Slashdot Mirror

How about managements spawn. That will get you more places than anything else will. Hell, they will hire two at a time to fill those jobs, one the spawn gets paid to do nothing much what so ever and their 'assistant' that does the actual job and gets paid bugger all, only to be fired when they are blamed for the spawns fuck up.

Petitions are as stupid as fuck, seriously, sign those and you screw over your career. To do that stuff you absolutely require the protection of Unions. Unhappy with company policies, secretly get it in writing, forward it to https://wikileaks.org/ and work on finding employment else where. Don't like bad management, catch them breaking the law and report them via https://wikileaks.org/ (whistle blowers are persona non grata in most corrupt democracies, especially the US, thanks, Uncle Tom Obama).

Actually catching and implicating management in prosecutable crimes is a smart career move, if you don't get caught. It creates many vacancies at the top, corrupt management types will drag down those corrupt employees who assisted them ie Wells Fargo, lots of job opportunities created there ;). You could even just send the information anonymously to the applicable three letter agency, so not just FBI but also SEC and even the NSA (get a bunch fired for espionage or treason, alls fair in corrupt corporate politics). Working you way up the corporate ladder is a lot easier if you can knock a few off that ladder on the rungs above you, just make sure they don't drop in your on the way down ;D.

How about managements spawn. That will get you more places than anything else will. Hell, they will hire two at a time to fill those jobs, one the spawn gets paid to do nothing much what so ever and their 'assistant' that does the actual job and gets paid bugger all, only to be fired when they are blamed for the spawns fuck up.

Petitions are as stupid as fuck, seriously, sign those and you screw over your career. To do that stuff you absolutely require the protection of Unions. Unhappy with company policies, secretly get it in writing, forward it to https://wikileaks.org/ and work on finding employment else where. Don't like bad management, catch them breaking the law and report them via https://wikileaks.org/ (whistle blowers are persona non grata in most corrupt democracies, especially the US, thanks, Uncle Tom Obama).

Actually catching and implicating management in prosecutable crimes is a smart career move, if you don't get caught. It creates many vacancies at the top, corrupt management types will drag down those corrupt employees who assisted them ie Wells Fargo, lots of job opportunities created there ;). You could even just send the information anonymously to the applicable three letter agency, so not just FBI but also SEC and even the NSA (get a bunch fired for espionage or treason, alls fair in corrupt corporate politics). Working you way up the corporate ladder is a lot easier if you can knock a few off that ladder on the rungs above you, just make sure they don't drop in your on the way down ;D.

"So instead of repealing the law, how about extending to also apply to Google and Facebook?"

Not going to happen, I'll get to why in a moment... check out the links when you get the time. The brain doesn't see the world as it is, see the science on reasoning:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYmi0DLzBdQ

This is former national security advisor of the united states Zbigniew Brezinski, worried about the political awakening of the masses, the rich and corporations fear the political awakening of the masses of the globe, so see what they really think behind closed doors here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7ZyJw_cHJY

On social media -- social media are connected to intelligence agencies... if you think you are going to get privacy it's all bs and optics for the masses.

Reddit and intelligence agencies

Wikileaks -- Reddit and intelligence agencies

These links will take a while to digest, but if you want to understand what's going on in the world, you owe it to yourself to become informed about the true state of the world.

"Intended as an internal document. Good reading to understand the nature of rich democracies and the fact that the common people are not allowed to play a role."

Crisis of democracy

Crisis of democracy - PDF

http://www.amazon.com/Crisis-D... ">Crisis of democracy - BOOK

Education as ignorance

Education as ignorance

Overthrowing other peoples governments

Overthrowing other peoples governments, the master list

Wikileaks on TTIP/TPP/ETC

Wikileaks

Energy subsidies

https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2015/NEW070215A.htm

Interference in other states when the rich/corporations dont get their way

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mxp_wgFWQo&feature=youtu.be&list=PLKR2GeygdHomOZeVKx3P0fqH58T3VghOj&t=724

Protectionism for the rich and big business by state intervention, radical market interference.

http://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499/

Manufacturing consent:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwU56Rv0OXM

https://vimeo.com/39566117

Manufacturing consent (book)

http://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499/

Testing theories of representative government

https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/files/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf

Democracy Inc

http://www.amazon.com/Democracy-Incorporated-Managed- Inverted-Totalitarianism/dp/069114589X

From war is a racket:

"I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil inter

Equally plausible: Entrope is User #7995631!

...You're so, so, so very late to the party. Google is only allowed to operate in China if it plays by the rules. There's quite a lot of history behind this. Outside of China, Google's moral compass is largely guided by its founders, including Sergey Brin, who grew up in the USSR and has been an outspoken opponent of censorship. Even Julian Assange feels strongly that Google's political objectives align closely with those of the Obama administration, a point backed up in Brin's Wikipedia article, where he's quoted as being concerned, on a geopolitical level, that more countries are following in China's footsteps and want to construct national firewalls.

While there are certainly very reasonable grounds for feeling insecure about the amount of control that large media companies can exert over the availability and visibility of facts and opinions, the example of Google seems to be a particularly benign one, at least for the time being.

