Slashdot Mirror


US Says Russia Hacked Energy Grid, Punishes 19 for Meddling (apnews.com)

Associated Press: Pushing back harder on Russia, the Trump administration accused Moscow on Thursday of a concerted hacking operation targeting the U.S. energy grid, aviation systems and other infrastructure, and also imposed sanctions on Russians for alleged interference in the 2016 election. It was the strongest action to date against Russia by the administration, which has long been accused of being too soft on the Kremlin, and the first punishments for election meddling since President Donald Trump took office. The sanctions list included the 13 Russians indicted last month by special counsel Robert Mueller, whose Russia investigation the president has repeatedly sought to discredit. U.S. national security officials said the FBI, Department of Homeland Security and intelligence agencies had determined that Russian intelligence and others were behind a broad range of cyberattacks beginning a year ago that have infiltrated the energy, nuclear, commercial, water, aviation and manufacturing sectors. Further reading: Russian Government Cyber Activity Targeting Energy and Other Critical Infrastructure Sectors (US-Cert); U.S. blames Russia for cyber attacks on energy grid, other sectors (Reuters); U.S. says Russian hackers targeted American energy grid (Politico); Trump administration finally announces Russia sanctions over election meddling (CNN); U.S. sanctions on Russia cite 2016 election interference -- but remain largely symbolic (USA Today); U.S. Sanctions Russians Charged by Mueller for Election Meddling (Bloomberg); and Trump Administration Sanctions Russians for Election Meddling and Cyberattacks (The New York Times).

229 comments

  1. Russia would never! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Ask Donald what Russia would never do, because he's definitely not out golfing!

  2. Picking safe targets by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Seems like they've chosen to sanction people already identified and charged by Mueller, but not anyone close to Putin.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:Picking safe targets by ClickOnThis · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Seems like they've chosen to sanction people already identified and charged by Mueller, but not anyone close to Putin.

      Correct, Mueller's 13 are among the 19 individuals sanctioned. Five organizations also were targeted in the sanctions.

      But note that the administration is acting on an authority granted by Congress last summer, with a congressionally-mandated deadline to act by early February, a month and a half ago. Mueller's indictments occurred after that deadline passed.

      And now Trump acts. To say he was reluctant is putting it mildly.

      https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/15...

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    2. Re:Picking safe targets by tomhath · · Score: 0

      If you believe the collusion conspiracy, those people are some of Putin's closest aides.

    3. Re:Picking safe targets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Isn't that how sanctions work? It's kind of hard to sanction unidentified people and those against whom you have no evidence.

    4. Re:Picking safe targets by ISayWeOnlyToBePolite · · Score: 4, Informative

      If you believe the collusion conspiracy, those people are some of Putin's closest aides.

      The Russians indicted by Mueller are allegedly the ones behind the fake social media posts, not anyone suspected of colluding with the Trump campaign. AFAIK no one believes Putin sent his "closest aides" to work with the Trump campaign but rather the opposite .

    5. Re:Picking safe targets by CaptainDork · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The sanctions just enacted are a response to an event that the administration said did not happen.

      Mixed messages.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    6. Re:Picking safe targets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AFAIK no one believes Putin sent his "closest aides" to work with the Trump campaign but rather the opposite .

      Sure, because nobody could guess who the “Happy 55th Birthday Dear Boss” sign was directed at. Couldn't possibly be Putin's buddy Yevgeny Prigozhin.

    7. Re:Picking safe targets by ISayWeOnlyToBePolite · · Score: 1

      AFAIK no one believes Putin sent his "closest aides" to work with the Trump campaign but rather the opposite .

      Sure, because nobody could guess who the “Happy 55th Birthday Dear Boss” sign was directed at. Couldn't possibly be Putin's buddy Yevgeny Prigozhin.

      Again, that is from the Mueller indictment concerning the fake social media accounts, not anyone suspected of colluding with the Trump campaign.

    8. Re:Picking safe targets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Isn't that how sanctions work? It's kind of hard to sanction unidentified people and those against whom you have no evidence.

      What makes you think The White House had no evidence? They had 6 months to act, after Congress issued a directive on Russia sanctions. And they pissed that time away, and let the deadline slip for six weeks. They're the fucking White House for God's sake. They have resources far beyond Mueller's investigation, to determine who warrants action regarding intervention in the 2016 election.

      And -- surprise -- after the deadline slips, and Mueller indicts 13 Russians, and there are reports of chemical attacks in the UK by Russians, suddenly the White House issues sanctions against 19 Russian nationals, 13 of whom happen to be on Mueller's indictment list? Didn't Trump claim that Mueller's investigation was a witch hunt? And now suddenly Mueller's shit-list becomes part of Trump's?

      We have seen this kind of plagiarism before. For example, the seven (Muslim-majority) countries on Obama-era the visa-restriction list suddenly became the list for complete travel bans under Trump. (Oops, make that six -- don't want to piss off Iraq.) And Melania Trump's speech to the 2016 RNC, almost verbatim-lifted from a speech Michelle Obama gave to the DNC years earlier.

      Over and over, I have wondered whether this administration could go any lower, and over and over, they do.

  3. MAGFO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Make Russia Great For Once

    1. Re:MAGFO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Make Russia Great For Once

      Too hard. Since Putin can't make Russia great, but he'll settle for fucking up the rest of the world, just so Russia doesn't seem so bad in comparison.

      Truth is stranger than fiction; you can't make this shit up. I'll point to https://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=593812851 but I know the Conservitards and Nazis won't be bothered to read or, or if they do, they deny it.

    2. Re:MAGFO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, he is basically a gangster white negro. I skimmed your article, where does it specifically say he's doing what he does so that Russia doesn't seem so bad?

    3. Re:MAGFO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I skimmed your article, where does it specifically say he's doing what he does so that Russia doesn't seem so bad?

      Jeezuz H. Christ. Skimmed? Try a little harder next time!

      BROWDER: Well, basically what Putin is trying to do generally is create so much chaos in the rest of the world that it brings the rest of the world down to him since he's unable to bring Russia up to the levels of us.

      P.S. captcha: motherer

    4. Re:MAGFO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [Putin] is ... basically a gangster white negro.

      A white black?

      Not a black white? Or an Oreo? Which is the bad part there, gangster? White? Black? Or White-Black? Wasn't it enough to call him a gangster? Did black really add anything?

    5. Re:MAGFO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did black really add anything?

      The OP wanted everyone to know that he's a racist.

    6. Re: MAGFO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GTKRWN

    7. Re:MAGFO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm a left-wing euro wimp tard and I believe this is bullshit, the latest story about spy poisoning. Countries's official voices like those of the UK, US, France have no credibility when they blather about "chemical weapons".
      The only good thing to do with a speech from May, Hollande, Macron etc. is to wipe your ass with it. Empty talk of naked emperors is worthless.

      What's deep :

      BROWDER: Well, basically what Putin is trying to do generally is create so much chaos in the rest of the world that it brings the rest of the world down to him since he's unable to bring Russia up to the levels of us. And that's what he's trying to do with all this crazy stuff - poisoning and interference in elections and all this type of things.

      It is US and NATO that have been repeatedly destroying countries, lying all the way through it. It is US policy to prevent the emergence of any competing or independent power. And so, NATO went to war against Libya for no other real reason than to destroy it. That's "regime change" : destruction of the entire state to replace it with, er, what exactly? We don't even care.
      Putin has been saving Syria from total destruction, so.. I hold him in good esteem for that at least. Right now thousands of civilians are being freed, after living for so long under the care of the "good terrorists".

  4. Misplaced priorities by FrankHaynes · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    They're so worried about "hackers" when mismanagement and neglect are much bigger problems. But admitting that makes the powers that be look bad, so we get this crap because it makes them appear to be "doing something".

    A "derecho" blasted through the Washington, DC area (twice) in two different summer seasons and left millions without power after the winds blew down power lines. Who was arrested for that??

    There are numerous older devices that convert serial ports on industrial control systems to TCP/IP in an attempt to modernize them, but with no security or very poor security by today's standards. Some of these are basically sitting on the internet just waiting to get pwned. Who's going to go to jail for this utter stupidity??

    But sure, let's crow about how we rounded up 19 Russians, because...RUSSIANS!!

