Imagine if the emails had been hacked and it was Hillary doing all she could for the good of America, what would the damage of been?
Instead they learned she is in bed with every major media, taking foreign funding and goddamn a team of monkeys working till heat death could write shakespeare but not get close to listing the corruption that is involved in the whole rotten system and they chose a queen.
As an aside, the motherfuckers want war, they are funding islamic terror in Syria, bombing russian troops, all out propaganda warfare, If the damage is that Hillary is discredited (hmmm like bernie??) and a lot of people get the chance to see what is behind the curtain, i'm glad.
kill the masters
e: I feel i was a bit harsh but i just wanna say the whole point of the world as it is and as it has been fostered in the care of these oligarchs is that they are living in a different world, above the law, above facts, and the entire system is designed, ITS DESIGNED, that we feel this confusion and division. You are supposed to hate trump or love him, same with Hillary. I don't trust a fucking one of them and neither should any of us.
I read through the article, and I didn't find anything overly convincing. First there are a few false claims that I noticed:
This time, the burglary was conducted from afar, directed by the Kremlin, with spear-phishing emails and zeros and ones.
By last summer, Democrats watched in helpless fury as their private emails and confidential documents appeared online day after day — procured by Russian intelligence agents, posted on WikiLeaks and other websites, then eagerly reported on by the American media, including The Times.
From everything I've read, intelligence agencies have denied proof connecting the hacks directly to the Kremlin. Sure, there is suspicion of it, but the New York times is obfuscating the facts.
I also want to offer some counterpoints because I don't want to see a repeat of the Iraq fiasco. It's imperative that we keep an open mind and entertain all possibilities. I don't doubt one bit that the Russians gained access to this information. When you see how easy it was to obtain this information, I would actually question the competency of Russian intelligence if they didn't break in.
This raises another important point. If it was so easy to gain access (no 2-factor authentication, falling for simple fishing attacks, and using 'p@ssword' as the password), then do you really think it was only the Russians who had access to these emails?
The United States and Russia are both very capable in cyber-warfare, and we should assume that we have access to the majority of their email systems as well. But there's a difference between having the information and actually acting on it. There are a lot of actors who also could've leaked the information (regular hackers like Guccifer, other state actors in different countries, insiders from the DNC like Seth Rich, or white hats from our own intelligence agencies). The last point is especially important given the evidence that it could've been our own people providing the information to Wikileaks. Here are just a few sources that suggest this is a possibility:
Think about this. If their purpose is to incite infighting, they are doing a good job. The current situation is that Russia could likely release info to cause an even larger conflict if it so chooses. The targeting of one party is designed to make the parties suspicious of each other.
Correct, if there is any truth to the claims posited in the Times' article then this controversy may result in a level of distrust and bellicosity between the two major U.S. parties that may set the stage for the most unpredictable and nationally destabilizing of tensions. The Republicans, specifically, are in the untenable position of having to preserve and secure their impressive, indeed dominative gains at all levels of government while simultaneously having to defend themselves against the potentially existentially lethal claims against them alleging, at the very least, passive ex post facto suppression of information relating to their benefiting from a monumentally hostile act of foreign subversion.
Good point. Whether or not Russia was responsible for any leaks to Wikileaks, I don't doubt that they're working to capitalize on the current divisions in America. It would be very subtle, but I can guarantee you that their agents aren't just sitting on their asses watching everything unfold as passive observers
I can see no evidence in here of Russian involvement beyond speculation and silly interpretation. Complete fluff piece. Podesta and others got fooled by a phishing scam of the type that is sent to millions of email addresses every day.
new york times is trash. bunch of liars and CIA operatives. No, I don't think you are right. This is more CIA manipulation of the election. It's so obvious! Come on, do you know who McCarthy was?
Well... the thing is CIA has no evidence. So yea, it seems similar to the bullshit red scare of last generation. Terrorism no longer works, considering we've been funding them for years. So let's go back to the commies!
I would say its a product of American Exceptionalism, when you subvert countless governments, have a vast array of puppet governments, incite warfare, engage in active disinformation, Lie, and generally exist to extort, bully and cripple nations of living human beings for 60 odd years...well its a bit distasteful to cry wolf to say the least.
"The United States had two decades of warning that Russia’s intelligence agencies were trying to break into America’s most sensitive computer networks. But the Russians have always managed to stay a step ahead."
LMAO, using the incompetence excuse again.To the sheep this reads as we must give more power and money to our governemnt becuase we are at risk from relentless evil forgien entities! Now here comes my rant.
