- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 10,033
- Reaction score
- 3,905
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
No, in fact, you didn't. You're now trying to cover up your mistake by faking the evidence and not using the same quote you used earlier. In the earlier quote you included my House of Lords link as well as that one sentence.
Yes, you included a book review and I quoted that book review. You didn't.
We have no treaty in reference to cyber terrorism or cyber attacks? I'm pretty sure both are against international law, which we theoretically uphold.Te difference of course, being that we do not have a legally binding treaty obligating us to do so.
I don't agree with your rules of rumor and innuendo and that's all you have....yes, it does. I don't know how to make that more blatant than block-quoting it for you, unless you want me to break up my discussion in chunks and block-quote the book below each claim?
Of course they did. The hackers were an instrument of foreign policy.
That's as good an excuse as any for not producing evidence when you want to make some money, as Mr Buy-My-Book is trying to do.Did you read that part about necessary ambiguity when discussing Intelligence Community Assessments?
I used your exact quotes as I made comments on them. There was NOTHING THERE showing the Russia government was responsible for the Estonia attack.Richard Clarke spent years trying to convince Administrations of both parties that Al Qaeda was coming, and found himself beating up against a similar wall with the Bush Administration on Cyber. It's not a surprise to me he went public - in his shoes, I would be tempted to do so as well.
But you deny that he even said what I am pointing out to you that he did.
The only thing I left off and didn't comment on was the - also unsupported - suppositions about the Russia mafia and the Russian government. One could accuse us of collusion with our underworld, too, since our government does on occasion hire former criminals as consultants.
I "denied" your assertion that the Russians attacked Estonia because there was no proof of that happening and in all these posts you have failed to produce any.You deny that states use cyber attacks and then go to great length to defend a position that would make it almost irresistibly tempting for them to do so.
I didn't deny that some countries carry on cyber warfare. I said if they did it it was on a small scale (with the exceptions also noted in that same post). If you believe otherwise then produce the evidence of these other not-so-small-scale attacks.
The fact is, we have more proof of Anonymous carrying out attacks against our government than we do another country attacking us.
I dismissed "testimony" - point by point - of supposition and rumor, which is all you supplied.You skip over or dismiss the testimony of those who know the subject far better than you, and to what purpose? Because you don't want to admit that NATO is basically useless for much of 21st Century Warfare?
I asked for proof of your claim that,
"Russia's response was to launch a cyber attack that basically shut down the country",
which referred to the Estonia incident in 2007. All these posts later you still have provided no proof of that claim. You've supplied a whole slew or rumor, suspicion, and innuendo but absolutely no proof at all. Now you're starting to accuse me of things I've never said.