    --
    slashdot: A failed experiment.
    1. Re:Misplaced priorities by SirSlud · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's a pretty lousy country where you only have one person who can do one thing at a time.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    2. Re:Misplaced priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you figure out a way to control the fucking weather, feel free to stop any storms headed toward DC. Until then, STFU and let people deal with the problems that actually can be dealt with.

    3. Re:Misplaced priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      you can actually place cables underground, mitigating most weather-related risk.

    4. Re:Misplaced priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You can also have your utility bills skyrocket because putting cables underground isn't fucking cheap.

    5. Re:Misplaced priorities by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 4, Informative

      "Targeting" and "attacking" the grid and grid systems is not 'hacking' the grid. It is attempted hacking. The articles talk about targeting , not successful hacks. The headline is misleading, as intended I suppose.

    6. Re:Misplaced priorities by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 2

      Strictly speaking it is not hacking at all, but cracking.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    7. Re:Misplaced priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah therefore it's no big deal! Great deflection!

    8. Re:Misplaced priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't really appreciate the distinction. It's like the distinction between pointing a gun at me and threatening my life. Either one is fucking worrying.

    9. Re: Misplaced priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Say what you like about the USA's third world infrastructure, at least it's cheap.

    10. Re:Misplaced priorities by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 2

      Strictly speaking it is not hacking at all, but cracking.

      Indeed. I wondered why the government was punishing people for diligently solving problems.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    11. Re:Misplaced priorities by lenski · · Score: 1

      Not necessarily, given even a little bit of planning.

      A house we just sold in a nearby suburb (Central Ohio, northwest side) that we had been renting out is in an area where services (electric power, gas, cable, communication) are all underground. The house is not a McMansion, more of a step up from a "starter home" and it's not in a fancy rich neighborhood. Reasonable property taxes too. (The point about reasonable property taxes not directly relevant, but supports the argument that underground service is not the exclusive domain of expensive/wealthy neighborhoods.)

    12. Re:Misplaced priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Underground services are more a function of when the area was developed. It's no doubt cheaper to put services underground before much else is built. Doing it after the fact is likely far more complex and expensive?

      The area I live in was developed in the late 70s and early 80s, everything is underground. In 4 years the power has been off twice and cable down once. Meanwhile every wind storm that blows through this part of the country results in trees down over lines and power outages for many that can last days if its a good one.

    13. Re:Misplaced priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or not even that, but probing.

    14. Re:Misplaced priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is /., clearly you didn't read the article. From TFA:

      U.S. national security officials said the FBI, Department of Homeland Security and intelligence agencies determined Russian intelligence and others were behind a broad range of cyberattacks starting a year ago. Russian hackers infiltrated the networks that run the basic services an Americans rely on each day: nuclear, water and manufacturing facilities like factories.

      The officials said the hackers chose their targets methodically, obtained access to computer systems, conducted “network reconnaissance” and then attempted to cover their tracks by deleting evidence of the intrusions. The U.S. government has helped the industries expel the Russians from all systems known to have been penetrated, but additional breaches could be discovered, said the officials, who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive national security information.

      The officials described Russia’s operation as ongoing.

  5. Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Unfortunately with Putin you have a man who likes to hide behind his nuclear weapons sticking his tongue out breaking all the rules and niceties of international agreements and doing whatever the hell he wants knowing no-one will do anything too bad because he has nukes.

    Obviously, I'm not going to say western countries are perfect, they're far from it; but Putin is dangerous because he doesn't play by the rules and he actively yearns for the good old days when Russia was subjugating many different nations and there was a cold war. Putin, to use a technical term is an immature jackass.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    1. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by iggymanz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Putin is very mature compared to the orange haired buffoon; sad that even an ex-KGB gangster has more statesmanship than who we have.

    2. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by guacamole · · Score: 1, Troll

      USA is the one who broke the international agreements (Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2000s) and possibly even Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (by placing sea-based cruise missile launchers on European soil). USA invaded for no excusable reason Iraq, armed and supported jihadists in Syria, and bombed Libya resulting in civil war that lasts to this day. Much of the middle east is on fire because of the US actions, with hundreds of thousands dead, and millions displaced. But Putin turns out to be actually the bad guy and a jerk.

    3. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Ryanrule · · Score: 2, Funny

      fuck you ivan.

    4. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      fuck you ivan

      Hey, is "ivan" the new term for someone who supplies detailed, easily verifiable facts in a calm manner and by doing so upsets crazed, illiterate, blood-thirsty lunatics drunk on fact-free fantasies and delusions of their own infallibility and grandeur? From the above exchange it surely seems so...

    5. Re: Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that the besr you've got, Buck Rodgers?

    6. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      man who likes to hide behind his nuclear weapons sticking his tongue out breaking all the rules and niceties of international agreements and doing whatever the hell he wants knowing no-one will do anything too bad because he has nukes.

      That description also fits the US presidents of the last 40 years, from both parties. But there's one relevant difference now: Russia is winning and the US is losing, basically in all of the recent geopolitical crises (Ukraine, Syria, Snowden...).
      Ho, ho, ho...

    7. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      /s /Putin /Trump

      It's really amazing how alike they are, in their special ways.

    8. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Comrade, here is your fifty kopeyka!

    9. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its not factual but opinionated.

    10. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Russia has far more to do with arming jihadists in Syria. Seriously, while the U.S. has been no saint in the matter, Russia has been far worse. Supplying chemical weapons is just one example.

      Iraq was a bad play, can't defend poorly planned and misguided attempts at war for the profit of Halliburton among many other defense contractors.

      The middle east is on fire for a whole host of reasons, the U.S. has contributed, Iran has contributed, Russia and Israel have all contributed. There are still more actors involved as well.

    11. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      any fact i don't like is opinion

    12. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Iraq was a bad play. Afghanistan was a bad play. Libya was a bad play ... all at the hands of US intervention

      Syria witnessed the birth of isis using the weapon caches from Libya. That was most definitely because of US intervention. And we won’t even go on about the 500bn worth of weapons sent. Or the 80 Toyotas that the US state department admitted to losing!

      Or Benghazi gate thing didn’t happen? Which one is it? Remember it was that carelessness that later became the mess in Syria. As for Assad and the chemical weapons I say see “exhibit IRAQ”. Or no this time they’re really there?

      Sounds like the tale of little red riding hood if you ask me lol. But in all honesty Russia, US (and China) when are people going to learn that their Govts (not the people) are as bad as each other. In the case of China they’re worse because they eat dogs (just sayin).

    13. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately with Putin you have a man who likes to hide behind his nuclear weapons sticking his tongue out breaking all the rules and niceties of international agreements and doing whatever the hell he wants knowing no-one will do anything too bad because he has nukes.

      Obviously, I'm not going to say western countries are perfect, they're far from it; but Putin is dangerous because he doesn't play by the rules and he actively yearns for the good old days when Russia was subjugating many different nations and there was a cold war. Putin, to use a technical term is an immature jackass.

      Right, so Putin is an immature jackass for ruling one of the most militarily powerful countries on earth because he uses his own strategic advantages "hides behind nukes" to.....wait for it....his advantage? You may not like him but he is anything but "an immature jackass". I think its projection on your part to assume anyone who you don't like is immature while calling them names. If I had to guess the only immature jackass here is you where jackass refers to the symbol of your party affiliation more than who you are.

    14. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ISIL was created from the remnants of Al Qaeda in Iraq; they had nothing to do with Libya. Syria harbored them to attack the US in Iraq, and up until the Syrian civil war started, ISIL wasn't a big deal.
      After the Syrian civil war began, the reputation and experience of ISIL attracted more fighters than many other groups, but even then, they didn't become a big deal until they managed to acquire several huge stashes military equipment and money by capturing some Iraqi military bases. The world has spent the last 3 or 4 years cleaning up from that GoI screw-up.

    15. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by mrclevesque · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Russia has far more to do with arming jihadists in Syria. Seriously, while the U.S. has been no saint in the matter, Russia has been far worse. Supplying chemical weapons is just one example."

      I think Russia is supporting Bashar and the jihadists are fighting Bashar, so I can't see how Russia could be supporting jihadists. And if by chemical weapons you mean the supposed sarin incident, again why would Bashar or Russians do something so counter productive, and useless as trying to kill a couple dozen people with gaz.

