FBI, DHS release report on Russia hacking

[Cow Poke]

Uhh, Duh?

He's participating. Incidentally, if you actually read the post I wasn't banning them.

Then why did you subsequently report me for posting in the thread after you banned me? Did you ban me, or not?

I was asking them to hold off until I had a chance to talk to them later that night.

No, not what you said.... you said "CP and Bill, please leave the thread until I make a reply to the both of you via pm later about why you're off topic. Don't reply to this." Nothing there about "later that night". You act like you can make up rules as you go along, and we're just supposed to comply.

At which point, SIX MINUTES LATER, Cow Poke made a post where he deceptively edited my reply to read only the text I've bolded.

No. Nothing deceptive about it. I used the quote function which includes the hyperlink so anybody could go back and see the full quote, along with the context. What's deceptive is you claiming you told us you'd respond "later that night" -- that is not what you said.

And, please note - if you ban somebody from a thread, then continue to address them or talk about them, they have a right to come back and respond.


ETA: By the way, in my actual partial quote, using the quote function, I even added the "..." to show anybody with a brain that there was more to the quote.

[elam]

For now I've abandoned the dribble in the press about the hacks and since I awoke until now I've been reading through the professional blogs of the cyber security world. Just came across a blog quoting someone and the penny has finally dropped. In the last couple of years there have been far more serious hacks particularly by China & North Korea and Obama quietly addressed these through diplomatic channels. So whats different with the Russian hack. "They weaponised the information they extracted" is the supposed answer. However, I observe they did not attack America, they didn't even attack a very corrupt personage...all they did was confirm what everybody already knew...seems the real issue is the Democrats got caught out and they are pouting...

[Jaecp]

Then why did you subsequently report me for posting in the thread after you banned me? Did you ban me, or not?



No, not what you said.... you said "CP and Bill, please leave the thread until I make a reply to the both of you via pm later about why you're off topic. Don't reply to this." Nothing there about "later that night". You act like you can make up rules as you go along, and we're just supposed to comply.



No. Nothing deceptive about it. I used the quote function which includes the hyperlink so anybody could go back and see the full quote, along with the context. What's deceptive is you claiming you told us you'd respond "later that night" -- that is not what you said.

And, please note - if you ban somebody from a thread, then continue to address them or talk about them, they have a right to come back and respond.


ETA: By the way, in my actual partial quote, using the quote function, I even added the "..." to show anybody with a brain that there was more to the quote.

You are banned, yes. If you care to know why, pm me

[Cow Poke]

You are banned, yes. If you care to know why, pm me

I Don't really care, as long as you stop the false accusations.

[Mountain Man]

For now I've abandoned the dribble in the press about the hacks and since I awoke until now I've been reading through the professional blogs of the cyber security world. Just came across a blog quoting someone and the penny has finally dropped. In the last couple of years there have been far more serious hacks particularly by China & North Korea and Obama quietly addressed these through diplomatic channels. So whats different with the Russian hack. "They weaponised the information they extracted" is the supposed answer. However, I observe they did not attack America, they didn't even attack a very corrupt personage...all they did was confirm what everybody already knew...seems the real issue is the Democrats got caught out and they are pouting...

It's because Hillary lost, and liberals are throwing a fairly dangerous temper tantrum. The good news is that Putin is smart enough to wait them out until Trump takes office.

[Jaecp]

For now I've abandoned the dribble in the press about the hacks and since I awoke until now I've been reading through the professional blogs of the cyber security world. Just came across a blog quoting someone and the penny has finally dropped. In the last couple of years there have been far more serious hacks particularly by China & North Korea and Obama quietly addressed these through diplomatic channels. So whats different with the Russian hack. "They weaponised the information they extracted" is the supposed answer. However, I observe they did not attack America, they didn't even attack a very corrupt personage...all they did was confirm what everybody already knew...seems the real issue is the Democrats got caught out and they are pouting...

If you're going to reference them, link them.

[ke7ejx]

I Don't really care, as long as you stop the false accusations.

Judging by the report I woke up to, apparently he's not interested.

[Tassman]

The good news is that Putin is smart enough to wait them out until Trump takes office.

...and Putin will have his man in the White House. This is good news, you think?

[MaxVel]

...and Putin will have his man in the White House. This is good news, you think?

It could have been the Saudi's woman - or if not the Saudi's, Russian uranium oligarch's woman, or whoever-can-pay-me-enough's woman. Even if Trump was Putin's puppet, I'd settle for Russia's man over any of those alternatives.

[Tassman]

It could have been the Saudi's woman - or if not the Saudi's, Russian uranium oligarch's woman, or whoever-can-pay-me-enough's woman.

Except that ALL the evidence points to Putin, as acknowledged by 17 US intel agencies (including the FBI and CIA) and is recognised as very probably the case by ALL sides of US politics...with the exception of Trump and his supporters.

Even if Trump was Putin's puppet, I'd settle for Russia's man over any of those alternatives.

Why would a sovereign nation like the USA settle for any puppet-master?

[Jaecp]

Let alone that the claimed evidence for her being compromised is tenuous at best and doesn't rise to the well known connections between the Bush family and the Saudi's and Saudi Arabia's crown prince is surprisingly progressive compared to its current policy base. Compared to the violence of Russia that is actively regressing that's not even a choice. Not that I believe that pay for play thing, but if it was it's just not even close.

[Mountain Man]

...and Putin will have his man in the White House. This is good news, you think?

I'm still not sure why you think Trump is Putin's "man" other than wild and uninformed speculation on your part.

You know who would have been beholden to the Russians? Hillary "Reset Button" Clinton who gave Putin and his gang a sweetheart deal when she transferred 20% of the United State's uranium deposits to Russia in exchange for generous "donations" to the Clinton Foundation.

[Mountain Man]

I notice the "usual suspects" are once again ignoring the fact that no hard evidence has been presented to implicate Russia.

From my earlier post:

Ars Technica

[Bill the Cat]

I notice the "usual suspects" are once again ignoring the fact that no hard evidence has been presented to implicate Russia.

From my earlier post:

Ars Technica

That was the gist of my post. The JAR was in no way controversial or implicating of "Russian techniques".

[Mountain Man]

And yet, Obama is trying to goad the Russians into war while fools like JimL, Tassman and Jaecp cheer him on.