The government spends billions upon billions of dollars on national security, knows in advance of the threat and they STILL can't get their shit together. Of course that's if you believe in the offical line. Their agenda is in part making it seem like they don't have enough resources and that they need more power to succeed.
Shit propaganda article. Russia did what it had to do so the US would leave it the fuck alone. Trump was Putin's last answer to peace (the other answer was war or at least a Russian ally destroyed). Russia has the GDP size of Italy why in the world would it want to start a conflict with the US?. No, its the USA that wants to start shit with Russia.
INB4 You Russian apologist scum! what about Ukraine (Russian separatist are fighting Ukraine not Russian forces and Cremia voted to be annexed) what about Georgia (South Ossetia relies on Russia and it was invaded by Georgia), what about Chechnya (That's part of Russia what about it?), what about Syria (Syria is Russia's ally what about it?), what about the Baltics? (PM when Russia invades the baltics and I'll start being way more critical of Russia).
NOW, Tell me about Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, and Yemen and the lies that killed 3000 Americans to get us involved in these countries. I understand the US must do what it has to do to stay a super power but how is the US any different compared to Nazi Germany or the USSR? Our rights and liberties is what sets us apart but guess what, those are slowly diminishing faster everyday.
I have said this before and I'll say this again. Russia is no saint, far from it, but compared to the USA it is an angel. (Stop talking like it's the 20th century, Russia is NOT the USSR anymore but yes the USSR was worse than the USA. Today is a different story)
NATO will stop at nothing and will be relentless with its propaganda against a country that has few allies and Russa does what it must do to survive without pissing off the Empire to much. Maybe if NATO/the ruling elite left Russia alone we might not have leaked US corruption brought to the public's eye (Because that's so horrible right?). I'm tired of these brain dead morons who go along with this sophisticated information propaganda war that allows these fuckers to make excuses to gain more power. Russia isn't the enemy but the fuckers who tell you that Russia is causing problems is the enemy.
To those who want to say nothing I said refers to the article are obviously brainwashed. Everything written in that article is to demonize Russia for manipulating our elections and to overshadow WHY Russia did it and WHAT was leaked. This should matter to people who are seeking the truth anything else is a distraction. TIME TO WAKE UP.
The server that phished the information from Podesta, himself... the leaker of his own password, was traced back to a server in the Netherlands named after a New Zealand county.
Runner4567 was his password. Before he was even fished, he sent his assistant his password. Anyone seeing his assistants emails could have easily have had the emails before the phish.
When he changed his password, he sent that changed password to someone else, later one, meaning that he could have been hacked again after the phish.
The whole point of not using gmail and not having a private server is so that the Russians, or anyone else can't hack them.
This whole article is total BS because it doesn't address the fact that any security breaches are the responsibility of idiots who use private servers and passwords like Runner4567.
I'm all about awareness and accountability, so it's necessary I refer you to the decades worth of election manipulation, financing of regime change, et al on the part of the United States, and my own country of England. This in no way absolves the Russians of their litany of misdemeanours, more so it's a stones in glasshouses kind of statement. If there was the same level of outrage and indignation every time the countries we hail from meddled in the affairs of foreign nations, perhaps we could dissuade others from doing so without all sounding like colossal hypocrites.
What do you mean how so? It's no coincidence that Petro Poroshenko is a US insider. And you are right we need to separate backing from putting to power but you shouldn't be telling me that but the media you link. Hence how US propaganda is over sensationalising Russia backing Trump in the elections and over exaggerating it as putting Trump into power.
EDIT: Switched exaggerating and sensationalizing. Russia helped wikileaks get corruption once hidden out in the open but the media sensationalized the story by saying Trump and Putin are in cahoots and is exaggerating the story with saying Russia has installed their puppet.
The media isn't worried about how incompetent and corrupt our government is but about how Russia is to be blamed for a "rigged" election. NYT isn't truth seeking journalism but a propaganda piece there to help the ruling elite (Hillary). It is known.
The way you referred to the CIA as a separate entity to America was interesting. Intererstng because that's essentially how they operate- as a clandestine wholly unaccountable 3rd party to the US government, giving diplomatic cover for all manner of nefarious activists.
Here's a list of sovereign nations where the US has overtly or covertly effected regime change
You can count the UK in for most of the ones you see, after American Independence they tended to piggyback on US foreign policy.
Edit - I'm curious did you ask me because you're genuinely ignorant to the history in question? Or just to see if I knew? Because if it's the former, it's worrying that you don't know your countries history well enough to avoid being a hypocrite. If it's the latter, then now you know.