      Totally agree with the rest of your comment.

    16. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your rubles will be deposited by the end of the week, comrade.

    17. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'll just leave this here:

      http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/7666/russia-breaks-arms-control-treaty-by-deploying-land-based-cruise-missiles

      Since the treaty’s execution, both the US and Russia have concentrated their cruise missile arsenals to sea-based and air launched varieties, with the US throwing away its Pershing II medium-range ballistic missiles and BGM-109G Gryphon cruise missiles based on the Navy’s Tomahawk. Then in 2008 Russia began testing what US intelligence believed was a land-based cruise missile, possibly based on the Kalibr family of cruise missiles used by Russian naval units today. This was a blatant violation of the treaty, and the Obama administration worked to stop Russia’s testing of the missile in an effort to keep the treaty intact. The administration even floated the possibility of reconstituting America's own ground-based cruise missile program in Europe as a reaction to Russia's actions. Obviously these efforts proved futile and the fact that the SSC-8 is now operationally deployed leaves no room for interpretation as to Russia’s intentions.

    18. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      What a load of nonsense.

      GWB withdrew the US from the ABM treaty, following the procedure specified in the treaty to do so. He didn't "break" it.

      The key violation of the INF treaty is the Russian Iskander missile. The US does not have intermediate range ballistic missile. At all. That Russia keeps complaining that the treaty does not suit them because China is not part of it (while placing their missiles in Kaliningrad, clearly where the Chinese are going to attack) is neither here nor there.

      The top 3 meddlers in Syria are Iran, Russia and Turkey, all directly involved. Followed by the Gulf states giving money to various factions. The west, including the US, has largely stood by.

      The Libya campaign was executed in accordance with a UN resolution that neither Russia nor China opposed, even though they had a veto.

      The only point you're making that's worthy of consideration is the US invasion of Iraq.

      As for Russia, how about we begin with Russia signing a treaty with Ukraine by which it guaranteed the integrity of its territory, not only not to invade it, but actually to defend it, in exchange for Ukraine abandoning its nukes, and then taking over part of it. Putin made a very clear statement that Russia's word wasn't worth wiping your ass with.

    19. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      fuck you ivan

      Hey, is "ivan" the new term for someone who supplies detailed, easily verifiable facts in a calm manner and by doing so upsets crazed, illiterate, blood-thirsty lunatics drunk on fact-free fantasies and delusions of their own infallibility and grandeur? From the above exchange it surely seems so...

      As someone born in USSR I consider from life experience Russia to be a poverty, corruption, apathy, alcoholism and ignorance stricken shit hole festering in a decaying corpse of Soviet Union. It is a miracle there is anyone left in RF with a gun pointed to their head to keep anything running. Enjoy your kickbacks until train at the end of the tunnel arrives.

    20. Re: Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "placing sea-based cruise missile launchers on European soil"

      Do you even know what these words mean?

    21. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Well since Ivan isted, I guess Dimitri and and Sergi have all the mod points.

      Yeah yeah it wasn't Russia, that chap just tripped and fell on some nerve gas.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    22. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      >by placing sea-based cruise missile launchers on European soil

      Wut? Sea based is in the sea. Soil is on the land.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    23. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ivan is a big unfair maybe, because there's many names in Russia. But turning the blame around by questioning unrelated moral issues and make some Orwellian excuse out of it is a quite Russian propaganda technique. Maybe they're not even Russian but they' certainly bought into their kind of narrative - always establishing them as the victim of unfair oppression and justifying their shitty action as some kind of defence mechanism. In that way they're pretty much like SJWs.

    24. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      C'mon this is as funny as fuck, the US governments has turned into a pack of idiots. So let me get this fucking straight, the US has band thirteen Russians from entering the US that they, want to fucking arrest, interesting, Inspector Clouseu much https://www.youtube.com/watch?.... Your government has just turned you into a pack of ass clowns.

      Yeah we all know the US is just trying to fuck with Russian Elections with the full support of US media and US government controlled Western media generally, but seriously why do suck a fucking stupid job of it. Gees you people used to invite these people to the US with a free trip to Disney Land, not flying naked bag over your head airlines, but a real airline, which when they get you to the US they used to make you pay for, false advertising much. Well at least this story isn't false advertising, stupid is as stupid. Fuck haven't even apologised for the sanctions applied upon a false basis, thirteen Russian trolls do not the Russia government make.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    25. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by GrimSavant · · Score: 2

      There were some oddities earlier in the Syrian war where ISIS and the Assad government seemed to go out of their way to not conflict with each other, but ostensibly they were on opposite sides of the war the whole way through, and the other jihadists more aligned with the Al-Qaeda groups were definitely fighting against Assad the whole time. Usually, the jihadists commonly referred to are radical Sunnis, and Assad's an Alawite which is more closely related to the Shiites (hence his alliance with Iran), and those two groups are at each others throats in Syria much like the post Reformation religious wars in Europe between Protestants and Catholics.

      Russia's supported the Assad government and fought on their behalf, and the Russian closeness with the Syrian government goes back at least to the Soviet Era. Apologia for Assad isn't really acceptable though, he's waged a brutal campaign in his fight for survival and is almost surely one of the worst war criminals around right now. Part of the problem is that at least some of his opponents would have the same penchant for slaughter or even genocide if they won, which is part of the reason why Syria is such a hellhole and quagmire.

      As for why Assad would use chemical weapons, there is a twisted bit of dictator and civil war logic that makes it make sense: it ensures that his underlings and army cannot surrender. If he was about to lose, there's a chance that Assad himself could hop on a plane and escape to Iran or Russia, but very few of the people fighting for him would have that option, and thus they and their ethnic groups would be subject to almost guaranteed brutal reprisals for what they've done. That's also one of the big downsides of the brutality of the ISIS types, they make many of their enemies fight to the death because they know no quarter will be given, and ISIS will go after their friends and family regardless.

    26. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Uberbah · · Score: 0

      Willful dumbfuckery. Bush started placing ballistic "defense" systems in eastern Europe, nominally to contain Iran but not even Ray Charles was blind enough to buy that whopper. And he's dead. Then Obama started a trillion dollar upgrade program for America's nuclear arsenal. OF COURSE this is to change the reality of mutually assured destruction in a nuclear war to a conflict America can win with a first strike.

      Add to that the fact that the U.S. has completely surrounded Russia with military bases, has overthrown one country on Russia's border, nearly doubled the size of NATO after promising it wouldn't expand eastward, is sending Navy ships to the Black Sea (like Russia sending a fleet to the Gulf of Mexico), and Russia's entire defense budget is little more than half the last increase to the U.S. imperial budget.

      As for Russia, how about we begin with Russia signing a treaty with Ukraine by which it guaranteed the integrity of its territory, not only not to invade it, but actually to defend it, in exchange for Ukraine abandoning its nukes, and then taking over part of it.

      How about you pull your head out of your ass, as the U.S. overthrew the elected government of Ukraine. Would you insist that America defend Canada after the USSR overthrew its government and started to bring it into the Warsaw Pact??? How many megatons of excrement is packed into your cranium to say all this bullshit with a straight face?

    27. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Uberbah · · Score: 0

      So you're trying to throw stones at Russia for ignoring a treaty....after Bush ignored the ABM treaty. Does your limited sense of self-awareness at least tickle from time to time?

    28. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      There were some oddities earlier in the Syrian war where ISIS and America seemed to go out of their way to not conflict with each other

      Fixed your autocorrect fail. Just letting you know so you can check your device settings.

      he's waged a brutal campaign in his fight for survival

      If foreign governments were literally arming, funding and training jihadists and terrorists to overthrow your nation, how hard would you fight to defend it?

      As for why Assad would use chemical weapons, there is a twisted bit of dictator and civil war logic that makes it make sense: it ensures that his underlings and army cannot surrender. If he was about to lose, there's a chance that Assad himself could hop on a plane and escape to Iran or Russia

      Except that doesn't make sense. It's the opposite of making sense - in fact it's complete dumbfuckery. Why would Assad use gas after the U.S. had been braying for a year about "red lines" and when Syria was winning the war? If he was going to use chemical weapons, why didn't he do it a year beforehand when your CIA backed head choppers and organ eaters were starting to overrun the country? And why would he use chemical weapons the day inspectors arrived in the country? Dumb. Fuck. Er. Eee. Moreso now that even the SecDef that loves shooting Arabs admits there's no evidence Assad used gas.

