In Capitalist America, Russia Hack You

[GreenBits]

Alright, let's talk about the Russia thing now that we can't pretend it didn't happen anymore. Now that all of the intelligence agencies have agreed, including the FBI (took them a while, huh?), with the latest being that the hacking is actually an ongoing process. This is on top of the Yahoo indictments*. Given that other countries have also accused Russia of interfering in their elections as well, is this finally real enough to take seriously? Taken at face, would this not delegitimize the Trump Presidency?


*A brief aside on the Yahoo hacking debacle. I have my beefs with Yahoo (they get hacked more than wood), but this one is pretty odd on the surface, as are all things Russia these days. Anywho, they formally charged a Russian national and two FSB agents with the intrusion, but we won't be able to apprehend one of the agents because he's already being held by Russia for treason.

What the blue fuck?

So apparently, he was charged by Russia of collaborating with us (double agent)? I don't get how you can be hacking for Russia, and us, without one of them (Russia or the US) knowing and condoning it. So is Russia lying to protect the agent?

This will all make the most amazing movie one day.

[1715575999]

1715575999

[1715575999]

1715575999

[1715575999]

1715575999

[Sithara007]

Government sponsored hacking was started by the CIA and the FBI. The CIA used this, to spy on their enemies and even on their allies. Russia and China are late entrants to this sector, but they have caught up pretty fast.

[HabBear]

Taken at face, would this not delegitimize the Trump Presidency?

No. Russia didn't hack the election, they didn't hack the votes. And believe me, they didn't effect how many people were or were not voting for Clinton. The majority of people were not interested in anything she was offering. Multiple news sources and the Federal Government have admitted there is no evidence that Russia's hacking influenced voters.

In fact, Russia's hacking was a GOOD thing...even if you hate Trump. It exposed how corrupt the US political system is. And if American's had some balls, enough to not vote for the two existing bullshit parties that exist in that country you wouldn't have Trump in office either.

*A brief aside on the Yahoo hacking debacle. I have my beefs with Yahoo (they get hacked more than wood), but this one is pretty odd on the surface, as are all things Russia these days. Anywho, they formally charged a Russian national and two FSB agents with the intrusion, but we won't be able to apprehend one of the agents because he's already being held by Russia for treason.

What the blue fuck?

So apparently, he was charged by Russia of collaborating with us (double agent)? I don't get how you can be hacking for Russia, and us, without one of them (Russia or the US) knowing and condoning it. So is Russia lying to protect the agent?

This will all make the most amazing movie one day.

There already is a movie about this, check out Stuxnet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet)

Stuxnet is a documentary about a US operation to spy on Iran and hack their nuclear facilities to make their reactors self destruct, this minimizing their ability to create nuclear weapons.

Any dumb shit any other country is doing was probably done by the US first...soo...who's really the asshole in this scenario?

[GreenBits]

Taken at face, would this not delegitimize the Trump Presidency?

No. Russia didn't hack the election, they didn't hack the votes. And believe me, they didn't effect how many people were or were not voting for Clinton. The majority of people were not interested in anything she was offering. Multiple news sources and the Federal Government have admitted there is no evidence that Russia's hacking influenced voters.

In fact, Russia's hacking was a GOOD thing...even if you hate Trump. It exposed how corrupt the US political system is. And if American's had some balls, enough to not vote for the two existing bullshit parties that exist in that country you wouldn't have Trump in office either.

*A brief aside on the Yahoo hacking debacle. I have my beefs with Yahoo (they get hacked more than wood), but this one is pretty odd on the surface, as are all things Russia these days. Anywho, they formally charged a Russian national and two FSB agents with the intrusion, but we won't be able to apprehend one of the agents because he's already being held by Russia for treason.

What the blue fuck?

So apparently, he was charged by Russia of collaborating with us (double agent)? I don't get how you can be hacking for Russia, and us, without one of them (Russia or the US) knowing and condoning it. So is Russia lying to protect the agent?

This will all make the most amazing movie one day.

There already is a movie about this, check out Stuxnet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet)

Stuxnet is a documentary about a US operation to spy on Iran and hack their nuclear facilities to make their reactors self destruct, this minimizing their ability to create nuclear weapons.

Any dumb shit any other country is doing was probably done by the US first...soo...who's really the asshole in this scenario?

LOL , really? Actually, the majority of people voted for Hillary, my man. Trump only won the electoral college. You must have swallowed the lie about illegals and voter fraud.

And no, an avowed enemy of the state using massive resources to influence the election is never a good thing. Let me guess, Vault Seven is a good thing too, right?

And Stuxnet is not the same beast at all. It was a joint US/Israeli operation to reinforce ignored nuclear sanctions by Iran. It was a move for global security, And, it like, wasn't an election.


