|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On July 28 2016 03:01 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 02:57 LegalLord wrote:On July 28 2016 02:51 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 02:39 LegalLord wrote:On July 28 2016 02:34 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 02:28 LegalLord wrote:On July 28 2016 02:18 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 02:15 LegalLord wrote:On July 28 2016 02:10 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 02:04 LegalLord wrote:
It's not the Russians' fault that the emails contain what they do. Spinning this as if it were is in fact blaming the Russians.
You're conflating blaming the Russians for the hack and blaming them for the content of the emails. On July 28 2016 02:04 LegalLord wrote:
My opinion of Obama is that he is not an FP president and he chose a pretty terrible advisor in Hillary Clinton. That is what it would be regardless of the Ukraine situation. Beside the point of whether you'd criticize him for being weak on Crimea. Blaming the Russians for the hack is an attempt to sidestep the issue of the contents of the hack. Foreign governments hacking your servers is neither unusual nor suspicious because everyone does it to everyone. Leaking the contents, a bit less so, but also not something all that out of the ordinary. Still no conclusive proof that it is Russia either. I gave you my thoughts on Obama's FP. That is hardly beside the point. I don't really think in terms of "weak or strong" but more in "foolish or well-planned" action. Stating a general opinion on Obama's FP is beside the point of a specific question on a specific issue. Both the contents of the hack and the hack itself can be big issues. You are clearly downplaying the latter. My general opinion is my specific opinion. The latter is an issue of the DNC and how fucking bad it is at protecting its own servers. I have mentioned this in the past and the hackee matters more than the hacker. LegalLord: Obama is not a FP president. I assess actions in terms of foolish or not foolish. LegalLord: The above clarifies whether I think Obama's reaction to Crimea was foolish or not foolish. Alrighty, so let's just answer this simply and specifically. Getting involved in Ukraine and encouraging the situation that led to the Crimean referendum was foolish and short-sighted. His response to the situation as it arose, was pretty garden variety for US FP: sanctions and posturing. He didn't start a war, which is a good benchmark for "not John Rambo McCain." He didn't do a good job of defusing the situation, but honestly I don't think that's a task that would happen within his presidency anyways, so I have little to comment about in that regard. I take it from you giving credence to the "referendum" that you think Putin's invasion wasn't that bad of a thing (after all, Obama got involved in Ukraine so we can't really blame Putin for invading). Now, Trump should let Russia have Crimea. I guess those are at least consistent positions, if surprisingly approving of Russia's ambitions w/r/t sphere of influence. I just hope you aren't adopting a Russia apologist stance to downplay the DNC hacking itself. The referendum was about as legitimate as a hastily organized event like that can be. At the very least only a clueless moron would doubt that the result was the favored result of a straight majority of the entire (voting and nonvoting) population. Anyone with at least a high school understanding of Russian history would realize that Russia was never going to give up Crimea, ever. If not for the Ukraine situation right now, Russia would have gotten it back through more diplomatic means, eventually. The US FP actors knew this and pushed forward anyways as a deliberate provocation. That sort of provocation is most consistent with the Wolfowitz Doctrine approach to foreign policy (preserve the US as the one and only superpower in the world) but it's ultimately short-sighted because no empire has ever been able to do that throughout all of human history, and it's a fool's errand to think this case will be any different. We're getting far away from the DNC hack argument here but I'm seeing a good bit of leniency from you on letting Russia have what it wants and hacking the DNC.
On Russia: Call it political reality. FP is influenced strongly by what you can expect other nations to do if you try to mess with them.
On the hacks: I'll give you another story that will perhaps show you why I say "the DNC fucking up matters more than Russia doing the hacking." I have a few friends who work in a nuclear power plant here in the US - an obvious target for foreign influence for perhaps extremely obvious reasons. They work specifically in cyber security, and they deal with at least 40 credible foreign every single day - most from China but plenty from all over the world. A lot of clever ones too that almost slipped through the radar. It's not that that plant is so important, it's just that they just keep pecking for weaknesses to see if they can get something. I don't blame the Chinese or anyone else for trying, it's just how the game works. Hell, they themselves once hacked into the control panel for the entire Ukrainian power grid as part of a research project. The only one who is really at fault for being constantly under siege by security threats and failing to properly address them is the hackee. Because they should know damn well that they are under siege and take proper security measures.