    29. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      ISIL was created from the remnants of Al Qaeda in Iraq; they had nothing to do with Libya.

      Weapons from Syria, like the parent poster said. Reading comprehension, it's not just for kids any more...

    30. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      But turning the blame around by questioning unrelated moral issues and make some Orwellian excuse out of it is a quite Russian propaganda technique

      That's an American propaganda technique: whining like a bitch whenever someone points out your Biblical levels of hypocrisy. For every single corpse you can lay at Russia's feet, there's a mountain of dead bodies from American actions. So fuck off on your handwrining over motes, when you refuse to deal with the beam in your own eyes.

    31. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by GrimSavant · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Really. Really? You think that America went out of its way to avoid ISIS in Syria? You taint the rest of your post by starting off with that, makes it hard to take you at all seriously.

      America was reluctant to get involved in Syria in general, because the factions that it wanted to back, the so called "moderate rebels", were basically nonexistent as actual fighting forces on the ground, which was revealed particularly embarrassingly a couple years ago. Not because the US wanted to stay out of the way of ISIS, America only majorly got involved in the war itself at all because of ISIS and its rapid early expansion, particularly into Iraq. The only other faction in Syria that America really has anything close to a good relationship at all with is the Kurds, which itself is a very complicated relationship, given that some of the Kurdish groups are basically old school communists and the Turks, ostensible NATO allies of the US, have been waging their own war against the Kurds on the Turkey-Syria border.

      The US clearly wanted Assad to lose, if for no other reason than he's allied with Russia and Iran and has been a thorn in Israel's side due to the Syrian relationship with Hezbollah. But the US spinned its wheels for so long under Obama, not even getting started about Trump, because it didn't know anyone around who it actually wanted to win that had a remote chance of doing so. The typical US allies of the region, Sunni led countries like Turkey, have been less restrained their support for Assad's enemies.

      It is sort of curious how hard you are arguing for the Assad side, is it support for him in particular or is it because the Russians or Iranians are fighting on his side? Assuming for the sake of argument that he didn't use sarin gas, its hard to argue that the Syrian government hasn't engaged in plenty of other war crimes. Take your pick of what you would find acceptable from Amnesty International's 2017/2018 report if you don't believe me or think I have an unacceptable US bias, since that doesn't let the US allied side of the war off the hook.

      The thing about chemical weapons in general is that they are not particularly effective as weapons of war, they are too uncontrollable and tend to go where the wind takes them, regular explosives are better for destroying military targets. Chemical weapons are weapons of terror, and their use should be viewed through that lens. See the Russian poisoning of the ex-spy in Britain with a Soviet era nerve agent in the past couple of weeks if you want an example of that. Or is that too sore of a topic, as well?

    32. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by guacamole · · Score: 1

      Russia has far more to do with arming jihadists in Syria.

      That's total BS. Russia has been fighting Islamic terror for two decades now. It is the Obama administration who supplied the TOW anti-tank missiles to the "Free Syrian Army", the entity that consisted pretty much of Al-Queda affiliated groups since a long time ago.

      And the middle east is on fire primarily because of USA, sorry my necon "friend". The USA broke Iraq and started the civil war over there, the civil war that spilled into neighboring Syria. The USA was the one that approved the bombing of Libya in 2011, and Libya is on fire right now too. The USA is the country that has been supplying Saudi Arabia with weapons, and continues doing so, even though Saudi Arabia has bombed every water tower, gas station, and an ox cart in Yemen, resulting in a widespread famine and the spread of cholera, but strangely according to you none of this is USA fault. It's apparently primarily Russia's fault. Please. Why not just shut up when there is nothing NOTHING that supports your argument.

    33. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by guacamole · · Score: 1

      -Iskander is a short-range missile.

      -How can you call Russia, Iran, and Turkey top three meddlers if USA and its allies are occupying a quarter of territory of Syria right now.

      - Russia and Iran are not the "meddlers" in Syria. Their presence is legitimized by the request of Syrian government, you know, the one that's holding the seat at UN.

      -On the other hand, Turkey and USA are occupying the Syrian territory completely illegally because the Syrian government never requested or allowed the presence of their troops on its territory.

    34. Re: Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by guacamole · · Score: 1

      I don't need to explain that to an idiot.

    35. Re: Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uberbah appears courtesy of the Internet Research Agency - trolling enemies of Mother Russia since 2014.

    36. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by najajomo · · Score: 1

      @Oswald McWeany: "Putin is dangerous because he doesn't play by the rules"

      Total bullshit !!

    37. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would you care to rebut the point, or just name-call?

    38. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hmm... seems to be a bit of confusion here.

      Hillary's emails and other documentation provided by Wikileaks showed that Saudi Arabia and Qatar were funding ISIS, and that the US State Department was working with the same entities, and Hillary was taking money from the same.

      Now, let's not assume Assad didn't use chemical weapons - he didn't. That fact is as plain as day. The first time Saudi supplied chemical weapons to jihadists but they mishandled it and had a small leak that killed many. An attempted false flag that failed and everyone knew it.

      The second time was an attempt of detonating a chemical shell by jihadists. didn't really do much.

      The third time... you get the patter here yet.

      So, as far as the EVIDENCE shows, the destabilisation of Syria is on the behalf of the board of a company called Genie Energy (Rothschild, Mudoch are two people associated with the company) - with the focus of stealing the oil fields they found in occupied Syria (in the Golan) on behalf of the occupiers (Israel). The US state department is working with Saudi and Qatar who are providing the majority of the funding to purchase weapons that Hillary sold to them in the biggest arms deal in US history, with both the US and Israel providing operational and intelligence support.

      This is another energy war, with the main benefactor being the state of Israel.

      To try and spin it as anything other than an act of aggression against Syria using Hillary's favourite tool of regime change - terrorism - just shows a complete ignorance of the evidence and of the players involved.

      Cheers

    39. Re: Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Uberbah · · Score: 0

      A noun, a verb, and Russia. The complete inability to make a relevant comment or argument is common amongst bed wetting cowards suffering from rectal cranium disorder.

    40. Re: Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry caller, the other party has hung up.

    41. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An important point is that Iran and Russia are there as guests of the internationally-recognized government. That's not "meddling", that's getting help from your allies. The presence of NATO members, who are uninvited and there by force, would better be called "meddling".

    42. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh the irony.

    43. Re: Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      Echo "thirteen Russians" >> possible_band_names.txt

    44. Re: Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      No, that's attacking guacamole's credibility.

    45. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your idiotic assumption that I live in Russia is demonstrating quite clearly how bankrupt your whole ideology is. In your warped world view all those who dare to question anything you believe must, by definition, be Russian. Or Iraqi. Or Yemeni. Or something, anything but the members of your "respectable", "reasonable" echo chamber of those of your social circle. Or the social circle you desperately want to belong in.

      It is the very attitude of every member of every murderous cult that ever existed, spanning the whole of recorded history.

    46. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah yeah it wasn't Russia, that chap just tripped and fell on some nerve gas.

      I stand corrected, what, with the common knowledge that Russia is the only country on the planet who even has a clue how to make nerve gas!

      Oh wait, them and Assad! Thats it.

      Ok, Russia and Assad and Saddam.

      Ok, Amongst the Designated Villains, Russia...

      Making this stuff is just impossible for anyone else. Particularly Our Glorious Allies and God Sponsored Moderate Rebels.

    47. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Oh, the dumbfuck hypocrisy. How many countries has Putin invaded on the opposite side of the planet from him? How many thousands of people has he kidnapped and tortured? Has he allowed the Russian military to arrest anyone on Russian soil and throw them in prison indefinitely?

      Fuck. Off.

    48. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You claim there's absolutely not responsibility for anything when it comes to Russia without shifting the blame onto others that apparently made you do so, just like a little child. You jump off the bridge and when you get scolded you whine and point out that others did it too and did even worse things. You don't see the irony in this? In the end it says little more than that you're a infantile, whining child that is unable to do anything on its own volition.
      Pathetic. Sincerely.

    49. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Nah, you can still go fuck yourself. You're treating a conspiracy theory with no evidence behind it as being as indisputable as the American invasion of Iraq or penchant for bombing weddings, funerals and hospitals. You whine like a little bitch about $5,000 in Facebook ads when there's an American official on video - in front of banners for western oil companies - bragging about spending $5,000,000,000 to subvert Ukraine's democracy.

