• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Geniuses behind Wikileaks daily dribbles

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

More importantly, they are at war with us.


HE IS ridiculed for his mendacity and ostracised by his peers. He presides over a free-falling currency and a rapidly shrinking economy. International sanctions stop his kleptocratic friends from holidaying in their ill-gotten Mediterranean villas. Judged against the objectives Vladimir Putin purported to set on inheriting Russia’s presidency 15 years ago—prosperity, the rule of law, westward integration—regarding him as a success might seem bleakly comical.

But those are no longer his goals, if they ever really were. Look at the world from his perspective, and Mr Putin is winning. For all his enemies’ machinations, he remains the Kremlin’s undisputed master. He has a throttlehold on Ukraine, a grip this week’s brittle agreement in Minsk has not eased. Domesticating Ukraine through his routine tactics of threats and bribery was his first preference, but the invasion has had side benefits. It has demonstrated the costs of insubordination to Russians; and, since he thinks Ukraine’s government is merely a puppet of the West (the supposed will of its people being, to his ultracynical mind, merely a cover for Western intrigues), the conflict has usefully shown who is boss in Russia’s backyard. Best of all, it has sown discord among Mr Putin’s adversaries: among Europeans, and between them and America.

The EU and NATO are Mr Putin’s ultimate targets. To him, Western institutions and values are more threatening than armies. He wants to halt their spread, corrode them from within and, at least on the West’s fragile periphery, supplant them with his own model of governance. In that model, nation-states trump alliances, states are dominated by elites, and those elites can be bought. Here, too, he has enjoyed some success. From France to Greece to Hungary he is cultivating parties on Europe’s far right and left: anyone who might lobby for Russian interests in the EU, or even help to prise the union apart (see article). The biggest target is NATO’s commitment to mutual self-defence. Discredit that—by, for example, staging a pro-Russian uprising in Estonia or Latvia, which other NATO members decline to help quell—and the alliance crumbles.

Mr Putin’s stranglehold on his own country means he has time and freedom for this campaign. As he has amply demonstrated, he has no qualms about sacrificing Russians’ well-being to satisfy his coterie’s greed or to further his geopolitical schemes. He persecutes those who protest. And in the echo chamber his propaganda creates, the nationalism he peddles as a consolation for domestic woes is flourishing.
Putin?s war on the West | The Economist
 
Russia is our enemy..

Why is that?

They are the only nuclear power that can (and does) threaten us. Has that slipped your mind or are you just too excited about what they are doing for you like Trump is. You do understand that Trump will be in their debt and they would want to be paid if he won. Being on "better terms" with a dictatorship that suppresses it's people, threatens its neighbors and controls it's press means what about us?

I don't like Trump, either, so *meh*. Even if this is true, what will Trump actually be able to do for Russia? Please tell me.

As far as "dictatorship and suppresses its people and controls its press" all I have to say about that is blah, blah, blah. No one cares about that. It's worse in Saudi Arabia and we are super duper BFFs with them and sell them arms to continue war crimes in Yemen. We are NATO freaking allies with Turkey, who is worse on all of those accounts than Russia, and we have to actually go to war to defend their sorry asses, if something happens.

Please, spare me your sanctimonious BS about Russia.
 
So a foreign power hacking private e-mails does not ring any bells about our protections under the Constitution? None of those e-mails are legal as evidence in any court in America. Putin has taken away our rights and you cheer him on. Yes that is an intriguing situation. Perhaps those rights are not as important to you any more.

Foreign governments don't have to follow the constitution of other governments. I'm not sure where you are going with this :confused:

And you're wrong about them being admissible. They wouldn't be admissible if it was out government that did it. If nefarious activities of a non-U.S. government entity brings criminal activity to light then it's definitely something that can be used, or did you miss that the FBI reopened it's investigation into Hillary?
 
Is that a confession? Should I forward your email to the FBI?

Not at all.

Democrats Say WikiLeaks Is a Russian Front, U.S. Intelligence Isn’t So Sure

UPDATE
I left Julian after midnight. He is fit, well, sharp and in good spirits. WikiLeaks never reveals or comments upon its sources, but as I published before a fortnight ago, I can tell you with 100% certainty that it is not any Russian state actor or proxy that gave the Democratic National Committee and Podesta material to WikiLeaks. The claim is nonsense. Journalists are also publishing that these were obtained by “hacking” with no evidence that this was the method used to obtain them.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/arch...eally-upset-foreign-office-security-services/

Craig Murray is a personal friend of Julian.
 