That all said, the American outlook of total opposition to censorship is rather abnormal; most functioning democracies have found it either needful or expedient to ban hate speech, including holocaust denial. From the perspective of those other countries, one might say Google is following in the footsteps of other companies that have taken it upon themselves to compensate for deficiencies in American political philosophy, albeit in a greatly diminished capacity. As Twitter has also recently discovered, hate speech contributes negatively to discourse communities.

From Development Tradecraft DOs and DON'Ts:

DO provide a means to completely "uninstall"/"remove" implants, function hooks, injected threads, dropped files, registry keys, services, forked processes, etc whenever possible. Explicitly document (even if the documentation is "There is no uninstall for this ") the procedures, permissions required and side effects of removal.

They want to avoid their toys falling into the wrong hands (i.e. anti-malware companies), so they don't want them sitting around for ever on the targetted machines.

In the leaks you can find for almost all tools and implants that the developers of the tools provide methods to remove and also auto-remove the implant.

For example, Hive: page 4 of this https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/... :
  is the self delete delay (in seconds). Amount of time since last successful beacon or
trigger allowed to pass before self-deletion occurs. If unused, the default value is 60
days in seconds.

There is also an entire section devoted to self-delete, on page 14: 4.1 (S) Self-Delete

LibreOffice Portable DLL Hijack shows a huge wall of DLL loads.

Procmon screenshot of some vulnerable DLL loads:

TL;DR: use dbgcore.dll in \app\libreoffice\program

Do we have a mole?

LibreOffice Portable DLL Hijack shows a huge wall of DLL loads.

Procmon screenshot of some vulnerable DLL loads:

TL;DR: use dbgcore.dll in \app\libreoffice\program

Do we have a mole?

https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
Chrome Portable DLL Hijack

Chromelooks for "DWrite.dll", a system DLL, adjacent to itself (under \app\Chrome-bin) before correctly finding it

This DLL is ideal for hijacking as it only exports one function (at ordinal #1) with the following prototype:

HRESULT DWriteCreateFactory(DWRITE_FACTORY_TYPE, REFIID, IUnknown**)

The DWRITE_FACTORY_TYPE is an enum defined in Dwrite.h, however we cannot #include this header as doing so will declare the function as an extern.

Instead, we can either create a dummy enum with only two values (as the real DWRITE_FACTORY_TYPE only has two options) or simply use a INT variable in its place.

Setup Password-less Access to Another Machine via SSH (hey, I didn't knew the ssh-copy-id command): https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/... ; C Coding Conventions: https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/... ; iptables rule to drop packets randomly: https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...

Setup Password-less Access to Another Machine via SSH (hey, I didn't knew the ssh-copy-id command): https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/... ; C Coding Conventions: https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/... ; iptables rule to drop packets randomly: https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...

Setup Password-less Access to Another Machine via SSH (hey, I didn't knew the ssh-copy-id command): https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/... ; C Coding Conventions: https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/... ; iptables rule to drop packets randomly: https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...

Recently, the CIA lost control of the majority of its hacking arsenal including malware, viruses, trojans, weaponized "zero day" exploits, malware remote control systems and associated documentation. This extraordinary collection, which amounts to more than several hundred million lines of code, gives its possessor the entire hacking capacity of the CIA. The archive appears to have been circulated among former U.S. government hackers and contractors in an unauthorized manner, one of whom has provided WikiLeaks with portions of the archive.

"Year Zero" introduces the scope and direction of the CIA's global covert hacking program, its malware arsenal and dozens of "zero day" weaponized exploits against a wide range of U.S. and European company products, include Apple's iPhone, Google's Android and Microsoft's Windows and even Samsung TVs, which are turned into covert microphones.

Since 2001 the CIA has gained political and budgetary preeminence over the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA). The CIA found itself building not just its now infamous drone fleet, but a very different type of covert, globe-spanning force — its own substantial fleet of hackers. The agency's hacking division freed it from having to disclose its often controversial operations to the NSA (its primary bureaucratic rival) in order to draw on the NSA's hacking capacities.

https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/

Start hunting through these...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...

Cliff notes version: You're screwed.

Start hunting through these...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...

Cliff notes version: You're screwed.

Start hunting through these...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...

Cliff notes version: You're screwed.

Start hunting through these...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...

Cliff notes version: You're screwed.

Start hunting through these...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...

Cliff notes version: You're screwed.

Start hunting through these...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...

Cliff notes version: You're screwed.

Start hunting through these...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...

Cliff notes version: You're screwed.

If your "desktop" machine has been owned enough with a boot sector style spyware/malware

They are owned by UEFI. All of them.

https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...

Operating system, installed programs, processor, encryption, none of it matters.

https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...

https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...

Can someone give us the Cliff Notes on what we need to sudo rm -rf ??? Is it just routers being targeted...?

https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...

https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...

Can someone give us the Cliff Notes on what we need to sudo rm -rf ??? Is it just routers being targeted...?

Wikileaks is one of the few remaining upstanding journalistic organizations.

I'm pretty sure you've come up with your own personal definition of the expectations of journalism in your head to fit a predefined position of the things you support that Wikileaks does...

I won't argue that Wikileaks doesn't have a place or a valid idea of ethics. I argue instead that they are by no means more ethical journalists than other reputable sources, and in fact are among the most blatant ethically dubious journalists in some areas.