      Few things as annoying as bed wetting tough guy hypocrites.

    50. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Really. Really? You think that America went out of its way to avoid ISIS in Syria? You taint the rest of your post by starting off with that, makes it hard to take you at all seriously.

      Your ignorance of the subject is not my problem. Yes, the United States has been arming, training and funding both ISIS and Al Queda to overthrow Assad. From the beginning.

      America was reluctant to get involved in Syria in general

      America was plotting to overthrow Syria before the Arab Spring was a thing. Again, remedial knowledge of the subject.

      if for no other reason than he's allied with Russia and Iran and has been a thorn in Israel's side due to the illegal occupation of the Golan Heights after the 1967 war which was started by Israel

      FTFY.

      It is sort of curious how hard you are arguing for the Assad side

      Why are you arguing for the Al Qaeda head choppers and the ISIS organ eating side? Because you want to see another Arab country turned into a third world hell hole like Iraq and Libya so American neocons can jizz themselves?

      its hard to argue that the Syrian government hasn't engaged in plenty of other war crimes

      How hard would you fight if if was your country being overrun by foreign-funded terrorists who wanted to chop off your head or cut out your heart and eat it?

      The thing about chemical weapons in general is that they are not particularly effective as weapons of war

      Then WTF would Assad use them in areas packed with his own people and military, when he was winning the war, on the day inspectors arrived. If your bullshit detector is completely and utterly non-functional....I have some oceanfront property in Idaho I would love to sell you at a great discount.

    51. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The irony is that you're doing most of the whining. Making it all about some fallacious hypocrisy that does not really exist.
      Hypocrisy in it self is classified by claiming to have higher standards than your opponent. That doesn't really happen here. You know, Stalin could have said to Hitler that concentration camps were bad. If Hitler replied that Stalin's gulags are not much different, it doesn't mean that Stalin claimed to be better. Concentration camps are still bad, no matter how bad gulags were. It just means that they're both shit at the end of the day.
      The thing in the West is that the West knows a ton of shit goes down. The very fact that you can back up your red herrings with all those links is due to the openness the West handles these events. Then you big corporations screwing consumers, large banks and credit card institutions that essentially scamming people out of their money, and when the happen to fail it's tax payer money that bails those criminals out, pharma companies making people addicted to opioids and even advertising that shit on TV, fastfood chains like McDonalds targeting kids and making millions of people obese with their crap food... We know about this because Western media constantly reports about that crap. Those scandals generate a ton of response from the public and help the media to sell their ad spaces. They don't care that much about whether it makes their own population divided or not. And you know what? Media does get a lot of shit for doing that as well in the West from other media and the consumers themselves.
      What you don't seem to get is that just because others do it, it doesn't make it suddenly alright if Russia does it as well. In this you're like those Americans that think it's only bad if others do it, but never when the USA does it. So you come here and troll whenever someone has some less than nice words to say about Russia. Do you do the same when someone in Russia media claims something bad about the West? Probably not, because the West is always evil, right? Maybe such trolling also exist in Russian media, where people claim that Russia does bad things as well every time something about the West is reported. I don't know. If that happens those trolls are just as snotty little bitches just as you are.

    52. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Making it all about some fallacious hypocrisy that does not really exist.

      Hypocrisy that doesn't exist? Now you're just engaging in willful dumbfuckery. The dozens of democracies overthrown by the United States alone makes you a liar of Biblical proportions.

    53. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's certainly hypocrisy like everywhere. But it is not like the strawman you're trying to present the West as. You see, one quality if the Western philosophy is that it is capable of self criticism. And while it doesn't always happen, and there are plenty of nutjobs around the place, because staying uneducated and stupid is a basic freedom everyone in the West enjoys, it happens a lot.
      The problem here is probalby your own narrow mind. When someone attacks your beloved Russia you must go on the defence. I for one don't give a shit if you attack the USA or Europe with allegations, because there's indeed a lot of shit happening there. In the end it does not make a difference because one event does not erase the other. For example if I murdered someone who is evidently a terrible person for their money and donated all that money to a charity that really helps people, them I'm still a murderer. It doesn't matter if I also worked at a soup kitchen that feeds the homeless, I'd still be a murderer. Of course that's only how it appears on the surface as I don't really know what is going on in your head. For all I know is that you're a paid troll whose job is to defend Russia's appearance here on Slashdot.

      Bottom line: The issue is when your country is adding to the shit that already happens in the world then it doesn't make things better, it only makes them worse. When the US messes with Russia or the rest of the world or by extension the NATO then it also makes things worse for you and isn't some quid pro quo situation.

    54. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or let me put it into some other terms: Imagine you live in 1st street of Big City. I live on 2nd street in Big City. Some criminal gang who lives on 2nd street breaks into your house, messes with your stuff and steals some stuff. Maybe you catch them and you're mad. And you should be mad.
      But if you're now so mad that you break into my house on 2nd street because people from 2nd street broke into your house, then things go to far. Because this does not give you the right or is a justification to mess with my stuff. And if you start arguing that people from my street broke into your house and did many other terrible things and that I didn't complain about it, then I don't give a shit and might shoot you in the face. And for the record if those criminals from my street would break in my house I'd do the same. You should have shot them in their faces when they broke into your house. Why? Because they should not have broken into your house.

    55. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Or let me put it into some other terms

      And now let me fix those terms. You're not even a Katy Perry fan but a child-molesting Catholic priest is attacking her for promoting homosexuality. Perry's really not your thing, but you ask the priest how he can throw stones at "kissed a girl" when he's got a long track record of child molestation.

      The priest responds by screaming "whataboutery" and claiming victory. You ask the priest if he could at least take his dick out of that 12 year old's ass while he's talking. He then starts screaming "to quoque" and stomping his feet in a hissy. America == that priest.

      The problem here is probalby your own narrow mind. When someone attacks your beloved Russia you must go on the defence.

      Your problems is that you're engaging in a base logical fallacy, and speaking to someone who has a functioning bullshit detector. I called out Birthers for doing the same thing Russiagaters are doing now - engaging in fact-free hysterics to take down a politician they didn't like. That doesn't mean I support Obama's persecution of whisteblowers or starting wars without authorization from Congress.

      Iraq war skeptics were also smeared as Saddam supporters back in 2002. SSDD.

      You see, one quality if the Western philosophy is that it is capable of self criticism.

      Then the United States would be paying more attention to the fact that it has the largest prison population in the world when accusing countries from China to Iran of being authoritarian states.

    56. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would I need to attack the priest's morality? I spent the better part of my life in the West where they taught us that homosexuality is ok if it happens between consenting people. As long as they don't break into my house and force me to do something, they don't harm me. It's you that attacks the priests morality. The priest could certainly reply with "whataboutery" and would be correct, but again here Homosexuality is mostly fine unless you're one of those Christian or Muslim fascists who think it's a sin because their religion says so (not everyone of them is like that). Based on that alone the accusations of the Priest are irrelevant. He may not like it, but nothing illegal has happened in the first place. Nobody was hurt or even could be hurt unless they're one of those special snowflake idiots, who believe that you can be raped by looking at something. If you brought this case to a court, they would simply drop it. No need to resort to such distraction tactics. But when that's settled, feel free to put the priest himself on trial. I'm sure the courts would not drop his case that easily. Although with a president like Trump he still might get pardoned in the end.
      I only have to take a look into your comment history to know what you are about. And now you're probably going to whine about the fact that I'm posting as an AC.
      Media in the United States does quite a bit of self criticism. That's how we know about places like gitmo. That they spy on their own people and their allies. That's how we know that the prison system in the US has become the modern equivalent of slavery. With disproportional punishment for smaller crimes like cannabis possession which affects mostly black people. And they have so many prisoners that all state and federal prisons are full, so they need to outsource convicts to prisons that are owned by private corporations with private interests and so forth. It's not really the secret that you'd like it to be. But whiny little faggots like you feel that it's relevant whenever someone attacks the group you belong to.
      And you know what? After having said all these bad things about 'my' West, it's you that is the hypocrite here by distracting from yourself.

    57. Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Why would I need to attack the priest's morality?