But yet - when put up against the wall and challenged to do so - your impotent to present any smoking gun from the wikileaks dumps.

I guess you're correct. Human language has not evolved enough to develop words that would pieced the shield you live under.

I'm respecting the position you have, and admitting there are no words, facts, or realities that would move you from the reality you've created for yourself.

It's all good.

Have a good day.
 
I guess you're correct. Human language has not evolved enough to develop words that would pieced the shield you live under.

I'm respecting the position you have, and admitting there are no words, facts, or realities that would move you from the reality you've created for yourself.

It's all good.

Have a good day.

You are the one lacking in words to present any evidence or mount any argument. That is your failing - not mine.
 
You are the one lacking in words to present any evidence or mount any argument. That is your failing - not mine.

Come on haymarket, I already wrote that I failed and I explained why. You don't have to pile on. :2wave:
 
:mrgreen:

Every liberal/Hillaryite on DP right nao:

1572549.jpg
 
Is that a confession? Should I forward your email to the FBI?

It's simple how Podesta was hacked.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/pol...hairman-john-podesta-hacked-article-1.2849660
The massive Hillary Clinton campaign email leak appears to have been caused by an inconspicuous email sent to one of the Democratic nominee's top staffers, newly unearthed evidence shows.

A trove of emails released by anti-secrecy site WikiLeaks Friday suggests that Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta received an email on March 19 that appeared to come from a Google tech support account. The email told him that somebody had attempted to sign on to his Gmail account in Ukraine and that he needed to change his password "immediately."

Podesta forwarded the email to his chief of staff, Sara Latham, who in turn forwarded it to the Clinton campaign operations help desk for assistance. Brooklyn-based tech staffer Charles Delavan picked up the request.

"This is a legitimate email. John needs to change his password immediately," Delavan responded. "It is absolutely imperative that this is done ASAP."
Latham forwarded Delavan's response to another staffer, Milia Fisher, who was asked to call Podesta and guide him through the password reset process.
Turns out the "change your password" request was anything but "legitimate."

Nobody knows who the phishing email came from accept that it was from the Ukraine. Russia is a different country. Nobody has been able to prove who hacked his emails. Here is the email from Wikileaks. Wikileaks is so easy to navigate.
https://wikileaks.com/podesta-emails/emailid/34899
 
It's simple how Podesta was hacked.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/pol...hairman-john-podesta-hacked-article-1.2849660


Nobody knows who the phishing email came from accept that it was from the Ukraine. Russia is a different country. Nobody has been able to prove who hacked his emails. Here is the email from Wikileaks. Wikileaks is so easy to navigate.
https://wikileaks.com/podesta-emails/emailid/34899

This is what happens when computer illiterate people get into power and decide to be corrupt. It's actually kind of sad how predictable it all is.
 
This is what happens when computer illiterate people get into power and decide to be corrupt. It's actually kind of sad how predictable it all is.

No ****. He left his phone in a cab. He used the same password for all of his accounts. His email and phone were hacked when he lost his phone. I think that was on the 12th of October, a week or two ago. He even used the password "pa$$word" on windows on his laptop. Who does that? And they talk about cyber security.
 
Undermine the legitimacy of democracy or to undermine the form "our" democracy has taken? Or, is democracy even the point of origin for the motivation? It could be said that it's more of a matter of undermining the government of an antagonistic nation. If we were on better terms with Russia, would this still be happening (assuming it actually is Russia for argument's sake)? I don't think so.

Oh, I am not against making sure that the electoral process is in order and that it as well as politicians are continuously vetted. That does not mean that the method of presentation is not consistent with non linear warfare or the Gerasimov Doctrine.

So yes, we must sort our systems out. And we should do so quickly. But no, I do not think that our democracy is at all broken and certainly not even as damaged as the present sentiment would have so many believe.
 
It's simple how Podesta was hacked.
WikiLeaks dump shows how Clinton chairman John Podesta was hacked - NY Daily News


Nobody knows who the phishing email came from accept that it was from the Ukraine. Russia is a different country. Nobody has been able to prove who hacked his emails. Here is the email from Wikileaks. Wikileaks is so easy to navigate.
https://wikileaks.com/podesta-emails/emailid/34899

Simple is the word and sloppy too. The Russians left many calling cards that revealed their identity. That phishing email came from THEM.

There were other errors, too, including a Russian smile emoji—")))"—and emails to journalists that explicitly associated Guccifer 2.0 with DC Leaks, as the cybersecurity firm ThreatConnect pointed out. But the hackers' gravest mistake involved the emails they'd used to initiate their attack. As part of a so-called spear-phishing campaign, Fancy Bear had emailed thousands of targets around the world. The emails were designed to trick their victims into clicking a link that would install malware or send them to a fake but familiar-looking login site to harvest their passwords. The malicious links were hidden behind short URLs of the sort often used on Twitter.

To manage so many short URLs, Fancy Bear had created an automated system that used a popular link-shortening service called Bitly. The spear-phishing emails worked well—one in seven victims revealed their passwords—but the hackers forgot to set two of their Bitly accounts to "private." As a result, a cybersecurity company called SecureWorks was able to glean information about Fancy Bear's targets. Between October 2015 and May 2016, the hacking group used nine thousand links to attack about four thousand Gmail accounts, including targets in Ukraine, the Baltics, the United States, China, and Iran. Fancy Bear tried to gain access to defense ministries, embassies, and military attachés. The largest group of targets, some 40 percent, were current and former military personnel. Among the group's recent breaches were the German parliament, the Italian military, the Saudi foreign ministry, the email accounts of Philip Breedlove, Colin Powell, and John Podesta—Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman—and, of course, the DNC.

Russia Hackers to Blame for Wikileaks Emails - Proof Vladmir Putin Was Behind the Clinton Email Hack
 
Simple is the word and sloppy too. The Russians left many calling cards that revealed their identity. That phishing email came from THEM.



Russia Hackers to Blame for Wikileaks Emails - Proof Vladmir Putin Was Behind the Clinton Email Hack

The trail they are seeing are trails that they cold see with any hacker, regardless of where they are from. They pass tips and techniques between them. NOBODY has proven that the hackers were Russian. I agree that it is possible and maybe even probable but they haven't proven it.
 
The trail they are seeing are trails that they cold see with any hacker, regardless of where they are from. They pass tips and techniques between them. NOBODY has proven that the hackers were Russian.

LOL You can't read? The proof is as plain as day if you can.
 
Oh, I am not against making sure that the electoral process is in order and that it as well as politicians are continuously vetted. That does not mean that the method of presentation is not consistent with non linear warfare or the Gerasimov Doctrine.

So yes, we must sort our systems out. And we should do so quickly. But no, I do not think that our democracy is at all broken and certainly not even as damaged as the present sentiment would have so many believe.

I don't know how you can witness this election cycle and not acknowledge our system is broken.
 
I don't know how you can witness this election cycle and not acknowledge our system is broken.

I am usually someone that looks for the systemic problem in socio-political or economic solutions. What I have found, however, is that the system is often broken in a totally other area that is causing the problems. What happens is that most and all populists will look for a cause that is close or at least popularly attributable using simplistic notions.
Instead one must dig more deeply and look carefully. In this election for instance, it is obvious that the three or for most successful candidates were embarrassing and worse dangerous each in their own way. But that does not seem to be a problem of the democratic system used, as it was not the system that brought about the final choice. It was the the citizens. That indicates that fiddling with the electoral system is not the place to try for the fix, quick as the thought might come.
 
I am usually someone that looks for the systemic problem in socio-political or economic solutions. What I have found, however, is that the system is often broken in a totally other area that is causing the problems. What happens is that most and all populists will look for a cause that is close or at least popularly attributable using simplistic notions.
Instead one must dig more deeply and look carefully. In this election for instance, it is obvious that the three or for most successful candidates were embarrassing and worse dangerous each in their own way. But that does not seem to be a problem of the democratic system used, as it was not the system that brought about the final choice. It was the the citizens. That indicates that fiddling with the electoral system is not the place to try for the fix, quick as the thought might come.

You're leaving out the systemic problems that exist under the two party system. They get to make up their own rules on who gets to go to the debate. They have so much of a monopoly they get all the money. The news will only give substantial coverage to those who are part of the two clubs. There are many things that have made the democratic system we have not very democratic.
 
Back
Top Bottom