Also, let's break down this dumb ass rhetoric about Russia actually hacking the election. To everyone on the board, you are being a coward intellectually if you can't see why interference by a state actor in this manner obviously had to influence the election. You didn't even vote for Hillary, yet the first thing you cited was DNC emails. So you in one breath, admit the emails influence people not to vote for Hillary, and in the same breath state that had no effect on the outcome of the election.

Well man, which one is it? The purpose of an election is for votes. You think Russia is so stupid they would perform an act of war just to 'release some emails for shits and giggles'? If they didn't want to actually influence the outcome of the election, why even attempt this in the first place?

Examine motivations. Again, why would Russia risk this, if not to sway public opinion in order to influence the vote? You didn't see RNC emails, despite the fact they were allegedly hacked as well.

[GreenBits]

Government sponsored hacking was started by the CIA and the FBI. The CIA used this, to spy on their enemies and even on their allies. Russia and China are late entrants to this sector, but they have caught up pretty fast.

And that history lesson correlates with current reality how?/Did the US hack the farcical Russian 'election' (it's even more a sham then our last one) ?

China invented guns. The US and Russia were late entrants to the sector, but boy, they caught up and surpassed the entire world.

But how about that Russian hacking though?

And can we please stop using the two wrongs fallacy to describe Russia's actions? Educate yourself:

The tu quoque fallacy is committed when it is assumed that because someone else has done a thing there is nothing wrong with doing it. This fallacy is classically committed by children who, when told off, respond with “So and so did it too”, with the implied conclusion that there is nothing wrong with doing whatever it is that they have done. This is a fallacy because it could be that both children are in the wrong, and because, as we were all taught, two wrongs don’t make a right.
Example
(1) The Romans kept slaves.
Therefore:
(2) We can keep slaves too.
This argument commits the tu quoque fallacy because it assumes that if someone else does a thing then it’s okay for us to do it too. It does not follow, however, from the simple fact that the Romans kept slaves, that there is nothing wrong with keeping slaves. It is plausible to think that the Romans acted immorally in keeping slaves, and that we would act immorally if we followed their example. The conclusion of the argument therefore does not follow from its premise.

[Sithara007]

Government sponsored hacking was started by the CIA and the FBI. The CIA used this, to spy on their enemies and even on their allies. Russia and China are late entrants to this sector, but they have caught up pretty fast.

And that history lesson correlates with current reality how?/Did the US hack the farcical Russian 'election' (it's even more a sham then our last one) ?

China invented guns. The US and Russia were late entrants to the sector, but boy, they caught up and surpassed the entire world.

But how about that Russian hacking though?

And can we please stop using the two wrongs fallacy to describe Russia's actions? Educate yourself:

The tu quoque fallacy is committed when it is assumed that because someone else has done a thing there is nothing wrong with doing it. This fallacy is classically committed by children who, when told off, respond with “So and so did it too”, with the implied conclusion that there is nothing wrong with doing whatever it is that they have done. This is a fallacy because it could be that both children are in the wrong, and because, as we were all taught, two wrongs don’t make a right.
Example
(1) The Romans kept slaves.
Therefore:
(2) We can keep slaves too.
This argument commits the tu quoque fallacy because it assumes that if someone else does a thing then it’s okay for us to do it too. It does not follow, however, from the simple fact that the Romans kept slaves, that there is nothing wrong with keeping slaves. It is plausible to think that the Romans acted immorally in keeping slaves, and that we would act immorally if we followed their example. The conclusion of the argument therefore does not follow from its premise.

Once again, the Russians didn't hacked the American elections. If you rephrase your wordings to "the Russians influenced the American elections", then probably I would agree with you.

[GreenBits]

Government sponsored hacking was started by the CIA and the FBI. The CIA used this, to spy on their enemies and even on their allies. Russia and China are late entrants to this sector, but they have caught up pretty fast.

And that history lesson correlates with current reality how?/Did the US hack the farcical Russian 'election' (it's even more a sham then our last one) ?

China invented guns. The US and Russia were late entrants to the sector, but boy, they caught up and surpassed the entire world.

But how about that Russian hacking though?

And can we please stop using the two wrongs fallacy to describe Russia's actions? Educate yourself:

The tu quoque fallacy is committed when it is assumed that because someone else has done a thing there is nothing wrong with doing it. This fallacy is classically committed by children who, when told off, respond with “So and so did it too”, with the implied conclusion that there is nothing wrong with doing whatever it is that they have done. This is a fallacy because it could be that both children are in the wrong, and because, as we were all taught, two wrongs don’t make a right.
Example
(1) The Romans kept slaves.
Therefore:
(2) We can keep slaves too.
This argument commits the tu quoque fallacy because it assumes that if someone else does a thing then it’s okay for us to do it too. It does not follow, however, from the simple fact that the Romans kept slaves, that there is nothing wrong with keeping slaves. It is plausible to think that the Romans acted immorally in keeping slaves, and that we would act immorally if we followed their example. The conclusion of the argument therefore does not follow from its premise.

