01-03-2017 11:11 AM
#151
| |
| |
01-06-2017 01:55 PM
#152
| |
|
BREAKING: the left's god endorses Trump!!! |
01-08-2017 05:05 PM
#153
| |
Last edited by Poopadoop; 01-08-2017 at 05:07 PM. | |
01-08-2017 06:47 PM
#154
| |
|
That hacking thing turned out to be total nonsense huh? Using a program a nation-state wouldn't get caught dead with and stuff. A+ Democrats at getting caught in their corruption then obfuscating by planting a hoax that takes eyes off their corruption. |
01-08-2017 07:08 PM
#155
| |
|
Looking forward to when Chieftess Fibbing Goof gets stomped in 2020 |
01-08-2017 07:18 PM
#156
| |
01-08-2017 07:29 PM
#157
| |
|
He always sounds dumb. |
01-08-2017 07:52 PM
#158
| |
|
loooooollllllllllllll |
01-09-2017 04:08 AM
#159
| |
There's as little unclarity about russian involvement in the dem hacks as there is in the Israeli and US involvement in the Iran nuclear facility hacks (stuxnet). | |
| |
01-09-2017 06:58 AM
#160
| |
01-09-2017 01:04 PM
#161
| |
No, I analyzed the logs myself. How else than "they told you so" do you know anything? Show me proof that US and Israel made Stuxnet. Obviously there isn't any publicly available proof, which means there isn't any to the contrary either. | |
| |
01-09-2017 01:38 PM
#162
| |
01-10-2017 10:20 AM
#163
| |
Where did this "so it was all a hoax" stuff come from? Let me guess just from Trump. Surely everyone can decide for themselves who's more reliable, him or the whole intelligence community. And yes, it is entirely possible that it's a huge conspiracy where they all colluded to mislead the public, but on whose orders? Hillary's? Comey's? I'd ask Mr William of Ockham. | |
| |
01-10-2017 12:58 PM
#164
| |
|
The Trump crowd doesn't necessarily think it's a hoax. I think it could have come from Russia; the problem is that it hasn't been demonstrated. The evidence released by the government is paltry. There are ways this could more reasonably be a false flag (though I don't think it is). I'm seeing lots of people who know this stuff better than me say that a 400 pound hacker from Zaire could have left the same trail that they're saying now confirms it was always and only Russia. |
01-10-2017 04:26 PM
#165
| |
|
I think the "Trump crowd" (whoever that is) needs to stop with that line of thinking. They're being trolled, and should wake up and realize it. While everything you said there may be true, the other side already knows it, and chose to ignore it before even starting this discussion. The goal of the discussion has nothing to do with determining the source, assigning blame, or retaliating. |
01-10-2017 04:40 PM
#166
| |
|
|
01-10-2017 04:44 PM
#167
| |
| |
01-10-2017 09:21 PM
#168
| |
Us+Russia v china. | |
01-10-2017 10:47 PM
#169
| |
| |
01-11-2017 01:54 AM
#170
| |
Hacks? The word you're looking for is "leaks". | |
| |
01-11-2017 02:36 PM
#171
| |
Soo, now that Trump admitted that the hack (yes hack, as in a spearfish attack to DNC personnel to access the systems, not an insider leak) was done by Russians, as well as an attempted to hack of the RNC, please spin this for me. Aaand ACTION. | |
| |
01-11-2017 02:52 PM
#172
| |
01-11-2017 06:06 PM
#173
| |
| |
01-11-2017 06:51 PM
#174
| |
|
I'm pretty sure I found what you're referring to: in the press conference, he says "as far as hacking, I think it was Russian....and many others....hacking..." |
01-12-2017 01:13 AM
#175
| |
| |
01-12-2017 08:24 AM
#176
| |
I'm roughly 66% that it's bona fide rather than intentional. | |
| |
01-12-2017 12:28 PM
#177
| |
|
Explain. |
01-12-2017 03:07 PM
#178
| |
Which part? | |
| |
01-12-2017 04:45 PM
#179
| |
| |
01-12-2017 06:18 PM
#180
| |
Sometimes, karma manifests itself as a wet bitch allegedly hahahaha | |
| |
01-12-2017 06:18 PM
#181
| |
Ok, it's what I get paid for. | |
| |
01-12-2017 06:49 PM
#182
| |
01-12-2017 10:11 PM
#183
| |
|
I'm looking for description on what precautions the Russian government has to not employ in order for the Russian government to be pinpointed as the hacker. From everything I've read, avoiding tracking during hacking involves well understood technical protocols, and that when people get caught hacking it is typically because they made some really dumb mistakes. |
01-13-2017 01:51 AM
#184
| |
|
Which examples of hackers are you talking about that don't get caught? |
Last edited by Savy; 01-13-2017 at 01:58 AM. | |
01-13-2017 05:57 AM
#185
| |
As you may understand, this is a wildly broad subject, kind of like asking what precautions do bank robbers have to not employ in order to get caught. I don't have data on how the attack was done on a technical level, but I can make a fairly conceivable assumption based on how previous similar hacks have happened, on which we do have more detailed info. | |
Last edited by CoccoBill; 01-13-2017 at 06:02 AM.
