PDA

View Full Version : Is Russia responsible



jack grebe
10-08-2016, 04:38 PM
For the DNC hack?

jack grebe
10-08-2016, 04:55 PM
Or maybe more important, is the POTUS responsible to confront them?

As a democratic president, would this be happening if it had been the RNC?

Paul Pless
10-08-2016, 05:06 PM
Or maybe more important, is the POTUS responsible to confront them?

Isn't that exactly what the Obama administration did just yesterday when the Department of Homeland Security and the Office of the Director of national Intelligence jointly released this statement?


"The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations," the statement says. "These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process...We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia's senior-most officials could have authorized these activities."

jack grebe
10-08-2016, 05:12 PM
Isn't that exactly what the Obama administration did just yesterday when the Department of Homeland Security and the Office of the Director of national Intelligence jointly released this statement?

I know he did, was it his responsibility? Would he have done the same for the RNC?

Paul Pless
10-08-2016, 05:14 PM
I know he did, was it his responsibility? Would he have done the same for the RNC?of course

TomF
10-08-2016, 07:37 PM
Absolutely. And I would expect that an honourable Republican President in the same circumstances would have released a similar statement. Some things are bipartisan, or should be.

Rich Jones
10-08-2016, 07:47 PM
Now that the government has proven the hacks are from Russia, we should disregard everything in them, not knowing if they're altered in any way. Julian Assauge's game is up. Nothing from WikiLeaks, who gets their hacks from mother Russia, can be taken as truthful.

jack grebe
10-09-2016, 05:21 PM
of course

That is easy to say in retrospect, but somehow I find it hard to believe
in practice, in an election year.

CWSmith
10-09-2016, 05:24 PM
That is easy to say in retrospect, but somehow I find it hard to believe
in practice, in an election year.

Then I think you need to separate yourself from the partisan politics of the last decades and remember what it means both to have ethics in life and to be POTUS.

Cuyahoga Chuck
10-09-2016, 05:41 PM
For the DNC hack?

TIME magazine did a four or five page spread on this story. Unfortunately, you need to get a copy to read the conclusions.
It looks like this.

http://time.com/magazine/us/4512760/october-10th-2016-vol-188-no-14-u-s/

The Russian hackers operate on the "dark web". It's the place where drugs are bought and sold, pedophilia porn is offered and stolen identities are sold. The Russian hackers go by the name "Fancy bear". They are very good and probably have the acquiesense of Vlad Putin.

John hartmann
10-09-2016, 05:50 PM
Now that the government has proven the hacks are from Russia, we should disregard everything in them, not knowing if they're altered in any way. Julian Assauge's game is up. Nothing from WikiLeaks, who gets their hacks from mother Russia, can be taken as truthful.

This.

Sky Blue
10-09-2016, 06:02 PM
we should disregard them for lack of authentication

Why? Just convene some hearings, subpoena the sender or recipient, as may be probative, and ask them if they in substance made or received the relevant communication. Citing the entity's own incompetence in allowing the hacks is an unpersuasive reason for why the information must be disregarded. Truly.

Rich Jones
10-09-2016, 06:14 PM
This. Hey, John! Welcome below decks!

jack grebe
10-09-2016, 06:25 PM
Hey, John! Welcome below decks!

Sucker..........:D:D:D

Tom Hunter
10-09-2016, 07:39 PM
It's difficult, because what Russia did is an attack on the US. In other countries they have damaged blast furnaces and shut down TV stations. It is, in fact, really serious. This is a guy, Putin, who has killed thousands of people in the Ukraine, Georgia and elsewhere. Pretty soon he will kill some Americans, maybe even someone on this forum. Your power goes out, your insulin gets warm and you die. The train you are on goes though a manipulated signal and crashes, and you lose a leg, the air traffic control system directing the plane your son is on goes down, and you lose a loved one.

Any thoughts about all of this?

George Jung
10-09-2016, 07:53 PM
That is easy to say in retrospect, but somehow I find it hard to believe
in practice, in an election year.

That just reveals your prejudice.

Cuyahoga Chuck
10-09-2016, 08:25 PM
It's difficult, because what Russia did is an attack on the US. In other countries they have damaged blast furnaces and shut down TV stations. It is, in fact, really serious. This is a guy, Putin, who has killed thousands of people in the Ukraine, Georgia and elsewhere. Pretty soon he will kill some Americans, maybe even someone on this forum. Your power goes out, your insulin gets warm and you die. The train you are on goes though a manipulated signal and crashes, and you lose a leg, the air traffic control system directing the plane your son is on goes down, and you lose a loved one.

Any thoughts about all of this?

Everything you said is on the minds of the administration. They have cyber weapons which are state of the art but cannot be guaranteed to cover all the eventual possibilities. Cyber weapons are part of the intelligence system. If you say what you have discovered you are giving the enemy the opportunity to plug their leaks or to take some other evasive action. And your enemies may profit. You want your opponent to keep doing what he is doing to determine, if possible the limits of his abilities.
Putin is not ready to go to war with us but he has over time fancied the internet as means of spreading discord, of planting false information and of trying to invade the web domains of softer targets like corporations or of political organizations. A Russian hacking group known as "Fancy bear" is said to be the source of the DNC files and possibly of penetrations of voter rolls in Arizona and Illinois.
The US employs a company known as "Crowdstrike " run by a Russian who is familiar with what goes on on the black web. And we have plenty of smart people tending our cyber weapons.

skaraborgcraft
10-10-2016, 02:37 AM
It's difficult, because what Russia did is an attack on the US. In other countries they have damaged blast furnaces and shut down TV stations. It is, in fact, really serious. This is a guy, Putin, who has killed thousands of people in the Ukraine, Georgia and elsewhere. Pretty soon he will kill some Americans, maybe even someone on this forum. Your power goes out, your insulin gets warm and you die. The train you are on goes though a manipulated signal and crashes, and you lose a leg, the air traffic control system directing the plane your son is on goes down, and you lose a loved one.

Any thoughts about all of this?

Any thoughts? Yeah, you seem to have swallowed hook line and sinker what they want you to think. When Maduro was complaining that the US was doing the same thing, your administration just called him paranoid, and now they want to whip up an anti-russia hysteria, which it seems is working with a few people. There is a history of US involvement in interfering elections in other countries in order to cover the US own interests, so what is the real complaint here, that Russia is now doing what the US has been doing for a long time? Would you like to post some kind of evidence of the 1000s killed in Georgia, i assume you mean the 2008 event?