It's not hard to find common themes among most international journalism societies. Take this and this for example. After reading those ethical expectations, please explain to me how 10 of 23 news stories at https://wikileaks.org/-News-.html over the past 2 years being devoted to the organization's founder qualifies as unbiased reporting. The leaks themselves, located here, while useful, are consistently either without any context whatsoever, or are given with the same or worse consistent bias and narrative that dozens of other journalism sources are lambasted for.

Again, I'm not saying that Wikileaks and the information it provides does not have a place. I'm saying that you're a fool if you aren't willing to see that it has ethical problems that are every bit as glaring and serious as those of other journalism sources and sometimes worse.

Wikileaks is one of the few remaining upstanding journalistic organizations.

I'm pretty sure you've come up with your own personal definition of the expectations of journalism in your head to fit a predefined position of the things you support that Wikileaks does...

I won't argue that Wikileaks doesn't have a place or a valid idea of ethics. I argue instead that they are by no means more ethical journalists than other reputable sources, and in fact are among the most blatant ethically dubious journalists in some areas.

It's not hard to find common themes among most international journalism societies. Take this and this for example. After reading those ethical expectations, please explain to me how 10 of 23 news stories at https://wikileaks.org/-News-.html over the past 2 years being devoted to the organization's founder qualifies as unbiased reporting. The leaks themselves, located here, while useful, are consistently either without any context whatsoever, or are given with the same or worse consistent bias and narrative that dozens of other journalism sources are lambasted for.

Again, I'm not saying that Wikileaks and the information it provides does not have a place. I'm saying that you're a fool if you aren't willing to see that it has ethical problems that are every bit as glaring and serious as those of other journalism sources and sometimes worse.

From the press release:

UMBRAGE

The CIA's hand crafted hacking techniques pose a problem for the agency. Each technique it has created forms a "fingerprint" that can be used by forensic investigators to attribute multiple different attacks to the same entity.

This is analogous to finding the same distinctive knife wound on multiple separate murder victims. The unique wounding style creates suspicion that a single murderer is responsible. As soon one murder in the set is solved then the other murders also find likely attribution.

The CIA's Remote Devices Branch's UMBRAGE group collects and maintains a substantial library of attack techniques 'stolen' from malware produced in other states including the Russian Federation.

With UMBRAGE and related projects the CIA cannot only increase its total number of attack types but also misdirect attribution by leaving behind the "fingerprints" of the groups that the attack techniques were stolen from.

UMBRAGE components cover keyloggers, password collection, webcam capture, data destruction, persistence, privilege escalation, stealth, anti-virus (PSP) avoidance and survey techniques.

Uh oh. So combine with:

Recently, the CIA lost control of the majority of its hacking arsenal including malware, viruses, trojans, weaponized "zero day" exploits, malware remote control systems and associated documentation. This extraordinary collection, which amounts to more than several hundred million lines of code, gives its possessor the entire hacking capacity of the CIA. The archive appears to have been circulated among former U.S. government hackers and contractors in an unauthorized manner, one of whom has provided WikiLeaks with portions of the archive.

Doesn't that make attributing the source of a hack based on exploit fingerprinting essentially meaningless? If a motivated hacker had access to this trove, and therefore Umbrage, and say they wanted to hack the email server of a US political party, could they not simply leave behind a Russian fingerprint in order to implicate them?

Always seemed strange to me the DNC hackers used a Russian VPN. Isn't the first rule of haxx0ring to be behind 7 proxies? And the last of which sure as shit shouldn't be anywhere near where you really are?

https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...

Reading list

A list of websites I like to check out to stay up to date and get new ideas:

        General
                http://reddit.com/r/netsec along with all the other good subreddits (RE, forensics)
                http://thehackernews.com/
                http://slashdot.org
        Forensics
                http://swiftforensics.com/

Ha, ha, hello CIA friends, I hope you've enjoyed all my ENTIRELY SATIRICAL posts over the years that may have appeared to the slow of wit to be critical of the government and the Agency, but were in fact entirely in jest. I'm sure you had a good chuckle all the times I COMPLETELY IRONICALLY referred to you as lying liars who lie about your lies to bring us into war under war false pretenses...over and over again.

Anywho, keep up the good work, friends!

Slashdot, we get that you have to cycle through your daily Facebook and Uber jones, but do you think maybe the Vault 7 story might just get a little air time here? Teensy weensy amount, maybe? https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/...

Google is in the best position to develop this these days

Google Is Not What It Seems -- by Julian Assange

More the reverse, I look for evidence that something is true. That's how the burden of proof works and some hearsay they've published isn't going to change that. But feel free to jump at every new rumor, there's going to be a steady drip of those for years, FYI.

Is there a single non-anonymous source there? Some random "US official," really? Because unless they have something that can be corroborated, the whole thing is just a rumor. We were told us they had attacks like that planned months ago.

And no, I don't believe them when they tell me things I want to hear, either. It's just a stupid game they play in the press that only fools those who don't know how it works. Read this article for how not to get fooled. And note that the source of that is actually a fairly partisan Democrat.

https://wikileaks.org/clinton-...