      ----> the analogy

      ----> your head

      The point is the mindblowing hypocrisy of Western Exceptionalists when throwing stones from within their glass houses, at other countries for "human rights". Which means it's all western propaganda.

  6. That Robert Meuller? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    The Robert Meuller who told congress that there was credible proof of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, and that they posed a threat to the US?

    The Robert Meuller who told senate that no data was being collected on american citizens?

    Are we talking about the same guy? AKA, The CIA's paragon of integrity and honesty?

    1. Re:That Robert Meuller? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow. You lefties are reduced to defending Bush now?

      Uniparty, indeed.

    2. Re:That Robert Meuller? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Yeah, except Robert Meuller was with the FBI and did none of those things.

    3. Re:That Robert Meuller? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry. I didn't know that giving credit where credit is due to the opposing party was, in fact, partisan. I think what you really wanted was an excuse to shit on a liberal. You can fuck right off with that shit.

    4. Re:That Robert Meuller? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So in summary you now see you were wrong about Bush, but you know Trump is bad for sure? Go ahead. Keep talking.

    5. Re:That Robert Meuller? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thankfully both Jared and Ivanka are working furiously on the issue of prison reform:

      http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/01/jared-kushner-is-turning-his-focus-to-prison-reform.html

    6. Re:That Robert Meuller? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Robert Meuller who told congress that there was credible proof of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, and that they posed a threat to the US?

      The Robert Meuller who told senate that no data was being collected on american citizens?

      Are we talking about the same guy? AKA, The CIA's paragon of integrity and honesty?

      No, not that Robert Mueller.
      1) Robert Mueller has NEVER worked for the CIA
      2) the FBI does not operate outside the USA and therefore did NOT make any claims about Iraqi WMDs.
      3) you're a fucking dumbcunt

  7. Russians have been covertly meddling for decades by mi · · Score: 3, Informative

    USSR/Russia have been meddling with foreign politics for decades. The entire "peace" movement was financed by the evil empire, financing everything "anti-war" in the West (while themselves invading neighbors like Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Afghanistan).

    Similarly, they also funded "Black liberation".

    There is even good evidence of Senator Edward Kennedy offering future cooperation in exchange for Soviet help in getting himself elected... Certainly more evidence of (attempted) collusion, than there ever was against Trump...

    But none of it was important, until Trump won the elections — and it became crucially important for the swamp to, if not impeach, keep him occupied and thus less dangerous to the crocodiles.

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  8. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by iggymanz · · Score: 1

    oh, and the USA hasn't meddled with foreign powers, causing hundreds of thousands of deaths, maimings, starvation?

    the stuff you link is mild in comparision

  9. More proof the Republicans want to start another.. by greenwow · · Score: 1

    cold war. Rmoney showed their hand in his debate with Obama when he called Russia our biggest threat. He accidentally revealed their plan.

  10. Re:More proof the Republicans want to start anothe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And Nikki Haley strong anti-Russia comments yesterday are further proof. Our UN ambassador shouldn't use such strong language. She should be more diplomatic. The Republicans want to go back to their golden years under Reagan.

  11. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by mi · · Score: 2

    oh, and the USA hasn't meddled with foreign powers

    We probably have.

    causing hundreds of thousands of deaths, maimings, starvation?

    Nope, we have not caused any of this. Notably, you aren't even attempting to cite examples.

    the stuff you link is mild in comparision

    My point in this thread was not to accuse Russia, but to expose the hypocrisy of anti-Trumpers.

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  12. Re:More proof the Republicans want to start anothe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So when Obama finally crawled out from under his desk in the oval office and noticed Russia was meddling and sanctioned them plus threw some Russians out of the country that was also a Republican plot?

    Oh wait I forgot, he would not have done that if Hillary had won. It was the setup to this whole bogus Russian collusion nonsense that gives Mueller and his prosecutors fat paychecks for years.

  13. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Iraq 2 alone covers all his complaints, you prevaricating shitstain

  14. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No u.

  15. Don't feed the troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Greenwow has been trolling here for years. Occasionally he slips up and posts under his real /. handle, but usually it's AC like the first reply to his own post.

  16. Trump or his seconds must have talked with Putin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to find out which sanctioning options were least disagreeable. The great deal-maker has done his job and both parties are happy. Putin agrees to sanctions that don't hurt and Trump saves face in the press and keeps the secret financial info that the Russians hold over him secret.

  17. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by guacamole · · Score: 3, Informative

    US has meddled in the elections and politics of other countries for decades, including 1996 Russian presidential elections, the Georgian politics during and after the Rose Revolution of 2003, Ukrainian politics and elections of 2003 and during and after the 2013-14 constitutional crisis. Not to mention the open aggression against the governments of Iraq (2003), Libya (2011), and Syria (2011 through now).

  18. Stupid question - WHY?? by filesiteguy · · Score: 1

    Since we all went to Berlin in early November '89 to start hammering at the Wall, I thought the whole East vs. West problem was solved. With Russia supposedly no longer our enemy, and the US not working to isolate them via Truman's Doctrine, why would they want to mess with the USA? Wouldn't it be more productive to have them mess with a third-world country?

    1. Re:Stupid question - WHY?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      >With Russia supposedly no longer our enemy,

      This was not, and is not the case. Republican sentiment was very anti-Russian prior to Trump. Russia doesn't have real elections anymore, Putin openly murders people in other countries, and on and on. If we condone these kind of things, we're just as bad.

    2. Re:Stupid question - WHY?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they never stopped fighting the war. The west thought they won in '89 - '91 and stopped fighting the war. Putin never stopped fighting, and now we're on the back foot and losing because we've de-equipped our military and intelligence agencies for that type of battle, instead choosing to focus on anti-terrorism efforts. Russia can't win in the end though, they're ultimately one country with a declining population, one trick pony fossil fuel based economy and in a growing renewable world, and rife with corruption, and anti-intellectualism that pushes anyone competent out of the country.

      The Russian's are a proud people, and we should've recognised that when the USSR fell and we thought the cold war was over - unfortunately the only way to deal with a people like that is to truly humiliate them just as the Germans and Japanese were after WWII. Next time Russia collapses we need to make sure we force them into abject poverty, encourage the country to break up by allowing Chechnya to go free, sending Crimea back fully into Ukrainian control, resolving Japanese and Chinese border disputes in favour of Japan and China respectively and truly force them to wake up to reality as a result, that they're better off joining the West as an equal partner, rather than trying to take it down. The only way to fix people like the Russians is through an enforced tough love lesson in humility.

      We clearly can't let them rise up ever again as is, they had their chance and they've blown it, we need to truly break them down and build them up again from scratch and maybe if we do that they'll be as productive, beneficial, and peaceful in the world as countries like Germany, and Japan are now - remember, they too were problematic arseholes in the world like Russia was once too, and we made the same mistake with Germany in not dealing with it properly after World War 1 too - let's not let it take another world war to sort this pathetic nation out.

    3. Re:Stupid question - WHY?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >The west thought they won in '89 - '91 and stopped fighting the war. Putin never stopped fighting

      Putin wasn't president until 1999.

    4. Re:Stupid question - WHY?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The USA is the hegemon of the entire world right now. They work to maintain the status quo. One cannot grow, acquire new territory, rise to become a more powerful nation with such a powerful force in the world. A weak USA gives Russia room to exert its own hegemony.

    5. Re: Stupid question - WHY?? by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      And how did him not being president prevent him from fighting, exactly?

    6. Re:Stupid question - WHY?? by AHuxley · · Score: 0

      Follow the money.
      Millions of people in the USA with a security clearance and as contractors need to be able to predict and plan for their futures.
      The ability to pull a "Russia" out allows for decades of budget growth, over time, share holder growth, no bid contracts and personal advancement.
      Every one on the USA is winning with cyber news like this.
      A new cyber command, over time, growth in funding, new products and services.
      The public thinks "Russia" is doing magical cyber things all the time to the US computers.
      The US security services place cyber news in the press and media to ensure the topic gets traction.
      Political leaders demand action and want news about US cyber efforts.
      The security services get funding for one issue everyone can understand and get behind. Cyber.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    7. Re: Stupid question - WHY?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Brought to you by the Internet Research Agency - trolling enemies of Mother Russia since 2014.

