Slashdot Mirror
"Anonymous" Hacks Palin's Private Email
netbuzz writes "'Anonymous,' best known for its jousts with Scientology, has apparently hacked Sarah Palin's private Yahoo email account. Contents, including sample emails, an index, and family photos, have been posted by Wikileaks, which calls them evidence that the GOP vice presidential candidate has improperly used private email to shield government business from public scrutiny." Note that there is no easy way to tell if the material on Wikileaks is genuine or a hoax. Update by J : Genuine.
Why it's real:
Why it's a hoax:
When you use a private account to conduct public business, it really seems just that the account suddenly becomes a public one.
My employer gives me my own e-mail address to use for work and my work and personal e-mails never end up in the wrong account. For anything else to happen would be more than a simple mistake.
She should have been using Hotmail.
I really wish that they would post most of the messages and their contents online. I think it would be very interesting to see the quality (or lack) of thought in her communications with other people. In the one sent sample in the zip file, it seems like she might actually be a little nutty. great.
Guess what? You can't legally imprison government officials either — but they can do it to you... Because they are, uhm, government officials. Get over it.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
... I'll say it again. Palin is Cheney with lipstick. The loyalty fixation, the end justify the means attitude, the secrecy... Can you imagine Cheney as president? That's what we'll get if McCain gets elected and croaks in office.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
There is a reason there called anonymous... that's because they'll never be found. Sarah Palin is a lair and her methods are no different from the rest of the republicans. Democrats do it too but they only are ever after sex, the republicans greedy ways will be there downfall.
I'd rather have some inappropriate fornicators running the government that just don't care instead of the greedy lobbyists that run it now.
Filter the internet LOL!
frankly I agree with them doing it.
Well then, let me be the first to say fuck you for condoning a crime.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Feminists all over the spectrum from Gloria Steinem to Jessica Valenti decry the insulting tokenism of Palin's appointment. In many ways, there could not be a more abhorrent candidate from the point of view of women's rights.
you had me at #!
I'd say that was McCain's entire point in picking Palin. She precisely represents that part of very mainstream American life that the far left, and increasingly the mainstream press and mainstream Democratic party, have been characterizing as extreme, harmful, and stupid. There's a large group of center-left Democats who, while they might not agree much with Palin's politics, see her as a very normal person.
When the press and/or the Democratic party savagly attacks her personal life (and personally, I can't belive they fell for that) those center-left voters think "Wait, what? These guys are tearing into someone just like me. Where has the Dempcratic party gone these days?". This has been an extremely effective tactic on McCains part thus far, but I think voter's attention will shift to the debates soon enough.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Obama is a socialist. I don't want that kind of change. On the other hand McCain isn't any better, just another version of the current administration. So, the choices appear to be keep the poor status quo or make a change toward socialism. It makes me sick. I'm not sure who I'll be voting for, but right now I'm leaning toward "sending a message". If a 3rd party can get a big enough chunk of the vote to send the message that the citizens are sick to death of the current direction with the DHS, loss of privacy, heavy-handed foreign policy, deficit spending, maybe it'll prime the pump for the future and get both parties back to their honest differences.
"terrorism" and "pedophilia" are the root passwords to the Constitution
Seriously, there is a good reason, Romans considered entertainers to be among the lowest class of citizens â" above only prostitutes... They weren't even allowed to serve in the regular army units.
Yet we elected one commander-in-chief 28 years ago, and now his teary-eyed fanbois want to add his head to Mt. Rushmore. So go figure.
Maybe if Palin didn't think this was a partisan witchhunt and that she was going to get a fair shake, she'd be more forthcoming. But the fact is it's Obama-supporting Democrats going after her for political reasons.
And oh, BTW, not everyone agrees that you have a right to see your Governor's or your President's work e-mail. There is the concept of executive privilege, that if people can't give an executive candid advice without seeing it posted in Wikileaks, they won't give it. So, you want Barack Obama or John McCain not to be able to get candid advice from their advisors after the election? You really think your political heroes - FDR, Lincoln, Ron Paul, whoever you worship - didn't say things privately that would make them look bad?
This fear that one's private thoughts and actions will be exposed to the public does not lead to better government. It leads to government officials (and future ones) playing it safe, not "thinking outside the box," not joining controversial groups like the ACLU or the Federalist Society, for fear their e-mails will be subpoenaed in some partisan show trial or Senate confirmation hearing.
I have a friend who I used to have fabulous political and legal talks with. But now he is a federal judge, and will no longer commit such thoughts to e-mail, for fear of having to answer to Joe Biden or Chuck Schumer in some future confirmation hearing. That's who we want running government: dumbed-down, play-it-safe, non-controversial thinkers out there, bland vanilla, risk-adverse, PC types. When we get Bush v. Kerry in an election, don't ask why better people don't run for office.