> More specifically, if you look back over the case law for this, people generally get prosecuted if:
> A) They get caught lying to the investigators

So what do you call this? Not to mention destroying items under subpoena. Here's the full hearing if you want more context.

> This is why Comey said what he did - cases like Clinton's result in administrative punishment at most, and the worst penalty was loss of clearance and thus job (which didn't apply anymore for her because she was no longer Secretary of State).

There's also the fact that Obama's AG, Loretta Lynch, would have had to prosecute a presidential candidate. It's not like this server was some accidental thing or that she was ignorant of the Presidential Records Act. Here's where I discuss her email with Colin Powell on how to cheat the oversight. The original email is here (click 'view original PDF'). And here's a transcription of it for anyone who hates PDFs. Some typos are in the original, but compare with the PDF if you want to be sure I didn't add any:

C06125520 UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-11013 Doc No. C06125520 Date: 09/08/2016

Re: Question
From: Colin Powell [redacted] [RELEASE IN PART B6]
To: Hillary Clinton hr15@att.blackberry.net B6
Subject: Re: Question

I didn't have a BlackBerry. What I did do was have a personal computer that was hooked up to a private phone line (sounds ancient.) So I could communicate with a wide range of friends directly without it going through the State Department servers. I even used it to do business with some foreign leaders and some of the senior folks in the Department on their personal email accounts. I did the same thing on the road in hotels.

Now, the real issue had to do with PDAs, as we called them a few years ago before BlackBerry became a noun. And the issue was DS would not allow them into the secure spaces, especially up your way. When I asked why not they gave me all kinds of nonsense about how they gave out signals that could be read by spies, etc. Same reason they tried to keep mobile phones out of the suite. I had numerous meetings with them. We even opened one up for them to try to explain to me why it was more dangerous than say, a remote control for one of the many tvs in the suite. Or something embedded in my shoe heel. They never satisfied me and NSA/CIA wouldn't back off. So, we just went about our business and stopped asking. I had an ancient version of a PDA and used it. In general, the suite was so sealed that it is hard to get signals in or out wirelessly.

However, there is a real danger. If it is public that you have a BlackBerry and it is governmend and your are using it, government or not, to do business, it may become an official record and subject to the law. Readingi about the President's BB rules this morning, it sounds like it won't be as useful as it used to be. Be very careful. I got around it all by not saaying much and not using systems that captured the data.

You will find DS driving you crazy if you let them. They had Maddy tied up in knots. I refused to let them live in my house or build a place on my property. They found an empty garage half a block away. On weekends, I drove my beloved cars around town without them following me. I promised I would have a phone and not be gone more than an hour or two at Tysons or the hardware store. They hated it and asked me to sign a letter relieving them of responsibility if I got whacked while doing that. I gladly did. Spontaneity was

It depends if George Soros funds the protests or not.

George Soros (Hillarys primary financer) instructing Hillary on what policies to carry out as Secretary of State:

https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/28972

https://i.sli.mg/64gA6D.png

Top contributors for Hillary Clinton page:

https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/contrib.php?cycle=2016&id=N00000019&type=f

Soros admits creating the European migrant crisis:

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/11/02/soros-admits-involvement-in-migrant-crisis-national-borders-are-the-obstacle/

Soros tells Europe to take in at least a MILLION refugees every year:

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/616541/European-Union-Migrants-Refugees-George-Soros-Hungary-Viktor-Orban-Europe

Soros finances Handbooks to spur EU-bound immigration:

http://news.sky.com/story/1551853/sky-finds-handbook-for-eu-bound-migrants

Soros urges giving Ukraine $50 billion of aid to foil Russia:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crisis-soros-idUSKBN0KH0NQ20150108

Hacked emails expose George Soros as Ukraine puppet-master:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-06-01/hacked-emails-expose-george-soros-ukraine-puppet-master

George Soros funds Ferguson Black Lives Matter protests:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/14/george-soros-funds-ferguson-protests-hopes-to-spur/?page=all

Soros funds paid "protestors" to spur civil unrest:

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Ferguson-Missouri-paid-protesters/2015/05/25/id/646587/

Soros funds MoveOn and Media Matters:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Matters_for_America#Funding

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MoveOn.org#Financial_contributors

Soros funds Black Lives Matter:

http://www.redstate.com/streiff/2015/11/13/anti-american-left-funds-blacklivesmatter-now/

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/14/george-soros-funds-ferguson-protests-hopes-to-spur/?page=all

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/may/19/hired-black-lives-matter-protesters-start-cutthech/

Globalists Unite: Hillary Clinton Running Mate Tim Kaine Dines with George Soros Son as Donald Trumps Rise Terrifies World Elite:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/08/12/globalists-unite-hillary-clinton-running-mate-tim-k

Again, no. Concern trolling is defined by the intent to disrupt the discourse by falsely representing one's motivations

Again, yes. Concern trolling is pretending to be supportive or sympathetic to a person or cause, but you just have these concerns about how they are doing it. The more baseless the concern, the bigger the concern troll.

And your failure to address the substance of a literally a single one of the points I made shows just how empty your argument is.