| |
01-13-2017 01:13 PM
#186
| |
Itwasfo | |
| |
01-13-2017 06:11 PM
#187
| |
|
Thanks for the info guys. |
01-13-2017 06:13 PM
#188
| |
| |
01-13-2017 06:20 PM
#189
| |
|
Question: I think it is reasonable to assume the Russian government would use proxies and other related tools. Let's say they hack from Secret KGB Headquarters Beneath Putin's House, jumping through proxy in Ukraine, Afghanistan, and Thailand. Is this typically traceable back to Secret KGB Headquarters Beneath Putin's House? |
01-13-2017 08:01 PM
#190
| |
You guys still using the word "hack" instead of "leak"? | |
| |
01-13-2017 09:35 PM
#191
| |
Inb4 republicans swiftly impeach trump, so they can have pence. | |
01-13-2017 09:46 PM
#192
| |
|
I would lol. I can think of a reason they wouldn't do that (most of them would not be reelected). |
01-13-2017 11:12 PM
#193
| |
01-13-2017 11:17 PM
#194
| |
01-14-2017 12:32 AM
#195
| |
|
Very much depends on what they are doing. It is very easy to make it a pain to track you to the point places like local police have no chance so I imagine that most people who get in shit tor stuff do give themselves away but that doesn't back up what you said. |
Last edited by Savy; 01-14-2017 at 12:34 AM. | |
01-14-2017 06:35 AM
#196
| |
Lol did anyone see the pile of 'documents' Trump brought to his press conference? Just a bunch of unlabeled folders full of apparently blank papers. | |
01-14-2017 10:11 AM
#197
| |
Wow, just wow....hack this and hack that.....standard for the msm and "intelligence" conglomerate. repeat a lie so many times that the american sheeple begin to believe it...ala, the gulf of tonkin incident or/and wmd in Iraq. | |
| |
01-14-2017 10:19 AM
#198
| |
Oh hi shotty, glad I'm not the only person who prefers to talk about leaks instead of hacks. | |
| |
01-14-2017 10:25 AM
#199
| |
I didn't see the Assange interview, I read the blog of one of his friends, former British ambassador Craig Murray. He's "former" because he resigned on principle many years ago. Or he got sacked by the Home Secretary for being a man of principle, whichever way you prefer to look at it. The British government don't like their ambassadors to oppose the use of torture. | |
| |
01-14-2017 10:47 AM
#200
| |
| |
01-14-2017 10:52 AM
#201
| |
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/ | |
| |
01-14-2017 10:55 AM
#202
| |
He waffles a lot about Scottish indepedance, which I tend to ignore, but he is Scottish so fair enough! | |
| |
01-14-2017 10:57 AM
#203
| |
Does Assange have some claim to be a perfectly reliable source of information? I'm just curious as to why I should believe everything he says. | |
01-14-2017 11:15 AM
#204
| |
It's a question of who you wish to put your trust in. I might come across as a skeptic, but I'm not that paranoid that I refuse to trust anyone. Now, when it comes to Assange, well who the fuck was he before Wikileaks? What has he done to gain my trust? Fuck all. He could be in this for the fame and money for all I know. But Murray, well this is a man who blew a career in politics. He's not in it for the fame and money, because he's not very famous, and he already had a well paid job with huge prospects. He blew that to expose the British government. He has earned my trust. | |
| |
01-14-2017 11:21 AM
#205
| |
| |
| |
01-14-2017 11:29 AM
#206
| |
01-14-2017 11:29 AM
#207
| |