This is all a larger part of a problem Pat Buchanan has recently pinpointed: The criminalization of politics. Now anything a politico does is suddenly indictable. These activities used to be just rough politics as usual, but now they are criminal. Whether it's Watergate or Iran Contra or Lewinsky or firing US Attorneys or blowing intel on WMD (or did you forget the Cuban Missile Crisis?), all things presidents have always done. Now it's all impeachable or indictable or at least show trialable. And have we really gotten better government for it?
It's funny, Slashdotter's howl when, God forbid, an employer wants to read their work e-mail, test them for drugs, or judge them based on their Facebook page. But God forbid an executive wants some private, candid advice.
Slashdot "libertarians": Small government for me, big government for those I disagree with. -1, I disagree with you
Because rational thinkers know that license is not the same as liberty. We have long understood the concept of "moral hazard," when natural consequences to our actions are artificially avoided. We become dependent upon the privilege of artifice, which cannot provide a coherent view upon the past generations of humanity that did not have such "rights" simply because they did not have the art. These things are not natural to man.
Under the philosophical system of Natural Jurisprudence, we can rightly choose our actions, not the consequences of them. There is indeed a personal choice: the choice to avoid making a fetus in the first place. We well understand the natural biological consequences of sexual intercourse, and the artificial circumvention of those natural phenomenon is the definition of "evil" to the philosopher of Natural Law.
For the casuist with these same underlying principles, a case for abortion could be made under certain circumstances (rape, incest, physical harm), but never as a licentious act.
No theistic religion is necessary to make such an argument.
Yeah, that guy wanted a...
mmmm.. iirc, that guy didnt know what he wanted, who he was or how he got there in the second term, and theres pretty compelling evidence he wasnt all that with it for the latter part of the first!
mind you, it probably isnt too far removed from the way president chaney has run things for the past 8 years.
do i detect a pattern here?
who would be running president mc cain in his twilight years?
While Scientology is indeed a crock... well... I find it amusing that someone from any religion would point that out. Don't people realize by now that every religion looks kind of stupid and insane to those outside the religion?
Sarah Palin does not use Yahoo Mail. Alaska has their own domain name and Sarah Palin was accused of using government email and that email is gov.palin@yahoo.com that anyone could have created instead of governor@alaska.us.gov which looks more like a government email address.
Anonymous got very sloppy on that one, created a fake Yahoo account and fake AOL and other freemail accounts pretending to be her friends and emailing "chain letters" to her. The style of writing of many of those emails looks like The Daily Kos, Kuro5hin, IWETHEY, and other liberal web sites participating in creating fake accounts to do a smear.
I ought to know as I created fake accounts on those liberal web sites and know of others who have done it as well, and then got mad at me for doing it much better than they did. I was Donald Trump and other figures and used them to troll them back when they created fake accounts to troll me and others. I quit doing that, but seems they are doing what I got accused of doing. I have experience in these matters, so I know how to spot fake accounts better than most people.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
So just because "other people are doing it too" a crime is okay ?
Democratic candidates are not going to move further left, the Republicans are not going to move any further right, no matter if you vote for a Pat Buchanan or a Ralph Nader.
Correction: they're not going to move right or left WITHOUT the voting population moving right or left.
Liberals and leftists seem to think that just voting for someone very left every 4 years in the general election is enough to get what they want. Republicans and the right wingers realize it's actually about the time in between elections that matters. They spend the intervening time preaching that evolution is a lie, that abortion is murder, that God wants us to rule the world, living in a country with homosexuals is a sin, and that trickle down economics made everyone millionaires but then democrats spent all our money on eskimo poetry. They push the voters right and slander the left while the left is waiting for the next election, then during the elections they come together to vote for the republican, even if he's not their poster child. They realize that come elections, you have to get your guy elected even if he's not your perfect canidate.
Liberals on the other hand seem to think that putting a sarcastic bumper sticker on your car when things get really bad is all you need to do besides vote to get your ideal government.
When it comes time to vote, some of them wait until the primaries are over, then start paying attention. That the democratic nominee doesn't advocate pot legalization or whatever they believe in makes them say there's no difference between the two canidates, they vote for a 3rd party canidate, and then are upset that their least preferred canidate won.
To some degree that happens to both parties, but party unity is much higher with the right, and the naderites quantifyably handed the election to Bush.
Most americans are actually more liberal than washington, the electoral college scam doesn't help, but it would be a non-issue if the left would realize you can't ignore the issues during the off season and then make up for it with a wasted vote.