Once again, the Russians didn't hacked the American elections. If you rephrase your wordings to "the Russians influenced the American elections", then probably I would agree with you.

If by influence you mean their interference decided the election for Trump, then yes, we are in agreement. I'm saying, point blank, the shit they pulled, made Trump president instead of Hillary.

[bryant.coleman]

If by influence you mean their interference decided the election for Trump, then yes, we are in agreement. I'm saying, point blank, the shit they pulled, made Trump president instead of Hillary.

If Trump won the POTUS elections in 2016, then less than 1% of the credit for that goes to the Russians who hacked the DNC. The remaining 99% can be divided among Hillary herself (thanks to the email server scandal), Weiner (pedophile scandal), Abedin (Al Qaeda scandal).etc. Russians only had a minuscule role in the American election outcome. Even if they had not interfered, Trump would have won easily. Remember that his margin of victory was not razor thin. He got 304 electoral college votes, against 227 for Hitlery.

[episteme]

Government sponsored hacking was started by the CIA and the FBI. The CIA used this, to spy on their enemies and even on their allies. Russia and China are late entrants to this sector, but they have caught up pretty fast.

exactly.

http://thestrategybridge.org/the-bridge/2017/3/8/information-warfare-isnt-russian-its-american-as-apple-pie

and american tactics in those departments, be that hacking or misinformation, are still to me most despicable.

russia and china are doing what any russia or china would.

[Sithara007]

Government sponsored hacking was started by the CIA and the FBI. The CIA used this, to spy on their enemies and even on their allies. Russia and China are late entrants to this sector, but they have caught up pretty fast.

exactly.

http://thestrategybridge.org/the-bridge/2017/3/8/information-warfare-isnt-russian-its-american-as-apple-pie

and american tactics in those departments, be that hacking or misinformation, are still to me most despicable.

russia and china are doing what any russia or china would.

The Americans have even converted the Hollywood movies into propaganda machines. Look at the movies such as American Sniper. The amount of propaganda in these movies will put those made by Leni Riefenstahl to shame. A perfect example is here:

http://pundita.blogspot.in/2017/02/the-devil-wears-white-helmet-hollywood.html

[episteme]

The Americans have even converted the Hollywood movies into propaganda machines. Look at the movies such as American Sniper. The amount of propaganda in these movies will put those made by Leni Riefenstahl to shame. A perfect example is here:

http://pundita.blogspot.in/2017/02/the-devil-wears-white-helmet-hollywood.html

here's a video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HCFol7g-FU

so what's this now..? a fake? or a fake of the fake? or the fake of the fake of the fake.... ah, the horror, lol.

and here's how the real thing looks

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-S5nvJUBFRA

yup. fuck that shit. the russians at least take some truth and verifiable facts mixed with the plausibly deniable lies to build a narrative.
this is here is just simply fucking criminal in every sense of the word.

[21kevin21]

The Americans have even converted the Hollywood movies into propaganda machines. Look at the movies such as American Sniper. The amount of propaganda in these movies will put those made by Leni Riefenstahl to shame. A perfect example is here:

http://pundita.blogspot.in/2017/02/the-devil-wears-white-helmet-hollywood.html

here's a video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HCFol7g-FU

so what's this now..? a fake? or a fake of the fake? or the fake of the fake of the fake.... ah, the horror, lol.

and here's how the real thing looks

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-S5nvJUBFRA

yup. fuck that shit. the russians at least take some truth and verifiable facts mixed with the plausibly deniable lies to build a narrative.
this is here is just simply fucking criminal in every sense of the word.

I would not shield some people and protect others. Both Americans and Russians use propaganda at full capacity, but the United States does it beautifully and beautifully. The quality and ratings of films are exactly what they say.

[Podgor]

The only fraud was done by Hillary.
Her people hacked votes in 5 states using Soros' vote counting computers.

[Sithara007]

The only fraud was done by Hillary.
Her people hacked votes in 5 states using Soros' vote counting computers.

That's what the Russian hackers uncovered, after Hillary secured the Democrat nomination. In many of the states, Sanders was cheated of victory. But it doesn't matter now, as Hillary got defeated in the presidential elections.