No probs- article was good btw. To your last point, so you think the US cared enough to overthrow another government, but don't really mind who goes into power after them? Behaviour threatening enough to US interests to justify them killing you, is behaviour they'll most definitely want to ensure whoever comes in after doesn't repeat. How do they do that? By selecting such a person. Or at the very least make certain said person understands what happened to the last guy and why. Either way they're not really in control anymore.
Got any more info on the Russian involvement with Brexit? I actually haven't heard of that before, but find it interesting combined with the fact that Cambridge Analytica was hired by both the Trump campaign and pro-Brexit campaigns.
Suspected, but the MP making the accusations says they have no proof. It would fit into an interesting narrative, however. I haven't considered the Syrian refugee crisis being deliberate.
Create crisis that spawns refugees, that travel en mass to Europe. Causes people to resent them, and resent leftist policy that allowed them. Encouraged by social media, people begin to move right and/or vote for Russian backed politicians.
32 comments
5 privatelameass 2016-12-14
As has been said, Russian hackers didnt write the emails!!
5 [deleted] 2016-12-14
[deleted]
3 privatelameass 2016-12-14
Imagine if the emails had been hacked and it was Hillary doing all she could for the good of America, what would the damage of been?
Instead they learned she is in bed with every major media, taking foreign funding and goddamn a team of monkeys working till heat death could write shakespeare but not get close to listing the corruption that is involved in the whole rotten system and they chose a queen.
As an aside, the motherfuckers want war, they are funding islamic terror in Syria, bombing russian troops, all out propaganda warfare, If the damage is that Hillary is discredited (hmmm like bernie??) and a lot of people get the chance to see what is behind the curtain, i'm glad.
kill the masters
e: I feel i was a bit harsh but i just wanna say the whole point of the world as it is and as it has been fostered in the care of these oligarchs is that they are living in a different world, above the law, above facts, and the entire system is designed, ITS DESIGNED, that we feel this confusion and division. You are supposed to hate trump or love him, same with Hillary. I don't trust a fucking one of them and neither should any of us.
5 ArchonFall4All 2016-12-14
I read through the article, and I didn't find anything overly convincing. First there are a few false claims that I noticed:
From everything I've read, intelligence agencies have denied proof connecting the hacks directly to the Kremlin. Sure, there is suspicion of it, but the New York times is obfuscating the facts.
I also want to offer some counterpoints because I don't want to see a repeat of the Iraq fiasco. It's imperative that we keep an open mind and entertain all possibilities. I don't doubt one bit that the Russians gained access to this information. When you see how easy it was to obtain this information, I would actually question the competency of Russian intelligence if they didn't break in.
This raises another important point. If it was so easy to gain access (no 2-factor authentication, falling for simple fishing attacks, and using 'p@ssword' as the password), then do you really think it was only the Russians who had access to these emails?
The United States and Russia are both very capable in cyber-warfare, and we should assume that we have access to the majority of their email systems as well. But there's a difference between having the information and actually acting on it. There are a lot of actors who also could've leaked the information (regular hackers like Guccifer, other state actors in different countries, insiders from the DNC like Seth Rich, or white hats from our own intelligence agencies). The last point is especially important given the evidence that it could've been our own people providing the information to Wikileaks. Here are just a few sources that suggest this is a possibility:
Source 1
Source 2
Source 3
4 andronicii 2016-12-14
I said it before and say again, this past presidential election was a subversive and deceptive event on the scale of another 9/11.
3 4esop 2016-12-14
Think about this. If their purpose is to incite infighting, they are doing a good job. The current situation is that Russia could likely release info to cause an even larger conflict if it so chooses. The targeting of one party is designed to make the parties suspicious of each other.
3 andronicii 2016-12-14
Correct, if there is any truth to the claims posited in the Times' article then this controversy may result in a level of distrust and bellicosity between the two major U.S. parties that may set the stage for the most unpredictable and nationally destabilizing of tensions. The Republicans, specifically, are in the untenable position of having to preserve and secure their impressive, indeed dominative gains at all levels of government while simultaneously having to defend themselves against the potentially existentially lethal claims against them alleging, at the very least, passive ex post facto suppression of information relating to their benefiting from a monumentally hostile act of foreign subversion.