The DNC is probably a bigger target than some nuclear power plant. Or maybe not, it's honestly hard to tell because science is about as big as politics in terms of hacker efforts.
|
On July 28 2016 03:08 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 03:05 Plansix wrote:On July 28 2016 03:00 xDaunt wrote:Now that U.S. authorities are confident Russian intelligence agencies are behind the hack of Democratic Party emails, political operatives and cybersecurity experts tell NBC News they are bracing for an "October Surprise" -- a release of even more potentially damaging information timed to influence the outcome of the presidential election and the course of the next administration.
The big question isn't whether more information will be disclosed, they say, but how destructive it might be to Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and to broader U.S. foreign policy efforts.
Democratic Party and Clinton campaign officials are now doing an urgent "damage assessment" to determine what kind of information might have been stolen and the impact its release might have on a tight presidential race.
"That is a nightmare scenario, and let's hope we don't see that as an October Surprise -- emails from Hillary Clinton's server that have either been in the press or worse, the classified ones that no one in the public has seen," said retired Adm. James Stavridis, who as the former Supreme Allied Commander for NATO is familiar with Russian information operations.
"I think it is a nightmare for all of us because it shows the degree to which our systems have been penetrated by Russian hackers potentially operating under the rubric of the Russian government," said Stavridis, who was vetted as a possible Clinton running mate.
Julian Assange, whose WikiLeaks organization leaked more than 19,000 DNC emails last Friday, has promised to leak more in an effort to damage Clinton. Source. This election is some amazing shit. We could have Trump elected on the back of wikileaks and stolen government documents. I am excited for this future where untouchable internet vigilantes backed by god knows who can do anything they want to anyone with no repercussions. MAYBE POLITICIANS SHOULD STOP DOING CORRUPT ILLEGAL SHIT THEN? DURRR?
So far nothing that has been released has been illegal. The head of wikileaks is a narcissist who said during an interview that he gets off on stealing powerful peoples information and releasing it. I doubt he has anything that will land her in jail or that is even criminal. All the digging into Clinton has found nothing criminal to date. It will just be mean, nasty and totally common place for politics.
Wikileaks is a group of assholes who like to pretend they are white hat hackers doing good work. But then they release the home address and personal information and of thousands of women in Turkey. Because they mostly want to fuck with people.
|
On July 28 2016 03:07 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 03:04 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
Getting mad at Russia for hacking into the DNC files and revealing how they rigged the election, proposed political appointments to campaign donors, and corrupted media organizations
Is like your significant other sneaking into your phone and confronting you about pictures of you cheating on them, and you decide to make the argument about how they are wrong for breaking into your phone They violated your privacy. Even if you were cheating, you would be totally justified in not wanting to be friends with that person any more.
Now which of those - the cheating or the snooping - is more significant and more valid an issue to look at?
|
On July 28 2016 03:13 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 03:07 Plansix wrote:On July 28 2016 03:04 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
Getting mad at Russia for hacking into the DNC files and revealing how they rigged the election, proposed political appointments to campaign donors, and corrupted media organizations
Is like your significant other sneaking into your phone and confronting you about pictures of you cheating on them, and you decide to make the argument about how they are wrong for breaking into your phone They violated your privacy. Even if you were cheating, you would be totally justified in not wanting to be friends with that person any more. Now which of those - the cheating or the snooping - is more significant and more valid an issue to look at?
I can't believe you broke into my phone you are UNREAL! We are so over
|
On July 28 2016 03:07 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 03:05 zeo wrote:On July 28 2016 03:03 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 03:00 xDaunt wrote:Now that U.S. authorities are confident Russian intelligence agencies are behind the hack of Democratic Party emails, political operatives and cybersecurity experts tell NBC News they are bracing for an "October Surprise" -- a release of even more potentially damaging information timed to influence the outcome of the presidential election and the course of the next administration.
The big question isn't whether more information will be disclosed, they say, but how destructive it might be to Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and to broader U.S. foreign policy efforts.
Democratic Party and Clinton campaign officials are now doing an urgent "damage assessment" to determine what kind of information might have been stolen and the impact its release might have on a tight presidential race.
"That is a nightmare scenario, and let's hope we don't see that as an October Surprise -- emails from Hillary Clinton's server that have either been in the press or worse, the classified ones that no one in the public has seen," said retired Adm. James Stavridis, who as the former Supreme Allied Commander for NATO is familiar with Russian information operations.
"I think it is a nightmare for all of us because it shows the degree to which our systems have been penetrated by Russian hackers potentially operating under the rubric of the Russian government," said Stavridis, who was vetted as a possible Clinton running mate.