[episteme]

I would not shield some people and protect others. Both Americans and Russians use propaganda at full capacity, but the United States does it beautifully and beautifully. The quality and ratings of films are exactly what they say.

i'd argue otherwise.
american propaganda is bloated annoyingly overpriced advertisement.
russian propaganda is art, and brilliant as such.

example
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Od4MWs7qTr8

seen any russian movies lately?
heavily sponsored by the ministry of culture, putin criticizing his own regime without any sugar coating.
but what is anybody gonna do about it?
any they're pretty artsy too. as good as any russian novel.

[Taki]

Taken at face, would this not delegitimize the Trump Presidency?

No. Russia didn't hack the election, they didn't hack the votes. And believe me, they didn't effect how many people were or were not voting for Clinton. The majority of people were not interested in anything she was offering. Multiple news sources and the Federal Government have admitted there is no evidence that Russia's hacking influenced voters.

In fact, Russia's hacking was a GOOD thing...even if you hate Trump. It exposed how corrupt the US political system is. And if American's had some balls, enough to not vote for the two existing bullshit parties that exist in that country you wouldn't have Trump in office either.

*A brief aside on the Yahoo hacking debacle. I have my beefs with Yahoo (they get hacked more than wood), but this one is pretty odd on the surface, as are all things Russia these days. Anywho, they formally charged a Russian national and two FSB agents with the intrusion, but we won't be able to apprehend one of the agents because he's already being held by Russia for treason.

What the blue fuck?

So apparently, he was charged by Russia of collaborating with us (double agent)? I don't get how you can be hacking for Russia, and us, without one of them (Russia or the US) knowing and condoning it. So is Russia lying to protect the agent?

This will all make the most amazing movie one day.

There already is a movie about this, check out Stuxnet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet)

Stuxnet is a documentary about a US operation to spy on Iran and hack their nuclear facilities to make their reactors self destruct, this minimizing their ability to create nuclear weapons.

Any dumb shit any other country is doing was probably done by the US first...soo...who's really the asshole in this scenario?

LOL , really? Actually, the majority of people voted for Hillary, my man. Trump only won the electoral college. You must have swallowed the lie about illegals and voter fraud.

And no, an avowed enemy of the state using massive resources to influence the election is never a good thing. Let me guess, Vault Seven is a good thing too, right?

And Stuxnet is not the same beast at all. It was a joint US/Israeli operation to reinforce ignored nuclear sanctions by Iran. It was a move for global security, And, it like, wasn't an election.


Also, let's break down this dumb ass rhetoric about Russia actually hacking the election. To everyone on the board, you are being a coward intellectually if you can't see why interference by a state actor in this manner obviously had to influence the election. You didn't even vote for Hillary, yet the first thing you cited was DNC emails. So you in one breath, admit the emails influence people not to vote for Hillary, and in the same breath state that had no effect on the outcome of the election.

Well man, which one is it? The purpose of an election is for votes. You think Russia is so stupid they would perform an act of war just to 'release some emails for shits and giggles'? If they didn't want to actually influence the outcome of the election, why even attempt this in the first place?

Examine motivations. Again, why would Russia risk this, if not to sway public opinion in order to influence the vote? You didn't see RNC emails, despite the fact they were allegedly hacked as well.

It's easy to judge someone else when Hilary whom you supported loose. I think it was the plan inside of the US to give the win to Trump. There are big corporation of politicians and businessmans who rule the country. And Russia has nothing in this.

[coszy]

I would not shield some people and protect others. Both Americans and Russians use propaganda at full capacity, but the United States does it beautifully and beautifully. The quality and ratings of films are exactly what they say.

i'd argue otherwise.
american propaganda is bloated annoyingly overpriced advertisement.
russian propaganda is art, and brilliant as such.

example
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Od4MWs7qTr8

seen any russian movies lately?
heavily sponsored by the ministry of culture, putin criticizing his own regime without any sugar coating.
but what is anybody gonna do about it?
any they're pretty artsy too. as good as any russian novel.

Any propaganda is bullshit. This is deceiving people. If questions were raised that really disturb the people, then it is understandable, and so the government does everything, To set some against others. In the end, war can not be avoided. The result of such propaganda is the war between Ukraine and Russia. It should not be done.And America has also made a lot of efforts here. At first they left the country without weapons, and then they began to pull everyone to their side each.

[Master1781]

This is a fantastic book to understand better

https://www.voltairenet.org/IMG/pdf/Bernays_Propaganda_in_english_.pdf

[Sithara007]

It's easy to judge someone else when Hilary whom you supported loose. I think it was the plan inside of the US to give the win to Trump. There are big corporation of politicians and businessmans who rule the country. And Russia has nothing in this.

Almost all of the corporations and the oligarchs were putting their weight behind Hillary. Soros himself donated more than $1 billion for the presidential campaign of Hillary. The only corporation supporting Donald Trump was Trump himself.