2 ArchonFall4All 2016-12-14
Good point. Whether or not Russia was responsible for any leaks to Wikileaks, I don't doubt that they're working to capitalize on the current divisions in America. It would be very subtle, but I can guarantee you that their agents aren't just sitting on their asses watching everything unfold as passive observers
3 flartibartfast 2016-12-14
I can see no evidence in here of Russian involvement beyond speculation and silly interpretation. Complete fluff piece. Podesta and others got fooled by a phishing scam of the type that is sent to millions of email addresses every day.
3 sweetholymosiah 2016-12-14
new york times is trash. bunch of liars and CIA operatives. No, I don't think you are right. This is more CIA manipulation of the election. It's so obvious! Come on, do you know who McCarthy was?
3 Treebeezy 2016-12-14
So because of McCarthy every criticism or suspicion of Russia is automatically analogous to the red scare?
2 sweetholymosiah 2016-12-14
Well... the thing is CIA has no evidence. So yea, it seems similar to the bullshit red scare of last generation. Terrorism no longer works, considering we've been funding them for years. So let's go back to the commies!
1 Treebeezy 2016-12-14
Them not showing the public their hand does not mean they don't have any
2 sweetholymosiah 2016-12-14
well I'm calling their bluff. And so are respected journalists: https://theintercept.com/2016/12/12/obama-must-declassify-evidence-of-russian-hacking/
1 Treebeezy 2016-12-14
Would people here even believe them if they did?
3 Treebeezy 2016-12-14
We are definitely seeing the beginning of a new era of psychological warfare.
The fact that anything painting Russia in a bad light is generally ignored or downvoted is very telling about the state of this subreddit
2 privatelameass 2016-12-14
I would say its a product of American Exceptionalism, when you subvert countless governments, have a vast array of puppet governments, incite warfare, engage in active disinformation, Lie, and generally exist to extort, bully and cripple nations of living human beings for 60 odd years...well its a bit distasteful to cry wolf to say the least.
2 Claypot 2016-12-14
LMAO, using the incompetence excuse again.To the sheep this reads as we must give more power and money to our governemnt becuase we are at risk from relentless evil forgien entities! Now here comes my rant.
The government spends billions upon billions of dollars on national security, knows in advance of the threat and they STILL can't get their shit together. Of course that's if you believe in the offical line. Their agenda is in part making it seem like they don't have enough resources and that they need more power to succeed.
Shit propaganda article. Russia did what it had to do so the US would leave it the fuck alone. Trump was Putin's last answer to peace (the other answer was war or at least a Russian ally destroyed). Russia has the GDP size of Italy why in the world would it want to start a conflict with the US?. No, its the USA that wants to start shit with Russia.
INB4 You Russian apologist scum! what about Ukraine (Russian separatist are fighting Ukraine not Russian forces and Cremia voted to be annexed) what about Georgia (South Ossetia relies on Russia and it was invaded by Georgia), what about Chechnya (That's part of Russia what about it?), what about Syria (Syria is Russia's ally what about it?), what about the Baltics? (PM when Russia invades the baltics and I'll start being way more critical of Russia).
NOW, Tell me about Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, and Yemen and the lies that killed 3000 Americans to get us involved in these countries. I understand the US must do what it has to do to stay a super power but how is the US any different compared to Nazi Germany or the USSR? Our rights and liberties is what sets us apart but guess what, those are slowly diminishing faster everyday.
I have said this before and I'll say this again. Russia is no saint, far from it, but compared to the USA it is an angel. (Stop talking like it's the 20th century, Russia is NOT the USSR anymore but yes the USSR was worse than the USA. Today is a different story)
NATO will stop at nothing and will be relentless with its propaganda against a country that has few allies and Russa does what it must do to survive without pissing off the Empire to much. Maybe if NATO/the ruling elite left Russia alone we might not have leaked US corruption brought to the public's eye (Because that's so horrible right?). I'm tired of these brain dead morons who go along with this sophisticated information propaganda war that allows these fuckers to make excuses to gain more power. Russia isn't the enemy but the fuckers who tell you that Russia is causing problems is the enemy.
To those who want to say nothing I said refers to the article are obviously brainwashed. Everything written in that article is to demonize Russia for manipulating our elections and to overshadow WHY Russia did it and WHAT was leaked. This should matter to people who are seeking the truth anything else is a distraction. TIME TO WAKE UP.
/rant
2 webofslime 2016-12-14
The server that phished the information from Podesta, himself... the leaker of his own password, was traced back to a server in the Netherlands named after a New Zealand county.
Runner4567 was his password. Before he was even fished, he sent his assistant his password. Anyone seeing his assistants emails could have easily have had the emails before the phish.
