we dont have a politics section anymore because its banned <_<
did the mods take the day off?
anyway neither this thread nor the issue is about hacking.
now its in tech/policy so its techinically correct
let it be
I always suspected that spiders were the real power in Australia. What wicked webs they weave. Also deadly poison. They have it.
Is it hacking if the person who got the emails happened to guess his password was password?
Maybe he was just checking how stupid politicians are?
Technically, it's a bruteforce, so I guess yes, it's kinda hacking.
FWD:
enter your password for a lifetime supply of creamy bacon syrup and dank memes
john podesta enters password in plaintext
p@55w0rd
<-taps send ->
CONGRADULATIONS! ___ YOU WIN!!!!!!!
russians will soon be on at your door to deliver the dankiest memes and creamiest bacon syrup
1 Like
If you (I don't mean you personally, but everyone here with the same feelings) have such an irreconcilable distrust with your own government and institutions, then can you imagine that the current Russian government feels the same after years upon years of the Bush doctrine?
With the difference that the current Russian government actually has the resources and the motivation to actuate an impact towards a more beneficial outcome to themselves? How is it then not at least believable, if not certain, that they have attempted, even if not succeeded? Is it not more likely they would actuate the said impact then that they would lay back and roll their thumbs and "trust" these governments and institutions (US, EU, NATO) to change their behavior for the better, independently on their own? Is it not very likely that the current Russian government feels just the same irreconcilable animosity, which has already gone on for so long that it just won't go away on its own and that we need to accept each other as opponents for the time being (of course with hope of reconciliation and regaining trust in future)?
There will be a change at the greatest center of the power in the world soon (within days from now), and hopefully that change will not be another squandered opportunity to repair the trust and stop the covert games. However, we do not know that it will or that it won't, in spite of strong indications (yes I do have my own convictions half of you won't agree with, and I can choose to call them facts).
I do realize I am falling back to the question of "faith" here again, but I have just noticed several posts here again discussing things based on "faith", personal convictions, and likelihoods, as if they were facts - but they aren't. I am even explicitly claiming to not be peddling facts in this post, only likelihoods based on sets of information the sources and quality of which I have chosen to trust. Please guys, watch out for facts not being same as convictions. There is a history of wars being started due to differences of "faith".
Some people (perhaps I am among them, but does it really matter if I am or not?) can't accept "faith" without "proof". However, by a certain quirk of the phenomena, by definition, "faith" does not need "proof". You decide what to believe (possibly railroaded by the interpretation of available information, true or false). Then you stick with it. "proof" makes "faith" into "fact". By some logic at least, if there was a proof of an existing deity, it would eliminate the faith in that deity existing, it would turn it into a fact. Verifiable facts aren't matters of faith.
Do you think modern politics has come to replace the role of religion for the modern generations?
I know that he's not going to invite someone over just to cut them down in the first 5 minutes. He's not that kind of guy. However, this didn't seem to be the case now. At least that was the impression i had after 10 minutes. Like I've said before, I've "tried" listening to them, but after 10 minutes I was already starting to doubt I'd hear anything constructive.
In that short time Kasparov actually equated Putin with ISIS and Al Qaeda, saying that they share a similar view of the value of human life... I couldn't think of a worse way to start off. Prior to that, he stated how in 1992 he believed that liberal democracy had won, and "evil" has been defeated, and everything would be jolly and fine from then on.
Really? I mean come on... Abolishing the gold standard in 1972 was no cause for alarm, and didn't remotely make him think about how evil could easily flourish just from that point alone? He paid no attention (or wasn't even informed about it) to the words and warning of Smedley Butler and John Perkins? You can forget about Perkins if you think he's a hack, but Butler was at least officially something more than just an "author". Kasparov wasn't worried about how USA stands in regards to value of human life after the killing of civilians and journalists in 2007 Baghdad Airstrike. Bradley Manning anyone? What about the NATO bombing of Yugoslavian civilians (again, "collateral damage") in 1999? The failed interventions in the middle east? The spying and mass collection of data? Edwad Sowden? Clapper lying under oath? Obama not closing Guantanamo 7 years after the executive order was given? Guantanamo is secondary here, it's a matter of principal. Does this mean that Trump or Clinton could go unpunished for gaining political points for issuing similar orders and then not delivering. Does this mean that lying and circumventing the system is now possible even AFTER the inauguration, as opposed to lying only during the campaign? Nope, THE source of evil that deserves his own book today is Putin. I understand where this comes from. But I'm not going further into it. There's just too much to say, and too many more examples, not to mention that it's mostly offtopic.