    8. Re:Stupid question - WHY?? by filesiteguy · · Score: 0

      Ah, valid point. We need another enemy now that the Taliban is more or less quiet.

    9. Re:Stupid question - WHY?? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      With all that criminal malware floating around "cyber" code litter is going to keep giving mil/gov budget growth.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  19. Better question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Does this imply that the energy grid is on a network that could be accessed via the Internet? If that's the case, why, and why is it necessary?

    If society wants everything connected online and there's going to be prices to pay. I guess the prospect of mass surveillance and control over the population is too big of a payoff for them. What a fucked up world we live in.

    1. Re:Better question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An energy grid doesn't need to be directly connected to the Internet in order to be hacked. The software that runs on devices for the energy grids has to come from somewhere, as does the updates to it. Information must flow in and out of the energy grid as well. Even if these are somewhat isolated with layers of firewalls, eventually, at some place, they are connected to the Internet - even if it is via a sneakernet USB thumb drive or laptop going back and forth. There is no such thing as an airgapped network these days, and anyone who tells you otherwise is omitting facts, aka lying.

    2. Re:Better question by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      AC the US connected its grids to the wide open internet to replace union workers on site.
      No union workers, no union to deal with. No wages to increase. No union negotiations.
      Thats money back into profits and as shareholder value by using the internet as a network using fewer staff to watch over a lot of different sites 24/7.
      A few engineers can watch over sites and send in contractors when a computer system finds a problem.
      The bad part was the networking and automation was not done with site secure, encrypted hardened networks.
      The free "internet" was used to save on having to think about and fund special new networks.
      So all that data is moving around the big wide internet from vital US computer networks that cant and won't be updated.
      Any advance new criminal malware that searches the depths of the internet for existing problems finds old networks and does what average criminal malware does.
      The US security forces don't suggest the US brands secure their unencrypted, plain text, internet facing, wide open industrial networks.
      The US security forces spin common criminal malware found all over the net as some super advanced, mythical nation level code litter.
      The US grants new funding to its cyber forces to study the malware. The US energy grid is left wide open as cyber bait so more criminal malware can be found in the wild to tell the media about.
      More malware found is more over time.
      Nice for the over time and contractor budget growth.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    3. Re: Better question by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      Years ago, at a social event in San Francisco, I met someone gentlemen who were working to secure the critical power infrastructure from cyber attack. I don't recall the name of their company, not that it matters - they were contractors for Uncle Sam.

      They seemed competent. One had even read Amory Lovins' excellent and very relevant book "Brittle Power". Of course it was a social event, we didn't discuss work in great detail.

      So it seems to me that fedgov does care, at least a little bit, about securing the power grid.

    4. Re:Better question by swb · · Score: 1

      I just worked on a project at a power plant. All the plant operation systems are air gapped from the Internet. That being said, the "business network" used all over the plant for non-plant operations is connected to the internet and it's not hard to see how the two networks could be bridged, accidentally or via "nearline" methods with USB sticks, connecting a plant system to the internet temporarily for updates and so on.

      I think for the separation to be truly effective you almost need spy agency level protocols and facility design to be part of it. At this plant, there's only one wiring plant and one set of network closets which houses switching for both plant and business networks, so accidental cross-connects are possible. Plus the control room has business network jacks and PCs which makes it possible for thumb drives to easily move between systems. And of course internet-connected wifi is plant-wide.

      I think to improve air gapping, there should be totally distinct wiring plants and network closets and any area critical for plant function shouldn't have any internet connection cabling at all and no wifi, either. You can't stop LTE, but they could possibly ban via policy even having cell phones in critical plant areas.

      TL;DR -- plants do air gap, but it's kind of sloppy and presents a lot of opportunity and accidental cross-connection hazards.

    5. Re:Better question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You talk as if Putin hasn't enacted mass surveillance, or that the world hasn't had it for decades.

      The ability to subpoena such records isn't new either.

    6. Re:Better question by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Why? Because it was easy, and nobody paid attention to security. Look up SCADA. There were never any serious plans to make it secure, as far as I can tell. This didn't really matter as long as SCADA communications were off the Internet, but a lot of them are.

      It wasn't any desire for surveillance, it was a desire to get stuff up and running before the engineer was fired, with no thought to security.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  20. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ideological people are proud of their hypocrisy; it really annoys the other side. Try something else.

  21. Whataboutism at it's best by Comboman · · Score: 5, Insightful
    You want someone arrested for a natural disaster? There's a big difference between losing power in a storm and someone INTENTIONALLY trying to disable the power system.

    And for your second "point", if someone robs your house, that's illegal and they should be arrested. It doesn't matter if you had the latest security system, or no security system. Blaming the victim is what criminals do to excuse their own horrible behavior.

    --
    Support Right To Repair Legislation.
  22. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by ilguido · · Score: 1

    causing hundreds of thousands of deaths, maimings, starvation?

    Nope, we have not caused any of this. Notably, you aren't even attempting to cite examples.

    Libya, Syria, Honduras and Yemen are just the latest examples I can recollect for the past five years or so.

  23. Re: Russians have been covertly meddling for decad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    USSR/Russia have been meddling with foreign politics for decades.

    Centuries?

    The entire "peace" movement was financed by the evil empire, financing everything "anti-war" in the West

    Entire?

    (while themselves invading neighbors like Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Afghanistan).

    Iraq, Panama, Grenada, Mexico, Honduras, Hawaii, the Cherokee, the Sioux, China, and oh yeah Afghanistan!

    Similarly, they also funded "Black liberation".

    The horrors! Why Americans couldn't be brazenly racist shits any longer! People actually started to care about lynchings.

    There is even good evidence of Senator Edward Kennedy offering future cooperation in exchange for Soviet help in getting himself elected... Certainly more evidence of (attempted) collusion, than there ever was against Trump...

    You were watching the Manchurian Candidate and confusing it for reality again, weren't you?

    Ted Kennedy is dead, you couldn't prosecute him or his Nazi hating brothers anyway.

    Trump may be brain dead but technically he is alive to bring to trial.

    But none of it was important, until Trump won the elections â" and it became crucially important for the swamp to, if not impeach, keep him occupied and thus less dangerous to the crocodiles.

    Why? You can distract Trump with a ball of aluminum foil if you put it on Faux and Friends. Only 99.99.99.

    Even easier with his stalwarts. Just chase them with a few ethnic types with rifles.

  24. OT: Blaming US for deaths in shitholes by mi · · Score: 1

    Libya, Syria, Honduras and Yemen are just the latest examples

    Please, explain, how the US is responsible for hundreds of thousands of dead and maimed in these countries. You'll need to show, how none of the carnage would've happened, were it not for the US.

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:OT: Blaming US for deaths in shitholes by sheph · · Score: 1

      It's a common logical fallacy. It happened after we were there. Therefore, it must have been because of us. Never mind that the whole reason we went there in the first place was to stabilize the ongoing conflict.

      --
      I don't believe in karma, I just call it like I see it.
    2. Re:OT: Blaming US for deaths in shitholes by mrclevesque · · Score: 1

      You need to show why the carnage caused by US interventions would have happened anyway.

    3. Re:OT: Blaming US for deaths in shitholes by mi · · Score: 1

      I'm not even sure, what "carnage" he was talking about... The burden of proof is on the one making the accusation.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    4. Re:OT: Blaming US for deaths in shitholes by mrclevesque · · Score: 1

      "The burden of proof is on the one making the accusation"

      Sure and they can start with simple data like the number of bombs falling from the sky, and the number civilians dying, which both went way way up after the US invasion and occupation of both Afghanistan and Iraq.

    5. Re:OT: Blaming US for deaths in shitholes by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      you're confused, we destabilized the region first.

      We could start talking about Saddam was our buddy and we supplied him with billions of dollars for dual use tech to make WMD and gas people. And it went downhill from there.

      the USA has the blood of hundreds of thousands on its hands, attacking those who did not attack us for power and profit.

    6. Re:OT: Blaming US for deaths in shitholes by mi · · Score: 1

      Yes, they can. But they haven't. And neither have you — despite posting here several times. I'm now convinced, you are unable to make a coherent accusation and am unlikely to respond to your future posts.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    7. Re:OT: Blaming US for deaths in shitholes by Capsaicin · · Score: 1

      The burden of proof is on the one making the accusation.