It's worth pointing out that British ambassadors get some serious perks. The one which Craig claims keeps a lot of his former collegaues quiet is that the British Govt pay the provate school fees of their kids. That's quite a perk, if you understand how British politics works. It's very difficult to have a high profile career in politics here if you didn't go to the right school. | |
| |
01-14-2017 11:33 AM
#208
| |
| |
01-14-2017 11:36 AM
#209
| |
Imo there isn't much question if they were hacks or leaks. There were two intrusions to the DNC servers... an intrusion is a hack yeah? Someone in there that isn't supposed to be? | |
01-14-2017 11:42 AM
#210
| |
01-14-2017 11:50 AM
#211
| |
Here's a theory (just a theory): Assange is a stooge of a foreign power trying to undermine the West. Could be China, Russia, N. Korea, Iran -they all hate us. His job is to create a whistleblower persona and 'leak' phony docs that make our gov'ts look bad. Our side can't just say 'that's fake' because no-one will believe us and there's no way to prove it anyways. | |
01-14-2017 12:20 PM
#212
| |
| |
01-14-2017 12:24 PM
#213
| |
|
As per paid shilling, the only one I know about is CTR (Correct the Record). Democrat shills. |
01-14-2017 12:33 PM
#214
| |
Originally I saw it on one of those "fake news" shows. Actual Russians saying they were paid for doing this and went into pretty good detail. Evidence is tricky because it's hard to know what to believe anymore. I can try to scrounge some stuff up but it would be on the observer to decide whether or not it's evidence. I'm pretty satisfied with there being a good amount of truth to it. | |
01-14-2017 12:34 PM
#215
| |
|
I saw it back when he gave the interview. It's worth noting, but Assange doesn't exactly have credibility on this. I like the guy and I love Wikileaks, but we would need third party corroboration when it comes to statements made by Assange. Let me put it this way, if I were him and if it were the Russians, I would say it's not the Russians. |
01-14-2017 12:36 PM
#216
| |
This is a petty good read although again it's hardly proof. | |
01-14-2017 12:44 PM
#217
| |
|
When they talk about social media shills for Trump, when they talk about all the alt-right stuff, they're basically talking about r/The_Donald, /pol/, and Breitbart (and InfoWars). My experience on those is that the claim is lol. It's all just a bunch of shitposting and the occasional very important news that is being censored everywhere else (like when the Orlando club terrorist attack happened). As for the conspiracy part, there is a decent amount of that (thanks Alex Jones), but it really doesn't go anywhere. People not deeply embedded in the pro-Trump circles tend to not see it. |
01-14-2017 01:10 PM
#218
| |
|
The real story of the week is that fake intel dossier. In fact, that's one of the biggest stories in years. It's so bad that CNN and others should be in the process of bankruptcy by now. But they're not, you know, because their propaganda is so incredibly strong that most don't know about their lie and most who do view it with cognitive dissonance. |
01-14-2017 01:32 PM
#219
| |
|
|
01-14-2017 06:26 PM
#220
| |
| |
01-14-2017 06:27 PM
#221
| |
If you think the life of a whistleblower and bloggist is somehow more profitable than the life of an ambassador, then perhaps I can see where you're coming from. | |
| |
01-14-2017 06:36 PM
#222
| |
| |
01-14-2017 07:37 PM
#223
| |
01-14-2017 07:40 PM
#224
| |
01-14-2017 07:48 PM
#225
| |
| |