Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 37 of 37

Thread: Obama administration tries to kill e-mail case

  1. #31
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    17,986

    Re: Obama administration tries to kill e-mail case

    Quote Originally Posted by independent_thinker2002 View Post
    Sorry, when you brought up the ugly world I assumed that was what you were talking about. I apologize if I was wrong.
    Small picture, dude. The "ugly world" includes handing off people to other nations (allies of all cultures) for interrogations because either their laws allow less than honorable tactics or their governments don't answer to media and citizen. It also includes assasinations, coups, diplomatic and non-diplomatic blackmail, shady deals that would prescribe oppression and brutality in exchange for regional "stability," and covert military and CIA operations everywhere and anywhere.

    And the reason such things occur is because we are dealing with an ugly world. Our international organizations refrain from designating an obvious ongoing massacre of people a genocide, because labeling it as such means that we are obligated to act. We can't afford to go on a global crusade in the first place, and in the second, "stability" and an attempt to keep from war often enough meant oppression, torture, and death for others. If we could start or lead an internal coup in another nation as an alternative to sending our troops into harms way...we do it. Congress authorized tens of millions of dollars just in 1998 to the internal overthrow of Hussein. Americans love their oil products, but love to pretend that we can get it simply by digging a 3ft hole in our backyards. We reject oppression, yet do what we have to keep the "peace" and provide that oil. Diplomats of foriegn enemy nations have been targetted by American sponsered hit squads just to ensure and end that is favorable to what we want to see.

    "Torturing" an individual over informoation we more or less already know is small talk when considering what we have had to do over the last 69 years. People complain about our wars. But these wars and other events have kept us from the global catastrophies of the past.

    But Americans can't be this blind. They simply wish to believe that it's an Oompa Loompa world and the American Willy Wonka is making black and white (right and wrong) decisions on their behalf. - The "Shining Capital on the Hill" thing and all.


    Quote Originally Posted by independent_thinker2002 View Post
    Well, waterboarding has only happened three times that we know of. Who knows what we don't know about? I don't think the naked pyramids at Abu Ghraib was honorable action. I certainly don't see that as some rogue fraternity house prank or a determined effort to aquire time sensitive information.
    Certainly there has been more waterboarding over the decades, but it only took three for the entire world to treat us as if we were lining up Muslims to slaughter. Hundreds of thousands of Muslims tortured in Algeria by the French (which was state sponsered and authorized) takes a back seat to the "three" cases of American dastardly evil and tyranny.

    You don't see Abu Ghraib as petty and stupid? Do not frat college kids perform similar stunts just to get pledged or to be hazed? That wasn't torture. That was senseless stupidity and unprofessionalism by a bunch of Reserve Army National Guardsmen who really had no business in Iraq in the first place.


    Quote Originally Posted by independent_thinker2002 View Post
    No, I haven't. How do you know if someone has time sensitive information? How do you know who to torture?
    There are times on the battle field where an individual may be caught setting IEDs. In his pack there may be evidence that another or two was set elsewhere. Now, before an American patrol discovers it the hard way, information must be pursuaded out of the prisoner before it is too late. Now, this doesn't necessary mean "torture," but someone's feelings may get hurt.

    The other aspect of this is after incarceration far from the field. Our intel circle gets information from international sources and have a good ieda of who they have in front of them. They know their comings and goings and their associates. They know what is in the works from one degree to another. People don't give this art enough credit. They don't just grab random people up and start with a clean slate of interrogation. For example...the terrorists that were arrested recently in Britian as they attempted to board airplanes wasn;t the end of the story. They were undoubtedly "pressed" for information in case something else unheard of was going on or was about to go on.


    Quote Originally Posted by independent_thinker2002 View Post
    As much as the military resents the fact that civilians question the methods the military provide our freedom and security, civilians resent the cavalier attitude of "how dare you question us" that they get as if the military was infallible.
    It's not so much the "how dare you question." It's "how dare you pretend to care when it suits you." Because no matter who the politicianis or what the conflict, the military man is consistent to what he knows works.

    Quote Originally Posted by independent_thinker2002 View Post

    Abu Ghraib.
    What about it? Stupid fraternity pranks caught on tape designated as "torture" by pundits and critics looking to bash Bush over everything else going on? Besides, Abu Ghraib "had" two things going against it before the Active Duty asumed the position...."Reserve" and "National Guard." Civilians in uniform did that.

    Every prisoner is afforded a Qu'ran and an appreciation to cultural and religious diet. This is afforded in Afghanistan. He is afforded his never ending prayers times throughout the day. This was at GITMO and in Abu Ghraib. Find such accomodations in foreign prisons. Of course, American politicians and foriegn critics found more interest in labels like "Gulag" and "Torture" and "Nazi" rather than portraying the situation with accuracy and honesty.

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

  2. #32
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:30 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,725

    Re: Obama administration tries to kill e-mail case

    Quote Originally Posted by GySgt View Post
    Most Americans come from lazy ignorance and choose to remain ignorant. This is why the media is supposed to supply them their clarity. Why a politician is supposed to make them understand what a book would have already done and they get angry when the politician doesn't deliver. Why Americans are "aghast" at the prospect that the leader of the free world may need a bit of discretion and secrecy to conduct his affiars for their well being.
    Stories about Angelina Jolie, Madonna, Britney Spears, American Idol, and the like, don't lend themselves very well to clarifying hard news for the majority of Americans.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  3. #33
    Student Eko Ren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Bedford Stuyvesant
    Last Seen
    08-28-10 @ 03:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    253

    Re: Obama administration tries to kill e-mail case

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    Stories about Angelina Jolie, Madonna, Britney Spears, American Idol, and the like, don't lend themselves very well to clarifying hard news for the majority of Americans.
    That is a grossly unfair assessment. In a society that has a media, corporate, and political infrastructure that all seek to manipulate the masses, we produce some pretty impressive individuals and organizations. This is a ****ing awesome society.