You haven't made a single point, just repeated the same old FUD and character assassination on Assange without bothering to back it up, while ignoring the central flaw in your premise:

Wikileaks is in the publishing business, not the hacking business. If you want them to publish something, go hack something.

Wikileaks is in the publishing business, not the hacking business. If you want them to publish something, go hack something.

Wikileaks is in the publishing business, not the hacking business. If you want them to publish something, go hack something.

Wikileaks is in the publishing business, not the hacking business. If you want them to publish something, go hack something.

Sunk in yet? Assange can only put out what he's been given, and they have published hundreds of thousands of documents on Russia in the past. If you have such a hard on for Pootie Poot's emails or Trump's tax records, go find a Starbucks with WiFi and get to work.

Manning was just a show-off trying to data-dump anything she could get her hands on without a greater purpose in mind. She did it because she could, not because she had any morale compass.

According to Manning in her final statements:

I believe that if the general public, especially the American public, had access to the information contained within the CIDNE-I and CIDNE-A tables, this could spark a domestic debate on the role of the military and our foreign policy in general as [missed word] as it related to Iraq and Afghanistan.

I also believed the detailed analysis of the data over a long period of time by different sectors of society might cause society to reevaluate the need or even the desire to even to engage in counterterrorism and counterinsurgency operations that ignore the complex dynamics of the people living in the effected environment every day.

When someone claims a purpose that matches his actions it seems wrong to claim they didn't have a purpose. Manning's leaks were what actually took the troops out of Iraq, when their government was forced to threaten taking American criminals to international court. Stratfor leaks relating to Syria show that officials believed the public would not support air attack without media attention to a massacre. Obama bombarded Libya without congressional approval.
She not only had a purpose, but she actually achieved it.

manning is a traitor. HE will always be viewed as such.

Snowden too.

By stupid rednecks, sure. The type of people who think (ok, that's a legal fiction) that they are right not because of their actions, but by default. The type who "thinks" that there is a finite supply of bad people in the world, and that we can solve all our problems by killing or incarcerating them, never mind the collateral damage. The type who may have heard of human rights, but does not understand that they apply to all humans, even those that disagree with them.

I'm not a big fan of Assange, but he wrote an excellent statement on the Manning case, quoting John Adams: "“Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people, who have a right and a desire to know.” He does not quote the second part, but I find it just as applicable: "...but besides this, they have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge, I mean of the characters and conduct of their rulers."

If you look at how Manning was treated both pre- and post-trial, its "as incontrovertible as geometry to any enlightened community of minds" that the people responsible for that treatment are guilty of severe crimes under both national and international laws - regardless of what Manning had done. But, as the presidential election has shown, "this community is an insult to the world" (to steal from Henry Drummond/Spencer Tracy), and so the chance for actual justice is remote.

You forgot about the WaPo party which shows us how the DNC lawyers forbade them to add the Washington Post's party to their donor price sheet, so they instead arrange to have the WaPo let them add people to the party invite list with a wink and a nod.

But I'm not surprised. Google buries it quite far down in the searches unless you go after it specifically.

Yeah, it's completely hilarious to see people falling for this one.

I just wonder if they're actually going to fall for the next one?

With as many so-called "nerd virgins" as they employ, you'd think they'd be more careful about going on MSNBC to complain about "childless single men who masturbate to anime."

You know Clinton was the fracking candidate, right? (it's in the attachment of the email).

From an article about the subject:

In one excerpt of a speech to Deutsche Bank in April 2013, according to the document, Clinton boasted about the federal government’s support for fracking and her own work to promote the process across the globe.

“Fracking was developed at the Department of Energy,” the document shows Clinton saying. “I mean, the whole idea of how fracking came to be available in the marketplace is because of research done by our government. And I've promoted fracking in other places around the world.”

In another excerpt of the same speech, Clinton outlines why she supports a continued push for fracking.

“The ability to extract both gas and oil from previously used places that didn't seem to have much more to offer, but now the technology gives us the chance to go in and recover oil and gas,” the document shows her saying. “Or with the new technology known as fracking, we are truly on a path -- and it's not just United States; it's all of North America -- that will be net energy exporters assuming we do it right."

I don't mean, in any way, that Trump might be good for the environment. Just that he probably isn't going to be worst (frackingwise) than Hillary would have been.

The problem is that you are implying I said or believed a lot of things I never did believe. I can only speak for myself, but I don't know a single person who ever read the Macedonian clickbait sites. They make money by being clicked on, not by being believed. Take this very Slashdot story for an example. I certainly clicked on it, but I find it a lot more likely that it's an Airbus 330 on a normal flight path than a UFO. So the only thing that might be proven is that they got a lot of clicks. And they did a shoddy job even of presenting that. Where are the Google trends showing the sites gaining in interest over the election? The Alexa rankings? You know, all the normal things that anyone who knows anything about SEO would even look at? Worse, all the news stories just cite other news stories saying things and add nothing new. Seems to me like they're worried about the Macedonians muscling in on their territory. Just cite this one story that uses the other dozen stories as evidence! Primary sources? Who the hell needs those when I can just link to someone who agrees with me?

Regarding PizzaGate, I mostly wrote about Podesta, not Alefantis and the worst I accused any of them was of having iffy taste in art. Every statement I made was an opinion based on fully disclosed facts.