When he changed his password, he sent that changed password to someone else, later one, meaning that he could have been hacked again after the phish.
The whole point of not using gmail and not having a private server is so that the Russians, or anyone else can't hack them.
This whole article is total BS because it doesn't address the fact that any security breaches are the responsibility of idiots who use private servers and passwords like Runner4567.
1 BlackMirror____ 2016-12-14
I predict this post will stay at 0.
Excellent article though, the next month is going to be interesting.
3 [deleted] 2016-12-14
[deleted]
3 tedsmitts 2016-12-14
Funny how that works, isn't it? It's almost as if there was a conspiracy calling from INSIDE the conspiracy forum.
Hmm.
3 [deleted] 2016-12-14
[deleted]
6 tedsmitts 2016-12-14
Oh, absolutely, but prepare for the usual "she lost get over it you CTR cuck shill!" posts.
3 THE_LORD_HERESY 2016-12-14
Posts which the mods have said, despite the rules of the forum, are perfectly acceptable. It makes no sense.
1 tedsmitts 2016-12-14
Oh, I'd argue it makes sense if the mods want it to
2 We-think-we-are-free 2016-12-14
Ive been saying this for a while..
1 elnegroik 2016-12-14
I'm all about awareness and accountability, so it's necessary I refer you to the decades worth of election manipulation, financing of regime change, et al on the part of the United States, and my own country of England. This in no way absolves the Russians of their litany of misdemeanours, more so it's a stones in glasshouses kind of statement. If there was the same level of outrage and indignation every time the countries we hail from meddled in the affairs of foreign nations, perhaps we could dissuade others from doing so without all sounding like colossal hypocrites.
1 [deleted] 2016-12-14
[deleted]
2 Claypot 2016-12-14
How about Russians neighbor, Ukraine, for a start.
3 [deleted] 2016-12-14
[deleted]
1 Claypot 2016-12-14
What do you mean how so? It's no coincidence that Petro Poroshenko is a US insider. And you are right we need to separate backing from putting to power but you shouldn't be telling me that but the media you link. Hence how US propaganda is over sensationalising Russia backing Trump in the elections and over exaggerating it as putting Trump into power.
EDIT: Switched exaggerating and sensationalizing. Russia helped wikileaks get corruption once hidden out in the open but the media sensationalized the story by saying Trump and Putin are in cahoots and is exaggerating the story with saying Russia has installed their puppet.
The media isn't worried about how incompetent and corrupt our government is but about how Russia is to be blamed for a "rigged" election. NYT isn't truth seeking journalism but a propaganda piece there to help the ruling elite (Hillary). It is known.
2 elnegroik 2016-12-14
The way you referred to the CIA as a separate entity to America was interesting. Intererstng because that's essentially how they operate- as a clandestine wholly unaccountable 3rd party to the US government, giving diplomatic cover for all manner of nefarious activists. Here's a list of sovereign nations where the US has overtly or covertly effected regime change You can count the UK in for most of the ones you see, after American Independence they tended to piggyback on US foreign policy. Edit - I'm curious did you ask me because you're genuinely ignorant to the history in question? Or just to see if I knew? Because if it's the former, it's worrying that you don't know your countries history well enough to avoid being a hypocrite. If it's the latter, then now you know.
1 [deleted] 2016-12-14
[deleted]
1 elnegroik 2016-12-14
No probs- article was good btw. To your last point, so you think the US cared enough to overthrow another government, but don't really mind who goes into power after them? Behaviour threatening enough to US interests to justify them killing you, is behaviour they'll most definitely want to ensure whoever comes in after doesn't repeat. How do they do that? By selecting such a person. Or at the very least make certain said person understands what happened to the last guy and why. Either way they're not really in control anymore.
2 Treebeezy 2016-12-14
Got any more info on the Russian involvement with Brexit? I actually haven't heard of that before, but find it interesting combined with the fact that Cambridge Analytica was hired by both the Trump campaign and pro-Brexit campaigns.
2 [deleted] 2016-12-14
[deleted]
1 Treebeezy 2016-12-14
Suspected, but the MP making the accusations says they have no proof. It would fit into an interesting narrative, however. I haven't considered the Syrian refugee crisis being deliberate.
Create crisis that spawns refugees, that travel en mass to Europe. Causes people to resent them, and resent leftist policy that allowed them. Encouraged by social media, people begin to move right and/or vote for Russian backed politicians.
1 [deleted] 2016-12-14
[deleted]