledthe B of A fraud department and they asked the following questions: 1. were you in Brooklyn this AM? 2. were you in Novosibirsk this AM? 3. were you in Leningrad this AM? 4. were you in Moscow this AM? 5 were in in (one other Russian city I can't remember)? Of cours the answer to all of those was "NO". The fraud department said that starting at 10:45 AM at a Brooklyn ATM machine the first withdrawal was made. That withdrawal activated all the other withdrawals from those cities in Russia. The whole thing was done in about 15 minutes. I spoke several times with the fraud department and was told by someone there that the Russians had hit 250,000 accounts in several weeks. Several months later in July President Bush met with Putin and the G8 group for a G8 meeting. He sat across the table from the man knowing that Putin had hit 250,000 accounts. The fraud department told me that B of A was not the only bank to be hit. Several of the other major banks were also included. The local Seattle news station did a 15 second blurb one time "some report of massive hacking--will get back to you". Never another mention. In 2009, in Pennsylvania I met a man working at the office supply store who had the same story to tell. Same time frame, also 250,000 accounts. So you see-- the Russians have been hacking into anything they want for years! And, we do nothing about it! I spoke with a banker here at another major bank. When they have a report of a fraudulent use of a card, or a stolen card--they just pump the cash into the victims account and probably "in most cases" do not pursue the criminal even if they have security camera footage. I wonder how many billions of dollars have been printed up to cover for these attacks? Americans should thank the Russians if they are responsible. Bureaucrats will hopefully play more by the rules in the future.
Hey Zach -
I'm starting a little CHRISTMAS fund and asking for small donations from regular readers. How much will it cost for you to disappear until after the New Year? PS - As always, Santa hopes you enjoy your usual bag of coal. Top U.S. Intelligence Officials: WaPo stories are Fake News (nothing to prove Russian intent to affect the election):
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-intelligence-idUSKBN14204E?il=0 Seems like the Z-bots' latest attack meme was yet more Fake News concocted by WaPo:
http://truepundit.com/cia-washington-post-report-linking-russian-government-to-trump-election-hacking-is-outright-lie/ "The Central Intelligence Agency is declaring the Washington Post’s much-hyped story linking the Russian government to hacking the presidential election to help Donald Trump an “outright lie,” according to CIA personnel with direct knowledge of the case." The good thing is that this latest conspiracy theory by the Democrats and their fellow travelers is so ludicrous that virtually everyone at my office was making fun of it today. Jim: http://truepundit.com/cia-washington-post-report-linking-russian-government-to-trump-election-hacking-is-outright-lie/ "Intelligence insiders said no one in the Agency or in the FBI, who is running at least one parallel inquiry, has ruled out a possible internal leak within the Democratic National Committee from actor(s) inside the United States who funneled private DNC emails to Wikileaks."
Good example of fake news. Your article conflates two issues, whether Russia hacked the DNC with why Russia hacked the DNC, then claims that the CIA has not determined that Russia was involved in the hack, something easy enough to check. Joint Statement from the Department Of Homeland Security and Office of the Director of National Intelligence on Election Security: "The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations." Can everyone stop feeding the troll named Zachriel, angel of memory and wikipedia? It's annoying filtering through all the comments hijacked by him to get to the real ones. If you ignore him he'll dry up and float away in the wind.
I enjoyed reading the Dylan speech, by the way. He sounds like he agrees with BD's original thought on the day of the announcement; he's a minstrel. I wonder if the medal will end up at the Dylan museum here in Tulsa. |