    Ahem.

    That being said, Guy in the Military, you have to admit that you're articulating what you've been trained to say. You are a United States soldier meant to protect the ends and interest of the United States government and the safety of the American people. Hence.

    The dubious fragments of information that this American society has retained displeases us. Something(s) need to be owned up to because, quite frankly, if this system isn't working and there's a better one, it is time to progress.

    Right?

    But drop the e-mails. How irrelevant is this bull****. Who the **** cares about e-mails. Do you have people beating down your door about some damned e-mails you deleted?

  4. #34
    Bus Driver to Hell
    Thorgasm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    12-06-17 @ 11:17 AM
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    68,191

    Re: Obama administration tries to kill e-mail case

    Gunny, I concede the points about time sensitivity and IEDs.

    We've taken this thread off course. You've made some very good points. Thanks for keeping my buttery butt safe.
    Quote Originally Posted by faithful_servant View Post
    Being a psychiatric patient does not mean that you are mentally ill.



  5. #35
    Pragmatist
    SouthernDemocrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    KC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,400

    Re: Obama administration tries to kill e-mail case

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    Here's some explanation on exactly what this is about.

    Basically, when emails are archived by a large business, they are put onto backup tapes. These tapes hold ****tons of material, but they can be very difficult to restore and get the old information off of. In this case, there were 14 million emails that were not preserved properly, but still may exist in some form on some sort of backup tape. A good government group is suing to try to force the government to take a bunch of extra steps to restore these emails, which I believe would then require the government to sort through all of them and determine what is and is not privileged. The reason that Bush and Obama both opposed this is not because of any desire to keep something hidden, but because it would take a ****load of money and time to restore all of these emails and sort through them, and without any indication that they would ever be relevant to anything.

    It seems pretty reasonable to me.
    Ok, let me expand on this one. Since this is what I do for a living.

    To the best of my knowledge, the Whitehouse is on Exchange and has been for some time.

    When Bush took office, they probably were on Exchange 5.5. They probably upgraded to Exchange 2000 around 2002 or so. They would have then upgraded to Exchange 2003 around 2004 or so, and they are probably now on Exchange 2007.

    It looks like they went to an email archiving system in 2005. Probably went with Symantec Enterprise Vault or possibly EMC EmailExxtender. At that point, their IT staff would have imported all pst files stored locally into the archiving system and the contents of the message stores. So there is no reason at all they should not have anything from that timeframe forward.

    However, in the timeframe from 2001 to 2005, older emails could very easily be on tape. Well, the problem there is that in that time frame they probably switched tape formats twice, and possibly backup vendors. So recovering them would be very difficult just because of that. It doesn’t stop there though because you cant just restore say a Exchange 5.5 message store to the current Exchange 2007 server. First you would have to build out a temporary exchange 5.5 environment / domain, and recover the stores to it, then see what you had. This is exponentially more difficult because of the number of backups available (hundreds if not thousands), and the fact that store level backups back then would have only been cataloged at the store level, not the mailbox or message level.

    I can expand further on this, but the point is that more than likely, this is not some big conspiracy. Its just that difficult to recover those emails.
    Last edited by SouthernDemocrat; 02-22-09 at 11:18 PM.
    "You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)

  6. #36
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,401

    Re: Obama administration tries to kill e-mail case

    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernDemocrat View Post
    Ok, let me expand on this one. Since this is what I do for a living.

    To the best of my knowledge, the Whitehouse is on Exchange and has been for some time.

    When Bush took office, they probably were on Exchange 5.5. They probably upgraded to Exchange 2000 around 2002 or so. They would have then upgraded to Exchange 2003 around 2004 or so, and they are probably now on Exchange 2007.

    It looks like they went to an email archiving system in 2005. Probably went with Symantec Enterprise Vault or possibly EMC EmailExxtender. At that point, their IT staff would have imported all pst files stored locally into the archiving system and the contents of the message stores. So there is no reason at all they should not have anything from that timeframe forward.

    However, in the timeframe from 2001 to 2005, older emails could very easily be on tape. Well, the problem there is that in that time frame they probably switched tape formats twice, and possibly backup vendors. So recovering them would be very difficult just because of that. It doesn’t stop there though because you cant just restore say a Exchange 5.5 message store to the current Exchange 2007 server. First you would have to build out a temporary exchange 5.5 environment / domain, and recover the stores to it, then see what you had. This is exponentially more difficult because of the number of backups available (hundreds if not thousands), and the fact that store level backups back then would have only been cataloged at the store level, not the mailbox or message level.

    I can expand further on this, but the point is that more than likely, this is not some big conspiracy. Its just that difficult to recover those emails.


    +1.........
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  7. #37
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:10 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,935

    Re: Obama administration tries to kill e-mail case

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    The one you can't get yourself out of? Clinton also had an email problem.
    Did you say "email" or "female" problem?
    It's nothing more than X's and O's.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •