[stratos]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

stratos stratos:

Look at the quote from Bever I have. He says exactly that.

Exactly. Beaver wrote it. No one in the media has. Which one is opinion, and which one is credible?

Thus my request LOL.

This is a side note but I'm kind of going WTF how can we be pissed off of another country trying to influence our election when we, the US, have been doing it for decades hell we even financed a revolution in the late 1800's so what is now Panama could break away from Columbia and thus we could build the canal.

[DrCaleb]

stratos stratos:

This is a side note but I'm kind of going WTF how can we be pissed off of another country trying to influence our election when we, the US, have been doing it for decades hell we even financed a revolution in the late 1800's so what is now Panama could break away from Columbia and thus we could build the canal.

A lot of people have been on your frequency man. Over the last 50 years the US has interfered in so many elections that shaped South America into the CF is it today. Some people think it's ironic the the US would complain that the tables got turned.

[BartSimpson]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

stratos stratos:

This is a side note but I'm kind of going WTF how can we be pissed off of another country trying to influence our election when we, the US, have been doing it for decades hell we even financed a revolution in the late 1800's so what is now Panama could break away from Columbia and thus we could build the canal.

A lot of people have been on your frequency man. Over the last 50 years the US has interfered in so many elections that shaped South America into the CF is it today. Some people think it's ironic the the US would complain that the tables got turned.

That's been my stance from the start.

Most recently Obama openly used US government staff and funds to try to cause Bibi Netanyahu to be ousted from the Israeli PM office.

So if Russia is supposed to face sanctions for Facebook pranks then Obama should be extradited to Israel to face their justice for openly fucking around in the elections of one of our closest allies.

[DrCaleb]

My stance has always been that no country should fart around in the elections of another. Just good manners, to me.

And I'd be supremely pissed if it were Russia doing it. But we still use pen and paper, so that it highly unlikely as far as actual votes goes.

[BeaverFever]

stratos stratos:

$1:

Secondly only your right wing batshit blogs are still in denial of Russian hacking

Please submit any article, that is credible, showing that any US polling station was hacked by the Russians in this past presidential election.

Why? Nobody said any polling station was hacked.

The Democrats were hacked by the Russians.

[BeaverFever]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

stratos stratos:

Look at the quote from Bever I have. He says exactly that.

Exactly. Beaver wrote it. No one in the media has. Which one is opinion, and which one is credible?

Take into account, I'm using the traditional definition of 'hack' as well, not the one the media has redefined it as.

Hang on. I didn't say "exactly that" or anything like that.

[BartSimpson]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

The Democrats were hacked by the Russians.

So says the private firm Crowdstrike which never turned over their alleged evidence to the FBI.

The claim therefore remains unconfirmed.

[BeaverFever]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

The Democrats were hacked by the Russians.

So says the private firm Crowdstrike which never turned over their alleged evidence to the FBI.

The claim therefore remains unconfirmed.

You need to spend more time outside of your denial bunker. It's not just the opinion of one firm, it's the consensus opinion of the public and private security sector

$1:

Russian Hackers Acted to Aid Trump in Election, U.S. Says


They based that conclusion, in part, on another finding — which they say was also reached with high confidence — that the Russians hacked the Republican National Committee’s computer systems in addition to their attacks on Democratic organizations, but did not release whatever information they gleaned from the Republican networks.

$1:

Russian government-linked hackers potentially targeted as many as 21 states' election systems last year, a Homeland Security official warned Congress on Wednesday.

You know people are testifying before congress about it, you might want to brush up on what's going on in the real world from time to time.

[BartSimpson]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

The Democrats were hacked by the Russians.

So says the private firm Crowdstrike which never turned over their alleged evidence to the FBI.

The claim therefore remains unconfirmed.

You need to spend more time outside of your denial bunker. It's not just the opinion of one firm, it's the consensus opinion of the public and private security sector

That 'consensus' was based upon claims that Crowdstrike has partly retracted and the remainder of which are still unconfirmed by anyone outside of Crowdstrike.

http://theduran.com/this-is-the-list-of ... cking-lie/

$1:

As Voice of America – hardly an instrument of Russian propaganda! – reports:

“U.S. cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike has revised and retracted statements it used to buttress claims of Russian hacking during last year’s American presidential election campaign. The shift followed a VOA report that the company misrepresented datapublished by an influential British think tank.”

[stratos]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

stratos stratos:

Look at the quote from Bever I have. He says exactly that.

Exactly. Beaver wrote it. No one in the media has. Which one is opinion, and which one is credible?

Take into account, I'm using the traditional definition of 'hack' as well, not the one the media has redefined it as.

Hang on. I didn't say "exactly that" or anything like that.

Okay I'll admit a mistake on my part here. I truly thought you were referring to hacking of voting districts or some such thing.

Sorry didn't mean any harm by it just a misunderstanding on my part of what you were meaning.

[BeaverFever]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

That 'consensus' was based upon claims that Crowdstrike has partly retracted and the remainder of which are still unconfirmed by anyone outside of Crowdstrike.

http://theduran.com/this-is-the-list-of ... cking-lie/

$1:

As Voice of America – hardly an instrument of Russian propaganda! – reports:

“U.S. cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike has revised and retracted statements it used to buttress claims of Russian hacking during last year’s American presidential election campaign. The shift followed a VOA report that the company misrepresented datapublished by an influential British think tank.”

You may be surprised to learn that The Department of Homeland Security and the many agencies of the US security and intelligence community have their own resources and don't simply base their position on the word of a single private sector firm.

[BeaverFever]

stratos stratos:

Hang on. I didn't say "exactly that" or anything like that.

Okay I'll admit a mistake on my part here. I truly thought you were referring to hacking of voting districts or some such thing.

Sorry didn't mean any harm by it just a misunderstanding on my part of what you were meaning.[/quote]

Peace.

[BartSimpson]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

You may be surprised to learn that The Department of Homeland Security and the many agencies of the US security and intelligence community have their own resources and don't simply base their position on the word of a single private sector firm.

Read this article carefully.

Check the links.

You'll see that Crowdstrike was the sole source of the evidence and that everyone else was 'confident' or that they made 'estimations' which were all based on the Crowdstrike analysis that was NEVER independently confirmed.

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/12/trump- ... -election/

If the DNC had truly been hacked by Russia then the FBI should have been IMMEDIATELY notified of this breach because it directly impacted national security at the domestic level and that's the FBI's purview.

The FBI has NEVER seen these servers.

The analysis from Crowdstrike is therefore unconfirmed.

[N_Fiddledog]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

You need to spend more time outside of your denial bunker. It's not just the opinion of one firm, it's the consensus opinion of the public and private security sector

The latest discovery by Beave's crack team of public/private, consensus opinion, security experts.

[BeaverFever]

Nowhere does it say anything like your post in your link.

Your link says sixteen (16) US agencies issued a joint statement implicating Russia in the hacking. Nowhere does it say they did that just because Crowdstrike told them to.

They've also testified to congress that they've been aware of various Russian cyber campaigns since 2015.