See, I believe in primary sources, not this second hand media laundry crap. And there are poorly explained things in the Podesta emails--who here thinks that it's normal for handkercheifs to have pizza-related maps? Or to ask whether you'd play dominoes better on pizza or pasta? That kind of stuff made people think they were talking in code words, so they went to Urban Dictionary and similar sites and a number of the oddly used words lined up with pedo slang. That doesn't make anyone a pedo, mind you, but that's how that got started. Oh, it's also true that it was later found that Podesta did not attend that one particular spirit cooking event when another email about it was discovered. But that's Podesta. I haven't written much of anything about Alefantis at all, other than to say that the jimmycommet instagram (NSFW) had some strange pictures on it before it got removed.

However, I have never said anyone there was a pedophile, I disclosed and linked the relevant emails and other facts that formed my opinions, and I never encouraged or supported any kind of violence. And I do condemn every idiot with a gun. Whether it's the idiot who searches a pizza place with a gun, or the idiot who murders a Russian diplomat.

So in sum, I believe evidence, not "news" sources. Especially given what passes for an investigation these days. I can and will point you to the specific facts I used to form my opinions. If you want to change that, present new facts.

Look at primary sources, not media BS. Then see how many I have and how many you have. No, I do not believe things because some knob with a journalism degree spent 10 minutes summarizing something and found another journalist who agrees with him to link to.

So give me your facts, not your opinions, if you want me to believe you. You gave me articles that link to other articles that contain a scant few facts other than the names of a few clickbait sites and no method of corroborating any of them. I gave you the damn flight number and all the information about where this happened and a way to look up that particular flight's route.

See the difference here?

The problem is that you are implying I said or believed a lot of things I never did believe. I can only speak for myself, but I don't know a single person who ever read the Macedonian clickbait sites. They make money by being clicked on, not by being believed. Take this very Slashdot story for an example. I certainly clicked on it, but I find it a lot more likely that it's an Airbus 330 on a normal flight path than a UFO. So the only thing that might be proven is that they got a lot of clicks. And they did a shoddy job even of presenting that. Where are the Google trends showing the sites gaining in interest over the election? The Alexa rankings? You know, all the normal things that anyone who knows anything about SEO would even look at? Worse, all the news stories just cite other news stories saying things and add nothing new. Seems to me like they're worried about the Macedonians muscling in on their territory. Just cite this one story that uses the other dozen stories as evidence! Primary sources? Who the hell needs those when I can just link to someone who agrees with me?

Regarding PizzaGate, I mostly wrote about Podesta, not Alefantis and the worst I accused any of them was of having iffy taste in art. Every statement I made was an opinion based on fully disclosed facts.

See, I believe in primary sources, not this second hand media laundry crap. And there are poorly explained things in the Podesta emails--who here thinks that it's normal for handkercheifs to have pizza-related maps? Or to ask whether you'd play dominoes better on pizza or pasta? That kind of stuff made people think they were talking in code words, so they went to Urban Dictionary and similar sites and a number of the oddly used words lined up with pedo slang. That doesn't make anyone a pedo, mind you, but that's how that got started. Oh, it's also true that it was later found that Podesta did not attend that one particular spirit cooking event when another email about it was discovered. But that's Podesta. I haven't written much of anything about Alefantis at all, other than to say that the jimmycommet instagram (NSFW) had some strange pictures on it before it got removed.

However, I have never said anyone there was a pedophile, I disclosed and linked the relevant emails and other facts that formed my opinions, and I never encouraged or supported any kind of violence. And I do condemn every idiot with a gun. Whether it's the idiot who searches a pizza place with a gun, or the idiot who murders a Russian diplomat.

So in sum, I believe evidence, not "news" sources. Especially given what passes for an investigation these days. I can and will point you to the specific facts I used to form my opinions. If you want to change that, present new facts.

Look at primary sources, not media BS. Then see how many I have and how many you have. No, I do not believe things because some knob with a journalism degree spent 10 minutes summarizing something and found another journalist who agrees with him to link to.

So give me your facts, not your opinions, if you want me to believe you. You gave me articles that link to other articles that contain a scant few facts other than the names of a few clickbait sites and no method of corroborating any of them. I gave you the damn flight number and all the information about where this happened and a way to look up that particular flight's route.

See the difference here?

This whole thing is just laughable. We've gone over the technical evidence and it's really bad. But they do nothing to justify their other random conclusions.

So we now have the idiot Left telling us we can trust Clapper & co. based on secret evidence that Russia might have... online trolls? Oh, but never mind Correct the Record's self-described "nerd virgins." Or is it because Julian didn't refuse Russian interviews, never mind that he's been doing lots of interviews with many outlets for many years now? The whole report is simply moronic. It's not even a good effort. It's aimed at people who just read headlines from media who rarely ever link to one lest you find all the ways they're lying.

But in the report, we obviously don't care about all the money funneled by Saudi Arabia & Qatar to the Clinton Foundation. No, that would never influence a candidate. And it's not like those states have anything to do with funding Islamic terrorists, like that guy who murdered a Russian diplomat. Yes, we're very confused as to why one of the "moderate" Islamic terrorists Hillary & co. were supporting in Syria would be a callous murderer.