Julian Assange, whose WikiLeaks organization leaked more than 19,000 DNC emails last Friday, has promised to leak more in an effort to damage Clinton. Source. NBD, Russia. Just commonplace. And it's still just wild speculation that Russia hacked the DNC, ofc. the Democrats know Clinton did something that could sink her in October spin spin spin
Thats not an argument. The DNC just admitted there is dirt out there on Clinton that could end her and that they knew about it. If commiting felonies couldn't end her I am genuinely curious what could be so big.
|
On July 28 2016 03:00 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +Now that U.S. authorities are confident Russian intelligence agencies are behind the hack of Democratic Party emails, political operatives and cybersecurity experts tell NBC News they are bracing for an "October Surprise" -- a release of even more potentially damaging information timed to influence the outcome of the presidential election and the course of the next administration.
The big question isn't whether more information will be disclosed, they say, but how destructive it might be to Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and to broader U.S. foreign policy efforts.
Democratic Party and Clinton campaign officials are now doing an urgent "damage assessment" to determine what kind of information might have been stolen and the impact its release might have on a tight presidential race.
"That is a nightmare scenario, and let's hope we don't see that as an October Surprise -- emails from Hillary Clinton's server that have either been in the press or worse, the classified ones that no one in the public has seen," said retired Adm. James Stavridis, who as the former Supreme Allied Commander for NATO is familiar with Russian information operations.
"I think it is a nightmare for all of us because it shows the degree to which our systems have been penetrated by Russian hackers potentially operating under the rubric of the Russian government," said Stavridis, who was vetted as a possible Clinton running mate.
Julian Assange, whose WikiLeaks organization leaked more than 19,000 DNC emails last Friday, has promised to leak more in an effort to damage Clinton. Source.
So, if this comes to pass, and the october releases cause Trump to win the presidency, I guess we could technically say that Russia put Trump into power.
Neat.
|
On July 28 2016 03:13 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 03:07 Plansix wrote:On July 28 2016 03:04 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
Getting mad at Russia for hacking into the DNC files and revealing how they rigged the election, proposed political appointments to campaign donors, and corrupted media organizations
Is like your significant other sneaking into your phone and confronting you about pictures of you cheating on them, and you decide to make the argument about how they are wrong for breaking into your phone They violated your privacy. Even if you were cheating, you would be totally justified in not wanting to be friends with that person any more. Now which of those - the cheating or the snooping - is more significant and more valid an issue to look at?
Both are completely valid. I don’t have friends that cheat on their significant others. I take a strict line on that one because I normally like my friends significant others. But I also wouldn’t condone someone breaking into someone’s phone just if they suspected the person what cheating. Even if it turned out to be true.
I don’t approve of either. Both things are deceptive and a violation of personal trust and I don’t have to choose.
In this case, Clinton has not been charged with a crime. In all her years in politics, no one has been able to turn up any criminal behavior. But not for lack of trying.
|
On July 28 2016 03:12 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 03:01 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 02:57 LegalLord wrote:On July 28 2016 02:51 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 02:39 LegalLord wrote:On July 28 2016 02:34 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 02:28 LegalLord wrote:On July 28 2016 02:18 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 02:15 LegalLord wrote:On July 28 2016 02:10 Doodsmack wrote:
[quote]
You're conflating blaming the Russians for the hack and blaming them for the content of the emails.
[quote]
Beside the point of whether you'd criticize him for being weak on Crimea. Blaming the Russians for the hack is an attempt to sidestep the issue of the contents of the hack. Foreign governments hacking your servers is neither unusual nor suspicious because everyone does it to everyone. Leaking the contents, a bit less so, but also not something all that out of the ordinary. Still no conclusive proof that it is Russia either. I gave you my thoughts on Obama's FP. That is hardly beside the point. I don't really think in terms of "weak or strong" but more in "foolish or well-planned" action. Stating a general opinion on Obama's FP is beside the point of a specific question on a specific issue. Both the contents of the hack and the hack itself can be big issues. You are clearly downplaying the latter. My general opinion is my specific opinion. The latter is an issue of the DNC and how fucking bad it is at protecting its own servers. I have mentioned this in the past and the hackee matters more than the hacker. LegalLord: Obama is not a FP president. I assess actions in terms of foolish or not foolish. LegalLord: The above clarifies whether I think Obama's reaction to Crimea was foolish or not foolish. Alrighty, so let's just answer this simply and specifically. Getting involved in Ukraine and encouraging the situation that led to the Crimean referendum was foolish and short-sighted. His response to the situation as it arose, was pretty garden variety for US FP: sanctions and posturing. He didn't start a war, which is a good benchmark for "not John Rambo McCain." He didn't do a good job of defusing the situation, but honestly I don't think that's a task that would happen within his presidency anyways, so I have little to comment about in that regard. I take it from you giving credence to the "referendum" that you think Putin's invasion wasn't that bad of a thing (after all, Obama