The two of them seem to know a lot about human nature, and yet they can't wrap their heads around acts such as terrorism and voting for Trump. In my opinion (if this is truly the case and they're not doing it on purpose, to serve an agenda), that is because they were raised in conditions which are radically different from people who carry cement on their backs for 8 hours a day (just making an example... it's a similar story for the unemployed) and then come home to the same lying talking heads on the TV that they've been watching for the past 10-15 or more years. Doesn't even matter if they're democrats or republican.
When you live a life like that, there's not much time or energy to educate yourself in depth on who these people are, how politics operates, how public opinion is swayed, why you think the way you think, etc. So someone like Trump comes along, and they think the guy is radically different (for the better) just because no one expected him, just because he talks differently and is hated by the establishment and even his own party, and has experience in something other than pure politics or diplomacy. The choice is quite simple in that case, for that man or woman.
Now, on the extreme side of the spectrum, imagine you live a life of the future terrorist. You've been conditioned since birth to live by the rules imposed by your environment. To believe what everybody around you believes. (Never underestimate the power of molding a mind since birth, it's actually a simple concept) The fact that you see nothing wrong in cutting off the hands of thieves, killing homosexuals for who they are, "oppressing" women (remember, you don't see it as an act of hatred or oppression or hatred, you've been conditioned to view it as normal), all of this, and this is crucial, does NOT mean that you are inherently evil and incapable of love. You love your family. You love them as much as anyone loves their family.
So when a US drone strike kills and keeps killing people you love, you go through the same trauma as anyone would go through. Maybe you start hating USA or NATO? Some will endure, some will break, but in most cases you're looking at total societal and psychological chaos. Your sleep cycle also suffers. The food and water you consume is worse, living conditions are worse, the thoughts of the people around you start influencing you more than they would normally.
That's why, when Sam Harris or Gary Kasparov say negative things about Putin, Trump or ISIS, without mentioning the role that USA has played in shaping the world, it reeks of misunderstanding and/or elitism. I, of course, don't think about the citizens of USA in this light. But then again, I had the good fortune of learning English early, having internet and personal relationships, exchange of ideas, work opportunities and friendships with Americans. The trick is to realize that for some people, all they know about Americans is that they bring death, suffering, and negative change. If you realize this simple fact, you will actually feel some of the moral superiority subside.
I realize that if I were born in a certain environment in Nazi Germany, who's to say I or you would not have grown up to be a Nazi? I'm sure this is nothing new to you, or to Sam Harris or Kasparov... But they seem to be ignoring it completely. They're creating an artificial witch hunt / debate about something that boils down to human nature (conditioning and response to stress in regards to terrorism, and simple act of being informed by the "wrong" source or an act of youth rebellion, in case of Trump) combined with action and reaction.
Where are the hijacked airplanes smashing into Japanese or Australian, or Mongolian buildings? Why are they targeting USA, Germany, France? Why isn't the rest of the Muslim world (Indonesia for example) doing the terrorizing? I'm not defending terrorism, I'm simply asking "Why" one more (crucial) time, which is something Sam Harris and Kasparov fail to do. They have a great train of thought with which I agree almost completely. But they choose to stop asking questions at a very odd point. Almost on purpose. And I see this behavior in many Americans. And especially in many news outlets. In some cases it is to serve an agenda, in some of the others it's cognitive dissonance... because the answer to the next "why" would turn your system of belief upside down. And this is EXACTLY what Putin did with RT, and executed it PERFECTLY. Even RT's motto is spot on ("Question More").
This is too much off topic... I could write 10000+ more words on the first 10 minutes of this interview alone, but I really don't come to this forum to discuss politics, and the forums rules discourage politics.
now, ON TOPIC:
My personal belief is that Russia (Putin) did influence the US election immensely.
I don't believe that they hacked the election in any technical way like hacking the voting machines or hacking the DNC or hacking in a similar sense. They did "hack" the election in the sense that they played the public relations (euphemism for propaganda, courtesy of E. Bernays) game that the West has been playing on the world for decades. And now they lost.
One thing that Kasparov is right about is that western society (USA at the front) has grown weaker. But not weaker in the sense that he talks about, how foreign policy towards Russia should be more harsh. No, I mean the west is weaker because it let evil in the house that was the beacon of light. The military-industrial complex, the banks, the politicians, in short the system was simply too greedy considering USA's moral "dictatorship" toward the rest of the world. The "establishment" (even though Trump is also the establishment) lost because it was playing the moral superiority game at the same time that it's leaders, corporations and prominent public figures were doing some shady, nepotistic, self serving and in my opinion evil things both abroad, and more importantly for the voter - at home! Against the interest of their own citizens. In THE country of prosperity, democracy, social justice, human rights, victory of capitalism etc.
