• Trump Dismisses Russia Sanctions: ‘Time for Our Country to Move On’
    75 replies, posted
[QUOTE=catbarf;51601303]Congress and the President trust them because the HSCI, SSCI, and President have the security clearance to actually see the evidence you're expecting, and Congress and the President are who make decisions. The public doesn't trust them, never has, and likely never will, because the work they do cannot be verified or often even acknowledged. Get that pseudo-intellectual Machiavelli bullshit out of here. Convincing you isn't their job. You can sit there and praise Putin while calling it baseless accusations all you want. You can say that it's false until Obama and Brennan personally swing by your house and convince you that it's genuine. Doesn't matter one iota either way. It's the task of the intelligence community to inform policymakers so that those policymakers can make informed decisions, not to educate the public. You don't have any idea how this works, do you? The publication was to help the private sector protect against further intrusion, not to convince the world that Russia was behind it by revealing classified sources and methods. That's not going to be revealed until there's a compelling international interest to do so (there isn't) or the mandatory declassification review date hits in 25 or 50 years. [B]Still waiting on any plausible motive for the accusations to be falsified.[/B][/QUOTE] This country even if not a pure democracy is based on democratic foundations... you are basically making the fascist/totalitarian argument here. Legally obama can declare war on canada tomorrow... but that does not change canada did not provoke. The facts are the facts, and the facts are that its unproven that russia did this, so stop claiming it is. Obama was going to be the most transparent president yet, hes clearly not... and this whole propaganda facade is however the transparent thing...
[QUOTE=Blizzerd;51601333]This country even if not a pure democracy is based on democratic foundations... you are basically making the fascist/totalitarian argument here.[/QUOTE] haha what, literally nothing about anything going on in this thread is "fascist" or "totalitarian" in any way. Literally not a single thing. You could argue propaganda, you could argue media manipulation, you can argue all that - but nothing in his post or in this thread has anything to do with totalitarianism or fascism. He said, more or less, that certain people and groups have security clearance to know the sources of the information and the details of the information that the regular populace does not. That's not fascist, that's not totalitarian, that's [I]basic[/I] international security. Stop using actually meaningful words as pejoratives and buzzwords. You're basically pointing a finger and saying "YEAH WELL YOU SOUND LIKE A DIRTY RED COMMIE." That's how meaningless this sentence is.
[QUOTE=.Isak.;51601354]haha what, literally nothing about anything going on in this thread is "fascist" or "totalitarian" in any way. Literally not a single thing. You could argue propaganda, you could argue media manipulation, you can argue all that - but nothing in his post or in this thread has anything to do with totalitarianism or fascism. He said, more or less, that certain people and groups have security clearance to know the sources of the information and the details of the information that the regular populace does not. That's not fascist, that's not totalitarian, that's [I]basic[/I] international security. Stop using actually meaningful words as pejoratives and buzzwords. You're basically pointing a finger and saying "YEAH WELL YOU SOUND LIKE A DIRTY RED COMMIE." That's how meaningless this sentence is.[/QUOTE] leadership does not need to explain why, they have the countries best intent in mind, have information the people dont have and need and therefore the people should follow... its the argument hitlers cabinet used to openly have propaganda officers. thats a fascist argument... thats a totalitarian argument and thats a horrible argument.
[QUOTE]When any politician tells you it’s time to just move on, that’s when you’re getting close, and should keep digging as deep as possible[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Raidyr;51601362]When any politician tells you it’s time to just move on, that’s when you’re getting close, and should keep digging as deep as possible[/QUOTE] bernie saying people have heard enough about those damn emails.
Weird how the President-elect who benefited from the email hack, called the elections rigged against him and the electoral college( from which he was able to win) terrible is telling people to 'move on'
[QUOTE=Blizzerd;51601360]leadership does not need to explain why[/QUOTE] If they want to be re-elected, maybe they do. But for the purpose of day-to-day operations, especially in a sensitive security context, they don't. And if you look at how the government is structured, the more clandestine and secretive an organization is, the less they're controlled by direct democracy, because they obviously cannot be accountable to the general public if they can't reveal information to the public. So again, no, it's not the CIA's or ODNI's job to convince you Russia was behind it. It's their job to inform the President and Congress, and then it's [I]their[/I] job to take appropriate action. At no point is 'personally sit down with Blizzerd and make sure he's fully informed' on the agenda. Now, if you're dissatisfied with your Congressional representatives inadequately justifying their actions, you can certainly vote them out. That's your power as a member of a representative democracy if you feel your leaders are not acting with your best interests at heart. But you don't make the decisions of day-to-day political operations, so you cannot reasonably expect full disclosure of sensitive materials, and the government has no obligation to lay out all that classified evidence for public scrutiny. I am not telling you that El Presidente knows best and that you need to shut up and get back to being a cog in the machine. I am telling you that you are being extremely unreasonable in your expectations, and failing to provide a compelling reason to disbelieve the claims the intelligence community is making. There are times when putting the burden of proof on a positive claim is warranted, but there are also times when there is no apparent reason for the claimant to lie, and outright disbelief requires more of a justification than accepting the claim at face value. This is one of those latter times. Still waiting on any plausible motive for the accusations to be falsified.