got involved in Ukraine so we can't really blame Putin for invading). Now, Trump should let Russia have Crimea. I guess those are at least consistent positions, if surprisingly approving of Russia's ambitions w/r/t sphere of influence. I just hope you aren't adopting a Russia apologist stance to downplay the DNC hacking itself. The referendum was about as legitimate as a hastily organized event like that can be. At the very least only a clueless moron would doubt that the result was the favored result of a straight majority of the entire (voting and nonvoting) population. Anyone with at least a high school understanding of Russian history would realize that Russia was never going to give up Crimea, ever. If not for the Ukraine situation right now, Russia would have gotten it back through more diplomatic means, eventually. The US FP actors knew this and pushed forward anyways as a deliberate provocation. That sort of provocation is most consistent with the Wolfowitz Doctrine approach to foreign policy (preserve the US as the one and only superpower in the world) but it's ultimately short-sighted because no empire has ever been able to do that throughout all of human history, and it's a fool's errand to think this case will be any different. We're getting far away from the DNC hack argument here but I'm seeing a good bit of leniency from you on letting Russia have what it wants and hacking the DNC. On Russia: Call it political reality. FP is influenced strongly by what you can expect other nations to do if you try to mess with them. On the hacks: I'll give you another story that will perhaps show you why I say "the DNC fucking up matters more than Russia doing the hacking." I have a few friends who work in a nuclear power plant here in the US - an obvious target for foreign influence for perhaps extremely obvious reasons. They work specifically in cyber security, and they deal with at least 40 credible foreign every single day - most from China but plenty from all over the world. A lot of clever ones too that almost slipped through the radar. It's not that that plant is so important, it's just that they just keep pecking for weaknesses to see if they can get something. I don't blame the Chinese or anyone else for trying, it's just how the game works. Hell, they themselves once hacked into the control panel for the entire Ukrainian power grid as part of a research project. The only one who is really at fault for being constantly under siege by security threats and failing to properly address them is the hackee. Because they should know damn well that they are under siege and take proper security measures. The DNC is probably a bigger target than some nuclear power plant. Or maybe not, it's honestly hard to tell because science is about as big as politics in terms of hacker efforts.
I at least am admitting the DNC corruption is a big issue. You are downplaying the release of espionage information during an election and instead shifting the focus to whether the hack should have been prevented. BTW, I'll bet attacks have gotten by your friends at the plant.
|
On July 28 2016 03:16 plated.rawr wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 03:00 xDaunt wrote:Now that U.S. authorities are confident Russian intelligence agencies are behind the hack of Democratic Party emails, political operatives and cybersecurity experts tell NBC News they are bracing for an "October Surprise" -- a release of even more potentially damaging information timed to influence the outcome of the presidential election and the course of the next administration.
The big question isn't whether more information will be disclosed, they say, but how destructive it might be to Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and to broader U.S. foreign policy efforts.
Democratic Party and Clinton campaign officials are now doing an urgent "damage assessment" to determine what kind of information might have been stolen and the impact its release might have on a tight presidential race.
"That is a nightmare scenario, and let's hope we don't see that as an October Surprise -- emails from Hillary Clinton's server that have either been in the press or worse, the classified ones that no one in the public has seen," said retired Adm. James Stavridis, who as the former Supreme Allied Commander for NATO is familiar with Russian information operations.
"I think it is a nightmare for all of us because it shows the degree to which our systems have been penetrated by Russian hackers potentially operating under the rubric of the Russian government," said Stavridis, who was vetted as a possible Clinton running mate.
Julian Assange, whose WikiLeaks organization leaked more than 19,000 DNC emails last Friday, has promised to leak more in an effort to damage Clinton. Source. So, if this comes to pass, and the october releases cause Trump to win the presidency, I guess we could technically say that Russia put Trump into power. Neat.
That's like saying the security cameras put someone in jail who was got away from the scene of the crime but was caught on video recording.
Sure I guess it's technically true to say that they're causally responsible, but who is morally responsible?
Yes Russia hacking into our shit is a serious problem, but what they're revealing is not to be ignored on the basis that it was released via Russian hacks.
That's a separate security issue that sidesteps and deflects off what has been revealed.
|
On July 28 2016 03:19 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 03:12 LegalLord wrote:On July 28 2016 03:01 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 02:57 LegalLord wrote:On July 28 2016 02:51 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 02:39 LegalLord wrote:On July 28 2016 02:34 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 02:28 LegalLord wrote:On July 28 2016 02:18 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 02:15 LegalLord wrote:
[quote]
Blaming the Russians for the hack is an attempt to sidestep the issue of the contents of the hack. Foreign governments hacking your servers is neither unusual nor suspicious because everyone does it to everyone. Leaking the contents, a bit less so, but also not something all that out of the ordinary. Still no conclusive proof that it is Russia either.
