World is Falling Apart Thread (Locked forever)

[ElkinFencer10]

[marurun]

That said, CRT has a point that I made a true statement. Some damaged young person could exploit this for profit.

Maybe once or twice until someone figures out this is going on. Then CPS will make sure it doesn't happen again.

[TSTR]

How, exactly?

[marurun]

Children can be assigned to foster homes and care facilities, and be regularly checked in on. And truth is, if the kid really is doing it repeatedly for a buck, the law probably has a number of recourses. The goal of this particular law is to allow children to be treated like victims, because in most cases they are. More often than not they are being pimped by an adult.

[TSTR]

Word, good point.

[Blu]

Let's put it to bed, right now. Read for yourselves, the declassified report from the intelligence community: https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

Disclaimer: Don't be so quick to dismiss if they can't reveal sources, clandestine operations require discretion as to not threaten lives and careers of those working in the field.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CRTGAMER]

Let's put it to bed, right now. Read for yourselves, the declassified report from the intelligence community: https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

Disclaimer: Don't be so quick to dismiss if they can't reveal sources, clandestine operations require discretion as to not threaten lives and careers of those working in the field.

Okay, so it's classified to prevent the public from knowing anything. The PDF is describing what procedures in the analyzing phase, but no evidence or what happened! Does that mean there was Russian hacking or not? Without any evidence presented in that slug thru read of multiple "assessments", we can all just speculate and continue to argue pointlessly taking each side of the political fence.

WikiLeaks has stated again and again their source are not the Russians. This conflicts accusations of the Russian hack via WikiLeaks! A question of who to believe; hit Russia hard if classified information is true.

However, I look at two very important issues that sadly are not being lambasted by the media or Republicans and Democrats!

1. Clinton's Email was on a private server protecting access via the Public Information Act. The hack though devious, a service provided whoever did do the hack to open Clinton's Emails for the public to read. Evidence that Clinton got advance notice for the debate questions from the DNC and Media giving her an advantage over Sanders. There is also evidence CNN was advised by the Democratic National Committee what questions to ask Trump. This is much more dangerous when the "Freedom Of The Press" Media has attempted to influence the election thru the fixed debate questions!

The Russians did not throw the Primaries vote, the DNC, Media and Clinton did winning unfairly over Sanders!

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/10/us/po ... leaks.html

In January, Donna Brazile, a vice chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, passed on an email from Mr. Sanders’s African-American outreach team about how it was planning to host a Twitter-related event. “Thank you for the heads up on this, Donna,” responded Adrienne Elrod, one of Mrs. Clinton’s campaign aides.

Ms. Brazile, a longtime party operative, later replaced Debbie Wasserman Schultz on an interim basis as D.N.C. chairwoman on the eve of the party’s national convention, a change that came after leaked emails revealed that Democratic officials had conspired to harm Mr. Sanders’s bid for the party’s nomination.

2. Based on the Security Report of the Russian hack, the study of Wikileaks and Russia Government Controlled TV News has been going on for years. There are hacks since 2009 from China and other countries. Obama in his last 30 days finally doing something about Government hacks, but focusing just on Russia. In June 2015 a China Hack of over 20 million people in the U.S. and nothing done back then!

Hacks ignored until Hillary Lost - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-qdutDTOFE

Cyber Attacks on U.S..JPG (68.3 KiB) Viewed 599 times

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/10/us/of ... .html?_r=0

WASHINGTON JULY 9, 2015 — The Obama administration on Thursday revealed that 21.5 million people were swept up in a colossal breach of government computer systems that was far more damaging than initially thought, resulting in the theft of a vast trove of personal information, including Social Security numbers and some fingerprints. Every person given a government background check for the last 15 years was probably affected, the Office of Personnel Management said in announcing the results of a forensic investigation of the episode, whose existence was known but not its sweeping toll.

The agency said hackers stole “sensitive information,” including addresses, health and financial history, and other private details, from 19.7 million people who had been subjected to a government background check, as well as 1.8 million others, including their spouses and friends. The theft was separate from, but related to, a breach revealed last month that compromised the personnel data of 4.2 million federal employees, officials said. Both attacks are believed to have originated in China, although senior administration officials on Thursday declined to pinpoint a perpetrator, except to say that they had indications that the same actor carried out the two hacks.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/ ... s-n2267233

ON KARL, ABC: So when the Chinese hacked OPM in 2015, 21+ million current and former government employees and contractors had their personal data stolen by the Chinese. Why did the White House do nothing publicly in reaction to that hack? Which in some ways, was even more widespread than what we saw here from the Russians?

JOSH EARNEST: These are two cyber incidents that are malicious in nature but materially different.

KARL: 20 million people had their personal data taken... fingerprints, social security numbers, background checks. This was a far-reaching act--

EARNEST: I'm not downplaying the significance of it, I'm just saying that it is different than seeking to interfere in the conduct of a U.S. national election. I can't speak to the steps that have been taken by the United States in response to that Chinese malicious cyber activity--

KARL: But nothing was announced. There was not a single step announced by the White House. '

EARNEST: It is true that there was no public announcement about our response, but I can't speak to what response may have been initiated in private.