Please do keep on informing us so well, media. We clearly haven't figured out how to research things ourselves from primary sources. Please do keep telling us about how we get all our info from idiot Macedonian clickbait sites we've never even seen before. It's really convincing when we can read your own damn emails on our own and find out about Glen "because I have become a hack" Thrush and the WaPo party and Donna "I get the questions in advance" Brazille. Good thing I don't watch CNN, or I'd think that it was illegal to read Wikileaks. I'm guessing Cuomo is as good at law as he was at math.

This whole thing is just laughable. We've gone over the technical evidence and it's really bad. But they do nothing to justify their other random conclusions.

So we now have the idiot Left telling us we can trust Clapper & co. based on secret evidence that Russia might have... online trolls? Oh, but never mind Correct the Record's self-described "nerd virgins." Or is it because Julian didn't refuse Russian interviews, never mind that he's been doing lots of interviews with many outlets for many years now? The whole report is simply moronic. It's not even a good effort. It's aimed at people who just read headlines from media who rarely ever link to one lest you find all the ways they're lying.

But in the report, we obviously don't care about all the money funneled by Saudi Arabia & Qatar to the Clinton Foundation. No, that would never influence a candidate. And it's not like those states have anything to do with funding Islamic terrorists, like that guy who murdered a Russian diplomat. Yes, we're very confused as to why one of the "moderate" Islamic terrorists Hillary & co. were supporting in Syria would be a callous murderer.

Please do keep on informing us so well, media. We clearly haven't figured out how to research things ourselves from primary sources. Please do keep telling us about how we get all our info from idiot Macedonian clickbait sites we've never even seen before. It's really convincing when we can read your own damn emails on our own and find out about Glen "because I have become a hack" Thrush and the WaPo party and Donna "I get the questions in advance" Brazille. Good thing I don't watch CNN, or I'd think that it was illegal to read Wikileaks. I'm guessing Cuomo is as good at law as he was at math.

This whole thing is just laughable. We've gone over the technical evidence and it's really bad. But they do nothing to justify their other random conclusions.

So we now have the idiot Left telling us we can trust Clapper & co. based on secret evidence that Russia might have... online trolls? Oh, but never mind Correct the Record's self-described "nerd virgins." Or is it because Julian didn't refuse Russian interviews, never mind that he's been doing lots of interviews with many outlets for many years now? The whole report is simply moronic. It's not even a good effort. It's aimed at people who just read headlines from media who rarely ever link to one lest you find all the ways they're lying.

But in the report, we obviously don't care about all the money funneled by Saudi Arabia & Qatar to the Clinton Foundation. No, that would never influence a candidate. And it's not like those states have anything to do with funding Islamic terrorists, like that guy who murdered a Russian diplomat. Yes, we're very confused as to why one of the "moderate" Islamic terrorists Hillary & co. were supporting in Syria would be a callous murderer.

Please do keep on informing us so well, media. We clearly haven't figured out how to research things ourselves from primary sources. Please do keep telling us about how we get all our info from idiot Macedonian clickbait sites we've never even seen before. It's really convincing when we can read your own damn emails on our own and find out about Glen "because I have become a hack" Thrush and the WaPo party and Donna "I get the questions in advance" Brazille. Good thing I don't watch CNN, or I'd think that it was illegal to read Wikileaks. I'm guessing Cuomo is as good at law as he was at math.

This shit got +5? That is Slashdot's lowest. Russia didn't destroy Iraq, or plan and give tactical, military and financial support for the destruction of Libya and Syria. The USA did.

And if people have doubts on Libya and Syria, remember the we came, we saw, he died interview, the DIA 2012 report and the Syria insight stolen memo.
Because people are lazy I'll quote, yet again, from the memo:

they said without saying that SOF teams (presumably from US, UK, France, Jordan, Turkey) are already on the ground focused on recce missions and training opposition forces. One Air Force intel guy (US) said very carefully that there isn't much of a Free Syrian Army to train right now anyway

So there were no rebels to train, but they were there and training them anyway.

the idea 'hypothetically' is to commit guerrilla attacks, assassination campaigns, try to break the back of the Alawite forces, elicit collapse from within

They dont believe air intervention would happen unless there was enough media attention on a massacre, like the Ghadafi move against Benghazi. They think the US would have a high tolerance for killings as long as it doesn't reach that very public stage.

> Really? When you receive a phishing email saying "click here to reset your Gmail password", your first thought is "OMG the Russians are in my network!"? Really? What the hell does "tips them off to the fact that you're in their network" even mean in this case - he gave them his GMAIL password.

You're confusing leaks, which is just sad because I wrote a guide to help people keep the three different leaks clear. This report is related to the DNC leaks which alleged the presence of RATs, etc. being found after an investigation caused by the emails being leaked to Wikileaks. Podesta was phished in a completely separate incident.

Those are two completely separate items, and there were reports of phishing leading to a malware download in some of the reports on the DNC leak, which is the incident I was talking about. I can see why you conflated that with the more famous phishing in the Podesta dump. It's really easy to conflate all this information (by design).