I gave you my thoughts on Obama's FP. That is hardly beside the point. I don't really think in terms of "weak or strong" but more in "foolish or well-planned" action. Stating a general opinion on Obama's FP is beside the point of a specific question on a specific issue. Both the contents of the hack and the hack itself can be big issues. You are clearly downplaying the latter. My general opinion is my specific opinion. The latter is an issue of the DNC and how fucking bad it is at protecting its own servers. I have mentioned this in the past and the hackee matters more than the hacker. LegalLord: Obama is not a FP president. I assess actions in terms of foolish or not foolish. LegalLord: The above clarifies whether I think Obama's reaction to Crimea was foolish or not foolish. Alrighty, so let's just answer this simply and specifically. Getting involved in Ukraine and encouraging the situation that led to the Crimean referendum was foolish and short-sighted. His response to the situation as it arose, was pretty garden variety for US FP: sanctions and posturing. He didn't start a war, which is a good benchmark for "not John Rambo McCain." He didn't do a good job of defusing the situation, but honestly I don't think that's a task that would happen within his presidency anyways, so I have little to comment about in that regard. I take it from you giving credence to the "referendum" that you think Putin's invasion wasn't that bad of a thing (after all, Obama got involved in Ukraine so we can't really blame Putin for invading). Now, Trump should let Russia have Crimea. I guess those are at least consistent positions, if surprisingly approving of Russia's ambitions w/r/t sphere of influence. I just hope you aren't adopting a Russia apologist stance to downplay the DNC hacking itself. The referendum was about as legitimate as a hastily organized event like that can be. At the very least only a clueless moron would doubt that the result was the favored result of a straight majority of the entire (voting and nonvoting) population. Anyone with at least a high school understanding of Russian history would realize that Russia was never going to give up Crimea, ever. If not for the Ukraine situation right now, Russia would have gotten it back through more diplomatic means, eventually. The US FP actors knew this and pushed forward anyways as a deliberate provocation. That sort of provocation is most consistent with the Wolfowitz Doctrine approach to foreign policy (preserve the US as the one and only superpower in the world) but it's ultimately short-sighted because no empire has ever been able to do that throughout all of human history, and it's a fool's errand to think this case will be any different. We're getting far away from the DNC hack argument here but I'm seeing a good bit of leniency from you on letting Russia have what it wants and hacking the DNC. On Russia: Call it political reality. FP is influenced strongly by what you can expect other nations to do if you try to mess with them. On the hacks: I'll give you another story that will perhaps show you why I say "the DNC fucking up matters more than Russia doing the hacking." I have a few friends who work in a nuclear power plant here in the US - an obvious target for foreign influence for perhaps extremely obvious reasons. They work specifically in cyber security, and they deal with at least 40 credible foreign every single day - most from China but plenty from all over the world. A lot of clever ones too that almost slipped through the radar. It's not that that plant is so important, it's just that they just keep pecking for weaknesses to see if they can get something. I don't blame the Chinese or anyone else for trying, it's just how the game works. Hell, they themselves once hacked into the control panel for the entire Ukrainian power grid as part of a research project. The only one who is really at fault for being constantly under siege by security threats and failing to properly address them is the hackee. Because they should know damn well that they are under siege and take proper security measures. The DNC is probably a bigger target than some nuclear power plant. Or maybe not, it's honestly hard to tell because science is about as big as politics in terms of hacker efforts. I at least am admitting the DNC corruption is a big issue. You are downplaying the release of espionage information during an election and instead shifting the focus to whether the hack should have been prevented. BTW, I'll bet attacks have gotten by your friends at the plant.
Foreign espionage, it happens. It's a fact of life, and everyone does it to everyone if they can. Allies do it to each other too. Leaking it is, as I said, rare but not unheard of.
Obviously some hacks get by, but they're mostly small scale - one document, maybe one project, a single email chain, one computer. Getting your email servers hacked is a fuckup that is massive in scope and I'm pretty sure they never had that happen. Getting your power grid hacked is even worse - if they were terrorists they literally could have turned off Ukraine and cost the government a few billion dollars worth of damages.
|
On July 28 2016 03:20 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 03:16 plated.rawr wrote:On July 28 2016 03:00 xDaunt wrote:Now that U.S. authorities are confident Russian intelligence agencies are behind the hack of Democratic Party emails, political operatives and cybersecurity experts tell NBC News they are bracing for an "October Surprise" -- a release of even more potentially damaging information timed to influence the outcome of the presidential election and the course of the next administration.