KARL: But no diplomats expelled, no compounds shut down, no sanctions imposed, correct? You don't do that stuff secretly.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/

The Democratic National Committee would not allow the FBI to study or see its computer info after it was supposedly hacked by Russia. So how and why are they so sure about hacking if they never even requested an examination of the computer servers? What is going on?

How did NBC get "an exclusive look into the top secret report he (Obama) was presented?" Who gave them this report and why? Politics! I am asking the chairs of the House and Senate committees to investigate top secret intelligence shared with NBC prior to me seeing it.

[Blu]

Thanks for the blatant ignoring of why they cannot release sourcing. If you cannot be bothered to read through the content in the report, don't bother posting in the threat with a poorly delivered argument. The assessments are what you should pay attention to. The assessments and judgments they stated are identical in the classified report, they cannot reveal their sources as to not endanger careers, threaten lives, or tip off how to the Russians. Seems reasonable for me, but clearly you must know better than me. They provide clear examples, including correlations to Guccifer 2.0, RT, and Wikileaks all being tied together. Your argument is null and moot solely by reading through the report from our three intelligence agencies.

Wikileaks has plausible deniability to Russia and vice versa. Guccifer was found to be multiple persons directed by the Kremlin. RT and Wikileaks often went hand in hand together. Why don't you read through the report with a little more scrutiny, and attention to detail, CRT. Thanks. Your dismissiveness is noted, it's hardly a "slug thru" read, it's 25 pages, many of which are bullet statements and findings, with evidence.

It's downright foolhardy and quite honestly, willful ignorance that you believe the President Elect and Assange, instead of three intelligence organizations whom it is the reason of existence to investigate and provide findings when things like this happen.

1. and 2. are baseless and you know it. The media is not meant to protect the public, they are meant to inform the public. That's in the report as a way the Russians had sewn discourse and caused doubt in our institutions. Congrats on falling for the bait.

I do not like the DNC. I do not like the state of establishment democrats or republicans. But to say you value exposing corruption over the sovereignty of our nation, you deserve neither. They are both worthy and necessary goals, but they need to go hand in hand, instead of valuing one when it serves your needs. Perhaps you might understand that point of view from your oath of enlistment or commission. Guess I was incorrect in such an assumption. What does it say again? Defend the Constitution, against all enemies, foreign and domestic?

Russia, having found success in their campaign will continue doing so, since they invest considerable resources into such operations for exact reasons such as what they did in Syria, Ukraine, and now the US.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BogusMeatFactory]

Thanks for the blatant ignoring of why they cannot release sourcing. If you cannot be bothered to read through the content in the report, don't bother posting in the threat with a poorly delivered argument. The assessments are what you should pay attention to. The assessments and judgments they stated are identical in the classified report, they cannot reveal their sources as to not endanger careers, threaten lives, or tip off how to the Russians. Seems reasonable for me, but clearly you must know better than me. They provide clear examples, including correlations to Guccifer 2.0, RT, and Wikileaks all being tied together. Your argument is null and moot solely by reading through the report from our three intelligence agencies.

Wikileaks has plausible deniability to Russia and vice versa. Guccifer was found to be multiple persons directed by the Kremlin. RT and Wikileaks often went hand in hand together. Why don't you read through the report with a little more scrutiny, and attention to detail, CRT. Thanks. Your dismissiveness is noted, it's hardly a "slug thru" read, it's 25 pages, many of which are bullet statements and findings, with evidence.

It's downright foolhardy and quite honestly, willful ignorance that you believe the President Elect and Assange, instead of three intelligence organizations whom it is the reason of existence to investigate and provide findings when things like this happen.

1. and 2. are baseless and you know it. The media is not meant to protect the public, they are meant to inform the public. That's in the report as a way the Russians had sewn discourse and caused doubt in our institutions. Congrats on falling for the bait.

I do not like the DNC. I do not like the state of establishment democrats or republicans. But to say you value exposing corruption over the sovereignty of our nation, you deserve neither. They are both worthy and necessary goals, but they need to go hand in hand, instead of valuing one when it serves your needs. Perhaps you might understand that point of view from your oath of enlistment or commission. Guess I was incorrect in such an assumption. What does it say again? Defend the Constitution, against all enemies, foreign and domestic?

Russia, having found success in their campaign will continue doing so, since they invest considerable resources into such operations for exact reasons such as what they did in Syria, Ukraine, and now the US.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But blu, Donald Trump didn't tweet these findings so they can't be true!

[marurun]

Studies are finding that feelings of racism and hostile sexism correlate more strongly with support for Trump than economic issues. Oh my! Who could have guessed? Using a Vox article simply because it summarizes the studies well.

http://www.vox.com/identities/2017/1/4/ ... nomy-study