Ironically, even if we go to just the Podesta dump, the actual phishing email specifically claimed that Podesta should worry about Ukrainian hackers from 134.249.139.239. Quoting from the thread in relevant part:

> Someone just used your password to try to sign in to your Google Account
> john.podesta@gmail.com.
>
> Details:
> Saturday, 19 March, 8:34:30 UTC
> IP Address: 134.249.139.239
> Location: Ukraine

(emphasis added)

You're also confused here:

> Due to an unfortunate typo by Charles Delavan

It's more than just a "typo" and we covered that on Slashdot when it came up (including yours truly). He also told him to do a password reset--something completely unnecessary for a fake attack. This also ignores the words of Sara Latham in that thread saying: "The gmail one is REAL" This was discussed extensively in the Slashdot story's comments.

Hackers don't normally want a target to realize they're hacked at all. And they were surely tipped off by these sloppy, noisy attacks. Podesta also had other passwords in his email that got used, including someone from 4chan messing with his Twitter account. They're probably sloppy enough to reuse passwords if they fall for this, too. Usually once they own your email they do password resets and leverage the access against other systems.

> Oh I see, you're an uber fan rooting against the other team.

I'm independent. Go check my Slashdot history for me supporting Obama back in 2008 if you like. I'm more than happy to give Colin Powell (and other Republicans, including that member of Trump's staff) their share of blame for bad OPSEC, too, as can be seen from my Slashdot history. I discussed that back here along with the entire email where Hillary & Colin discuss how to break every rule of operational security and worm their ways around the Presidential Records Act in ways that would make Nixon jealous.

Inasmuch as I am partisan, it's because I hate lying.

I hated it when Bush lied. I hate when Hillary & co. lie. Watching Obama trying to sabotage Israel and keep us from working with Russia to crush Isis murderers in Syria is perhaps the most disappointed I've been with him in his entire tenure. When Islamic militants are murdering Russian diplomats, not to mention this other murder by Isis, you have to quest

Don't worry, I covered Saudi Arabia & Qatar's influence in a comment up here with links to some of the relevant emails.

If anyone wants bonus points, start reading the bylines of all these stories and compare them to the reporters who were working for the DNC, coordinating messaging with them, having their articles reviewed and approved, etc. and feel free to tag the relevant authors as #fakenews on Twitter with a link back to Wikileaks.

I suggest starting with Glenn "I have become a hack" Thrush.

> I am really appalled at how many people don't take the Russian interference seriously and blame it on some kind of Democrat/Obama conspiracy.

Even if we believe the claims being made without any real evidence, at worst they're alleged to have revealed the truth to us, the same way the Pentagon Papers did a generation back. Remember, for all the talk of "election" hacks, there have been no credible allegations that any voting machines were tampered with by anyone.

Inasmuch as we are to worry about foreign influence on our elections, why is there no concern over the funding of Clinton by Saudi Arabia and Qatar, places with a terrible human rights record where abuses like modern day slavery can still be found? Places that fund terrorists like ISIS? You know, the people who do this sort of thing? (NSFW - graphic content)

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-...
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-...
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-...
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-...

If you're having trouble making out the context, look here for a more digestable form.

I dunno about you, but I'd rather temporarily work with Russia and take out ISIS than to attempt the reverse.

Your links about Russia basically say that they might be trying to fund people they agree with--so if you don't think the above is also harmful, that's literally hypocritical. I'd personally take a more nuanced view that it matters what they have the politicians in question do with that money, whether they follow the relevant laws, etc.

And it's not like elections can be straight up bought. Let's not forget that Hillary spent twice as much as Trump on this election and lost badly where it counted. It's doubly ironic that it's exactly the same kind of loss she suffered to Obama in the DNC primaries in 2008, where he was focused on delegates and she was focused elsewhere as anyone who watched 538's coverage back in 2008 should remember.

> I am really appalled at how many people don't take the Russian interference seriously and blame it on some kind of Democrat/Obama conspiracy.

Even if we believe the claims being made without any real evidence, at worst they're alleged to have revealed the truth to us, the same way the Pentagon Papers did a generation back. Remember, for all the talk of "election" hacks, there have been no credible allegations that any voting machines were tampered with by anyone.

Inasmuch as we are to worry about foreign influence on our elections, why is there no concern over the funding of Clinton by Saudi Arabia and Qatar, places with a terrible human rights record where abuses like modern day slavery can still be found? Places that fund terrorists like ISIS? You know, the people who do this sort of thing? (NSFW - graphic content)

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-...
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-...
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-...
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-...

If you're having trouble making out the context, look here for a more digestable form.

I dunno about you, but I'd rather temporarily work with Russia and take out ISIS than to attempt the reverse.

Your links about Russia basically say that they might be trying to fund people they agree with--so if you don't think the above is also harmful, that's literally hypocritical. I'd personally take a more nuanced view that it matters what they have the politicians in question do with that money, whether they follow the relevant laws, etc.

And it's not like elections can be straight up bought. Let's not forget that Hillary spent twice as much as Trump on this election and lost badly where it counted. It's doubly ironic that it's exactly the same kind of loss she suffered to Obama in the DNC primaries in 2008, where he was focused on delegates and she was focused elsewhere as anyone who watched 538's coverage back in 2008 should remember.