The big question isn't whether more information will be disclosed, they say, but how destructive it might be to Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and to broader U.S. foreign policy efforts.
Democratic Party and Clinton campaign officials are now doing an urgent "damage assessment" to determine what kind of information might have been stolen and the impact its release might have on a tight presidential race.
"That is a nightmare scenario, and let's hope we don't see that as an October Surprise -- emails from Hillary Clinton's server that have either been in the press or worse, the classified ones that no one in the public has seen," said retired Adm. James Stavridis, who as the former Supreme Allied Commander for NATO is familiar with Russian information operations.
"I think it is a nightmare for all of us because it shows the degree to which our systems have been penetrated by Russian hackers potentially operating under the rubric of the Russian government," said Stavridis, who was vetted as a possible Clinton running mate.
Julian Assange, whose WikiLeaks organization leaked more than 19,000 DNC emails last Friday, has promised to leak more in an effort to damage Clinton. Source. So, if this comes to pass, and the october releases cause Trump to win the presidency, I guess we could technically say that Russia put Trump into power. Neat. That's like saying the security cameras put someone in jail who was got away from the scene of the crime but was caught on video recording. Sure I guess it's technically true to say that they're causally responsible, but who is morally responsible?
Poor analogy. A very central part here is that if the russian has damaging data, and they release it at the most opportune time to damage one of your presidental candidates, it's deliberately to do damage to that candidate to the advantage of another.
I find it worrying, of course, that this is happening and there's not much reaction. I mean, the fappening, which released tons of private images, was met with, well, faps, but also outrage, lawsuits and legal action. This, which is a much grander scale injury, is being ignored because it helps someone's fantasy football team against the other team.
At the same time, however, I do enjoy the irony in the US being injected with a puppet ruler.
Yes Russia hacking into our shit is a serious problem, but what they're revealing is not to be ignored on the basis that it was released via Russian hacks.
That's a separate security issue that sidesteps and deflects off what has been revealed.
The hacking itself is not even the greatest part here, although yes, that's a dire breach of both international diplomacy and of security. The big issue here, is that it's deliberately being used to manipulate the US voting population to serve a foreign power.
The contents of the email should definitely have its time in the light, however only in the context of a thorough search of the entire US political system, team affiliation be damned. If anyone believes corruption in politics is a one-team deal, then they're very naive.
|
United States43971 Posts
How are power grids not on completely isolated systems with only local access?
|
On July 28 2016 03:26 KwarK wrote:
How are power grids not on completely isolated systems with only local access?
Because Ukraine is really bad at this game.
|
On July 28 2016 03:26 plated.rawr wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 03:20 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 28 2016 03:16 plated.rawr wrote:On July 28 2016 03:00 xDaunt wrote:Now that U.S. authorities are confident Russian intelligence agencies are behind the hack of Democratic Party emails, political operatives and cybersecurity experts tell NBC News they are bracing for an "October Surprise" -- a release of even more potentially damaging information timed to influence the outcome of the presidential election and the course of the next administration.
The big question isn't whether more information will be disclosed, they say, but how destructive it might be to Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and to broader U.S. foreign policy efforts.
Democratic Party and Clinton campaign officials are now doing an urgent "damage assessment" to determine what kind of information might have been stolen and the impact its release might have on a tight presidential race.
"That is a nightmare scenario, and let's hope we don't see that as an October Surprise -- emails from Hillary Clinton's server that have either been in the press or worse, the classified ones that no one in the public has seen," said retired Adm. James Stavridis, who as the former Supreme Allied Commander for NATO is familiar with Russian information operations.
"I think it is a nightmare for all of us because it shows the degree to which our systems have been penetrated by Russian hackers potentially operating under the rubric of the Russian government," said Stavridis, who was vetted as a possible Clinton running mate.
Julian Assange, whose WikiLeaks organization leaked more than 19,000 DNC emails last Friday, has promised to leak more in an effort to damage Clinton. Source. So, if this comes to pass, and the october releases cause Trump to win the presidency, I guess we could technically say that Russia put Trump into power. Neat. That's like saying the security cameras put someone in jail who was got away from the scene of the crime but was caught on video recording. Sure I guess it's technically true to say that they're causally responsible, but who is morally responsible? Poor analogy. A very central part here is that if the russian has damaging data, and they release it at the most opportune time to damage one of your presidental candidates, it's deliberately to do damage to that candidate to the advantage of another. I find it worrying, of course, that this is happening and there's not much reaction. I mean, the fappening, which released tons of private images, was met with, well, faps, but also outrage, lawsuits and legal action. This, which is a much grander scale injury, is being ignored because it helps someone's fantasy football team against the other team. At the same time, however, I do enjoy the irony in the US being injected with a puppet ruler.