USA had learned its lesson from the Vietnam war, regarding journalists on the battlefield. Only "approved" media outlets and journalists would from then on bring news to the people, otherwise the anti-war protests would just suffocate USA's international reputation and internal stability. RT simply circumvented this by putting cameras in Syria, Libya, Turkey, Palestine and putting everything on youtube. Then the DNC really shot themselves in the foot by sabotaging Bernie Sanders. Really, it was the US from the beginning that was supplying Putin with all this political ammo.
That's the real weakness. Not the lack of harsh foreign politics towards Russia that Kasparov was talking about. Not even the mainstream media machine was able to stop the avalanche. Kasparov thinks that if you close the windows to prevent draft, somehow the house of cards in front of you magically becomes a house of reinforced concrete stable enough to support the weight of a human being. It doesn't. It's still a house of cards. It's going to stand longer since there's no more draft, but it is not any "stronger".
The anti-commie game is ridiculous. Russia is not communist anymore. They know the game, and they are playing it brilliantly. Unlike, for example the Saudis. The poor f*cks. I almost feel a wee bit sorry for them. Just when they were starting to really understand how USA works and show their lobbying A game, the Clintons fell down with Obama, and got replaced with a man who I really still don't know what to think of. But he's definitely not taking the pro-Saudi road. Or any pro-Islam road for that matter. They'd have done better praising KEK than Allah.
4 Likes
Wasn't expecting an essay back :)
I can't really disagree with much that you said, all well reasoned. Suffice to say:
I don't think you have to be a terrorist to understand a terrorist. Maybe you do to empathise with them, walk a mile in their shoes etc. But what they want seems pretty cut and dry.
I guess the main point Kasparov was making, was Putin was once a thug, and still is. But since his allegiance is to Russia, it is hard to see how what he does benefits others. Many such power struggles going on in the world, countries aggressively looking after their own interests.
Did Russia hack the election? I guess I don't know, I wasn't there! Was there something to gain in doing so? Sure, even if it's just the reduction of tensions.
The election hacking debacle is certainly working against the introduction of electronic polling booths.
1 Like
Sorry. I'm not an elegant writer, but I try to say everything I can in one go (and answer questions that haven't been asked yet), as completely as possible, so that the other side understands my bias. I did end with on-topic remarks.
I know that leaving walls of text is not dialogue-encouraging but it solves the problem of the follow-up questions leading to thread derailment over time. As a bonus, it makes most people sick and wanting to leave the thread :) Which would be kind of a blessing considering what this forum is actually supposed to be about.
2 Likes
I'm surprised that they didn't bring Westboro Baptist Church into this. I mean, if you want to antagonize somebody, just relate him to Russia and WBC. This is ridiculous.
Try and be a little less condescending man, and maybe teach more.
Also, not everyone voted for Trump because they fell for his rhetoric. In fact I'd say most people (that I know at least) chose him because of his opponent.
Also, how the hell does anyone have the time to stay highly informed about politics? After my 9-5 and second job and social life, the last thing I want to do is sit at the computer and read more news. I still have no clue how to find unbiased news without just comparing reports.
1 Like
unbiased news
Pretty much impossible to find these days, imo.
Seems to be the only place you find it is in the technology sphere of journalism, but many outlets seem to lean a little left if not moderate.
There are a million links though between people involved in the election with Russia, including Wikileaks since they seem to just filter out certain leaks to push an agenda. I'd wager that they have evidence but because of intelligent agencies secrecy, they aren't saying a peep yet.
Not when there is actual ties behind it. Can't believe people here are blocking their ears over this.
Our intelligence agencies don't have a good track record for being trustworthy lately. This is something people need to keep in mind, they operate in secrecy so blindly trusting them would also be bad idea.
Although I take a chance with them over Putin and Russia's even more backwards CIA seeing that he is out there to kill anybody that challenges him. And you have Trump, Bannon and other supporters of this "alt-right" (More like anti-liberal, where are the principles? At least actual conservatives have some.) movement also working closely with Russia. I even suspect now Wikileaks is working with Russia, cause Trump makes a false accusation that Obama wiretapped with no evidence (AND if that was the case, I would bet it had something to do with Trump and Putin's relationship) and then Wikileaks comes out with information that intelligence agencies do it with everyone (which is hard to even call news anyways in my opinion), they didn't leak it before, they timed it right.
As for RT, I use to trust them, but critical thinking and Putin's rise tells me otherwise or they been corrupted. RT is a propaganda machine, if they weren't, how come they don't jump on Russia's government for the BS they do like ours? Putin is no angel, he has gotten many people poisoned and killed to keep his ass in power. And RT doesn't question this? Well, RT is still not as bad as Fox News or Breitbart.
Bottom line. There is a plot to destabilize the faith people have in our country and are manipulating people and their beliefs in every turn to reach their ends, and the people who still support Trump, are being manipulated, not just by him or Bannon, but by foreign forces.