[QUOTE=Blizzerd;51601360]leadership does not need to explain why, they have the countries best intent in mind, have information the people dont have and need and therefore the people should follow... its the argument hitlers cabinet used to openly have propaganda officers. thats a fascist argument... thats a totalitarian argument and thats a horrible argument.[/QUOTE] I understand being skeptical about it, I really do, but you do understand why security clearance is a thing and why only certain people have access to the actual information and the sources of the evidence against Russia? Do you understand that, at least? Lindsey Graham, a very prominent [I]Republican[/I] senator, has stated that [URL="http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/27/politics/lindsey-graham-donald-trump-russia/"]Trump is in disagreement with the entire senate consensus on the Russian hacking[/URL], estimating that about 99 of 100 senators agree that Russia was the source of the hacks with the intent to influence the elections. Some, like Graham, are skeptical about whether it actually influenced the election, but there's almost unanimous senate acceptance that Russia hacked the DNC. There's 99 senators, thousands of CIA, FBI, and DHS members, and the senior White House staff who all agree, regardless of political affiliation, that this hack was of Russian origin - all of whom have security clearance to know the [I]source[/I] of the intel and the evidence that comes along with it. Second, to be pedantic, you mean authoritarian. Not fascist. Not totalitarian. They are all different terms. Fascism is a political ideology that extends far beyond "leader can't be wrong" and into "political violence is A-OK." Totalitarianism extends further still, necessarily involving the state in the public and private lives of all citizens, and [I]absolute control[/I] by the state that does not tolerate opposing political parties or dissenting opinions. You're expressing a dissenting opinion. I'm more inclined to believe the panel of experts, you're more inclined to believe ur feelz, that's the only difference. Nothing about "we should believe the president and the intelligence agencies and the entire senate and the consensus of almost everyone who has security clearance regardless of their political affiliation" screams totalitarianism or fascism - it just means we understand that certain pieces of evidence cannot be released to the public. You can't say "we have a mole in GRU who leaked us Russian files that confirmed it," and even if you could, [I]you still wouldn't fucking believe them.[/I]
[QUOTE=Raidyr;51601362][A quote][/QUOTE] Fucker can't tell people that Obama was born in Kenya for years then just walk away from this.
I'm still finding it really hard to trust the US Government on this one. The analysis report didn't really convince me that the adversaries necessarily [I]had[/I] to be Russian, much less directly working for the Russian government. The vast agreement that Isak points out is convincing, but is there a way I can confirm that those listed names, Cozy Bear, Fancy Bear, ATP29/28, and so on, really are undeniably associated with Russian government cyber operations?
How can you believe that the entire Government, including all of the Republicans who have nothing to gain, everything to lose, and have made it their mission to undermine the Democrats at every opportunity, are all lying about this? What do the Republicans have to gain for lying about this, to go against not only their elected president, but to claim something that casts a shadow of doubt on his legitimacy?
[QUOTE=Helix Snake;51601954]How can you believe that the entire Government, including all of the Republicans who have nothing to gain, everything to lose, and have made it their mission to undermine the Democrats at every opportunity, are all lying about this? What do the Republicans have to gain for lying about this, to go against not only their elected president, but to claim something that casts a shadow of doubt on his legitimacy?[/QUOTE] I don't know, but even if it is a lie it doesn't necessarily mean that anyone that believes the lie is in on it. Anyway, .Isak.'s posts in the report thread had the sort of evidence I was looking for. I believe it now, absolutely. [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1547000&p=51601405&viewfull=1#post51601405[/url] [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1547000&p=51601484&viewfull=1#post51601484[/url]
It's like people have never heard of private interests before. The amount of faith in the American government in this thread is astounding.
[QUOTE=Aetna;51602023]It's like people have never heard of private interests before. The amount of faith in the American government in this thread is astounding.[/QUOTE] I don't have faith in the American government at all, mostly because it's a partisan shitshow that's spying on its own citizens. But when there's unilateral consensus between usually-opposed groups, and you see Republicans and Democrats working together, and you have three opposing intelligence agencies working together, and it's backed up by several independent analyses of the hacking tools and methods used, I'm more inclined to believe that than a man who's backed out of 90% of his campaign promises or a politician who rigs elections and worked for the KGB.
Sure, but there's a major lack of information. Until we know more there's no point in passing judgement in either direction.
[QUOTE=Radley;51601332]Ummm [T]http://bazavan.ro/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/boris.jpg [/t][/QUOTE] "The US did a bad thing by fucking with the internal politics of other countries, therefore we should let other people do a bad thing and fuck with our internal politics." "The republicans did a bad thing by spreading lies about the legitimacy of Obama's presidency and devoted themselves to government obstruction for the entirety of his administration, and therefore it's totally fine for the democrats to question the legitimacy of Trump's presidency, and dedicate themselves to obstructing his administration." [editline]30th December 2016[/editline] How many people in this thread don't believe the claims of intelligence agencies and bipartisan collaborators, but do believe project veritas? How many people here believed pizzagate but won't believe this? Logic is dead, reason is dead. [editline]30th December 2016[/editline] I s'pose we should give all the land in the United States back to the natives because it belongs to them, and have a mass exodus back to England. Might as well count up every penny of economic benefit slavery gave us and forcibly remove it from white people and give it to black while we're fatally flagellating ourselves for stupid shit people in our government did in the past. I find it hilarious that right-wingers are so ready to take the spankin' from daddy Putin over things big bad america did THIS TIME, but will absolutely fucking flip their shit whenever the SJWs suggest anything similarly fucked up. "I don't care if one of the least democratic nations on earth, with a government built on cronyism and mafia tactics, with an administration that quite literally [i]poisons[/i] people who get out of line is fucking with our government, because it might've helped get Trump into office and I like that!" I'm sorry if this is coming off as incomprehensible ranting, but goddamn the lack of self awareness is absolutely astounding.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.