I think it's something you have to look at on a security level. In the future practice safer handling of your materials through government encrypted servers for example.
Should you be less inclined to vote for Trump because it seems to be in Russia's interests for one candidate to get elected over another? Many countries would stand to benefit more from one candidate over the other.
Did people make this much ruckus over David Cameroon effectively endorsing Clinton and condemning Trump? Is it okay for the U.K. to try to influence our election but not Russia?
This entire attack against Trump is just a deflection off the DNC corruption.
The hacking itself is not even the greatest part here, although yes, that's a dire breach of both international diplomacy and of security. The big issue here, is that it's deliberately being used to manipulate the US voting population to serve a foreign power.
Do you know how many foreign politicians have condemned Trump? Is that not attempting to manipulate the U.S. voting population to serve the interests of a foreign power? Why do people all of a sudden care about this now?
This is classic media blowing something up out of proportion to push their narrative, and now we actually have factual evidence that they are corrupt and biased.
|
And I reiterate, if there was anything TRULY damning in those emails they'd be all over the place. It's some people shit talking in an unprofessional matter. They had personal opinions and biases which were more or less expected, but they did not let it impact their work.
It's like people don't know how the world works.
|
Canada11509 Posts
Do you know how many foreign politicians have condemned Trump? Is that not attempting to manipulate the U.S. voting population to serve the interests of a foreign power? Why do people all of a sudden care about this now?
And I think it was bad form for foreign politicians to condemn Trump- such as Mexico's president. I think keeping mum like Trudeau is the way to go and just sort out what to do with whoever Americans decide to put in power. Of course Canada wasn't accused of sending down our rapists...
But you have to admit hacking into one party's emails and leaking one party's emails in order to influence the election to another party is orders of magnitude worse than we don't like one of your candidates.
|
On July 28 2016 03:16 zeo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 03:07 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 03:05 zeo wrote:On July 28 2016 03:03 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 03:00 xDaunt wrote:Now that U.S. authorities are confident Russian intelligence agencies are behind the hack of Democratic Party emails, political operatives and cybersecurity experts tell NBC News they are bracing for an "October Surprise" -- a release of even more potentially damaging information timed to influence the outcome of the presidential election and the course of the next administration.
The big question isn't whether more information will be disclosed, they say, but how destructive it might be to Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and to broader U.S. foreign policy efforts.
Democratic Party and Clinton campaign officials are now doing an urgent "damage assessment" to determine what kind of information might have been stolen and the impact its release might have on a tight presidential race.
"That is a nightmare scenario, and let's hope we don't see that as an October Surprise -- emails from Hillary Clinton's server that have either been in the press or worse, the classified ones that no one in the public has seen," said retired Adm. James Stavridis, who as the former Supreme Allied Commander for NATO is familiar with Russian information operations.
"I think it is a nightmare for all of us because it shows the degree to which our systems have been penetrated by Russian hackers potentially operating under the rubric of the Russian government," said Stavridis, who was vetted as a possible Clinton running mate.
Julian Assange, whose WikiLeaks organization leaked more than 19,000 DNC emails last Friday, has promised to leak more in an effort to damage Clinton. Source. NBD, Russia. Just commonplace. And it's still just wild speculation that Russia hacked the DNC, ofc. the Democrats know Clinton did something that could sink her in October spin spin spin Thats not an argument. The DNC just admitted there is dirt out there on Clinton that could end her and that they knew about it. If commiting felonies couldn't end her I am genuinely curious what could be so big.
By the same standard Trump is a fucking walking mudslide
|
On July 28 2016 03:29 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 03:26 plated.rawr wrote:On July 28 2016 03:20 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 28 2016 03:16 plated.rawr wrote:On July 28 2016 03:00 xDaunt wrote:Now that U.S. authorities are confident Russian intelligence agencies are behind the hack of Democratic Party emails, political operatives and cybersecurity experts tell NBC News they are bracing for an "October Surprise" -- a release of even more potentially damaging information timed to influence the outcome of the presidential election and the course of the next administration.
The big question isn't whether more information will be disclosed, they say, but how destructive it might be to Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and to broader U.S. foreign policy efforts.
Democratic Party and Clinton campaign officials are now doing an urgent "damage assessment" to determine what kind of information might have been stolen and the impact its release might have on a tight presidential race.
"That is a nightmare scenario, and let's hope we don't see that as an October Surprise -- emails from Hillary Clinton's server that have either been in the press or worse, the classified ones that no one in the public has seen," said retired Adm. James Stavridis, who as the former Supreme Allied Commander for NATO is familiar with Russian information operations.
"I think it is a nightmare for all of us because it shows the degree to which our systems have been penetrated by Russian hackers potentially operating under the rubric of the Russian government," said Stavridis, who was vetted as a possible Clinton running mate.
Julian Assange, whose WikiLeaks organization leaked more than 19,000 DNC emails last Friday, has promised to leak more in an effort to damage Clinton. Source. So, if this comes to pass, and the october releases cause Trump to win the presidency, I guess we could technically say that Russia put Trump into power. Neat. That's like saying the security cameras put someone in jail who was got away from the scene of the crime but was caught on video recording. Sure I guess it's technically true to say that they're causally responsible, but who is morally responsible? Poor analogy. A very central part here is that if the russian has damaging data, and they release it at the most opportune time to damage one of your presidental candidates, it's deliberately to do damage to that candidate to the advantage of another. I find it worrying, of course, that this is happening and there's not much reaction. I mean, the fappening, which released tons of private images, was met with, well, faps, but also outrage, lawsuits and legal action. This, which is a much grander scale injury, is being ignored because it helps someone's fantasy football team against the other team. At the same time, however, I do enjoy the irony in the US being injected with a puppet ruler. I think it's something you have to look at on a security level. In the future practice safer handling of your materials through government encrypted servers for example. Should you be less inclined to vote for Trump because it seems to be in Russia's interests for one candidate to get elected over another? Many countries would stand to benefit more from one candidate over the other. Did people make this much ruckus over David Cameroon effectively endorsing Clinton and condemning Trump? Is it okay for the U.K. to try to influence our election but not Russia? This entire attack against Trump is just a deflection off the DNC corruption. Show nested quote +The hacking itself is not even the greatest part here, although yes, that's a dire breach of both international diplomacy and of security. The big issue here, is that it's deliberately being used to manipulate the US voting population to serve a foreign power. Do you know how many foreign politicians have condemned Trump? Is that not attempting to manipulate the U.S. voting population to serve the interests of a foreign power? Why do people all of a sudden care about this now? This is classic media blowing something up out of proportion to push their narrative, and now we actually have factual evidence that they are corrupt and biased.
Should the servers have been safer? Yes. Will changing that now remove the files already leaked? No. So that's not the issue currently.
As for influencing foreign elections - yes, there's always politicians and groups voicing their opinions about other countries (hey, just look at me, or whitedog, or any non-US poster here). However, we're exercising protected speech through open forums. This is something vastly different than illegally hacking the servers of foreign political parties and positioning the illegally gained content in a way to injure the hacked party.
And don't give me the "this is wikileaks! It's just whistleblowing!"-excuse. If this was about whistleblowing, all the data would be relased today, not withheld to a politically opportune moment in a foreign country election.
About attacks against Trump being a DNC corruption deflection - i'm not following american political discourse or media, so I'd assume I'm more protected against your country propaganda than those involved.
And as for foreign politicians condemning Trump - again, excercising protected speech through legal channels. Hacking and positioning for political damage is not protected speech through legal channels.
I haven't seen any media comment on this apart from the snippets people have posted in this thread. Believe you me, this fury is entirely my own.
|
On July 28 2016 03:36 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +Do you know how many foreign politicians have condemned Trump? Is that not attempting to manipulate the U.S. voting population to serve the interests of a foreign power? Why do people all of a sudden care about this now? But you have to admit hacking into one party's emails and leaking one party's emails in order to influence the election to another party is orders of magnitude worse than we don't like one of your candidates.
I can admit that
|
On July 28 2016 03:36 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +Do you know how many foreign politicians have condemned Trump? Is that not attempting to manipulate the U.S. voting population to serve the interests of a foreign power? Why do people all of a sudden care about this now? And I think it was bad form for foreign politicians to condemn Trump- such as Mexico's president. I think keeping mum like Trudeau is the way to go and just sort out what to do with whoever Americans decide to put in power. Of course Canada wasn't accused of sending down our rapists... But you have to admit hacking into one party's emails and leaking one party's emails in order to influence the election to another party is orders of magnitude worse than we don't like one of your candidates.
We don’t get to see Trumps tax returns, but apparently we get to see all the DNC’s emails. Not the RNC’s emails, which I am sure are a bastion of angel like behavior. Nothing but nice things said about everyone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