      Except where, as here, res ipsa loquitur applies: The regional instability is an obvious after effect of Western intervention, specifically the removal of Saddam Hussein and the Bathists from power in Iraq and the dismantling of the repressive apparatus of the Iraqi state. It failed to eventuate under Hussein's oppressive and murderous regime, which had managed to keep longstanding ethnic and religious conflicts and forces at bay for decades (which is, of course, why it had previously been US foreign policy to support it notwithstanding the nastiness of the regime). Once the damn was blown the waters poured forth, which waters then wetted the Arab spring. I'd need to show, how none of the water would've leaked out, were it not for the damn being blown, do I hear you say?

      That being said, iggymanz' original reply to you is a canonical example of the tu quoque fallacy, for which, under my prospective dictatorial regime of social media censorship ;), it and all subsequent replies (including even this) should have been cast into oblivion.

      --
      Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
    8. Re:OT: Blaming US for deaths in shitholes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, but you used the swear word, damn, instead of the water holding thingy, a dam.

    9. Re:OT: Blaming US for deaths in shitholes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These guys are subscribed to historical revisionism. They are likely a lost cause. Luckily they can't espouse their easily disproven ignorance much anywhere in the world except the dumbest parts of the USA, so they are easily contained. They need to read the Powell Memo and realize that the information they are very carefully fed is literally ALL propaganda to swing the US more right wing.

    10. Re:OT: Blaming US for deaths in shitholes by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Add Iraq to the list of countries, and you've got hundreds of thousands.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    11. Re:OT: Blaming US for deaths in shitholes by mrclevesque · · Score: 1

      "Yes, they can."

      I agree, it isn't hard to find solid references, just look up the two data points I mentioned. Go to a library and ask for help if you need to.

      "am unlikely to respond to your future posts."

      No problem.

    12. Re:OT: Blaming US for deaths in shitholes by Capsaicin · · Score: 1

      Well that's embarrassing. :)

      --
      Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
  25. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1, Insightful

    You missed the Korea, Vietnam and two Iraq wars.
    You missed the disaster in South America.

    You have no clue about the horrible things your country did.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  26. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by mi · · Score: 1

    US has meddled in the elections and politics of other countries for decades

    Sure. It is perfectly natural for a happy, prosperous country to advocate its own way of life.

    Not to mention the open aggression against the governments of Iraq

    "Open" is quite the opposite of "covert", is not it? And covert meddling is the subject of this thread.

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  27. Have you even heard of the CIA before? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    >> causing hundreds of thousands of deaths, maimings, starvation?
    > Nope, we have not caused any of this. Notably, you aren't even attempting to cite examples.

    Have you never even heard of us deposing the democratically elected ruler of Iran?

    Are you even remotely aware of what the CIA has done in South America?

    Here's the Washington Post calling that out. Here's them listing 72 times we did that. And this is just the Washington Post, one of the papers most critical of Trump. Here are 7 governments we've overthrown.

    Please read some history. There's a ton of stuff they never bother to mention in history class for some reason...

  28. None of them gives a sh*t about it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    No "sanctions" of any sort will actually hit any of them, they are all safe in Russia. Americans are just a senile, alcoholic group of cretins who cannot accept that they have lost power and relevance at an international level. They are simply powerless against Putin. He won everywhere, in all of the geopolitical crises of the last decade: Ukraine, Syria, even the Snowden case. And they lost. Yawn...

    1. Re:None of them gives a sh*t about it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So tell us: does he have a big dick also?

    2. Re:None of them gives a sh*t about it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know, but if you need an homosexual prostitute I'm sure that you can find one in the USA, so there's no need to take information about the Russian President for that.

  29. Re:More proof the Republicans want to start anothe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wait what? Now the narrative switched from "Trump is colluding with Russia" to "Trump wants to go to war with Russia"?

    Man, some people have gone full-on stupid over Trump. Trump Derangement Syndrome is real.

  30. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by mi · · Score: 2

    You missed the Korea, Vietnam

    It is thanks to America, that millions of South Koreans enjoy the prosperity and the human rights of Capitalism. That the millions of North Koreans and Vietnamese do not have these, is despite rather than because of anything we've done.

    You missed the disaster in South America.

    No, I didn't. The "horrible dictator" of Chile (US-sponsored) left his country the number one economy in the South America. While Russian-sponsored Chavez and Catro have ruined theirs.

    You have no clue about the horrible things your country did.

    Maybe, that's because we didn't...

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  31. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm old enough to remember the Cold War. We always knew that the Soviet Union was supporting left-wing parties and causes, particularly in Europe. There was no big secret about that. And mostly we were fine with it, because it all seemed fair enough: they advocated for what they believed in, they spread the best propaganda they could come up with, and voters could choose to take it or leave it.

    Today's operation is nothing like that. Now we have co-ordinated efforts, not to propagandize or support their ideology, but to spread hatred and division through deception. There are Russian trolls posing as Trump supporters, posing as diehard Hillary supporters, BLM supporters, Antifa, you name it - with the well co-ordinated goal of making all those groups as radicalized, vicious and closed-minded as possible.

    You may not see how that differs from the Soviets funding Britain's CND in the 80s, but I damn' well do.

  32. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by loonycyborg · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Both Eltsin and Putin were little more than US placed viceroys in practice. Putin only recently started to show any sort of irreverence to his overlords kinda like False Dmitry I. But make no mistake, it's not about Russia, it's about clowns in US trying to make an external scapegoat for their own mistakes.

  33. Maybe now . . by hduff · · Score: 1

    Maybe now Russia will release the video of Trump with that teenage hooker we've heard about . . .

    --
    "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
  34. US Sponsored? Not Likely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The "horrible dictator" of Chile (US-sponsored) left his country the number one economy in the South America. While Russian-sponsored Chavez and Castro have ruined theirs

    US sponsorship is probably propaganda. Or am I expected to believe that the CIA actually did something good for the people?

    1. Re:US Sponsored? Not Likely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is thanks to America, that millions of South Koreans enjoy the highest suicide rate in the world. That the millions of North Koreans who died to American bombing campaigns will never be able to enjoy.

    2. Re:US Sponsored? Not Likely. by mi · · Score: 1

      South Koreans enjoy the highest suicide rate in the world

      A demonstrable lie. South Korea has the 10th suicide rate in the world, not the 1st.

      That the millions of North Koreans who died to American bombing campaigns

      Another demonstrable lie. The total number of North Korean military casualties (dead and wounded combined) was well under 1 million, plus 1.5 million of perished civilians. Can't blame all of those deaths on Americans either. We should've finished that job, however — with nukes, if necessary. By "giving peace a chance", we robbed actual millions of North Koreans — several entire generations and counting — of the same prosperity and freedoms, that the South now takes for granted.

      There is nothing inherently wrong with Koreans — had they not been divided by the frozen conflict, they could've been as rich as Japan (which we did nuke into surrender)...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    3. Re:US Sponsored? Not Likely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The total number of North Korean military casualties (dead and wounded combined) was well under 1 million, plus 1.5 million of perished civilians. Can't blame all of those deaths on Americans either. We should've finished that job, however — with nukes, if necessary. By "giving peace a chance", we robbed actual millions of North Koreans — several entire generations and counting — of the same prosperity and freedoms, that the South now takes for granted.

      Gosh, is that what you're saying about the Germans, Russians, Czechs, Poles, Hungarians, Romanians, Georgians, Bulgarians, Latvians, Estonians, Lithuanians, Mongolians, Albanians, Azerbajanis, Kazahs, Uzbeks, Turks, Chinese, Negros, Tibetans and Cubans?

      That you didn't free them with the glorious power of nuclear warheads? Is that it?

      There is nothing inherently wrong with Koreans — had they not been divided by the frozen conflict, they could've been as rich as Japan (which we did nuke into surrender)...

      Somebody forgets that Japan is the enemy of America, and that they weren't significantly harmed by two experimental bombs anyway.

    4. Re:US Sponsored? Not Likely. by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      It's thanks to America, that millions of North Koreans live in poverty, the ones that survived that is.

    5. Re:US Sponsored? Not Likely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I will take your lack of reply about Pinochet's regime in Chile as an admission of defeat. You are lucky you didn't get into that argument with Chileans. The only time I mentioned Pinochet to my Chilean dev team I almost got jumped; they are still extremely touchy. He is Chile's Hitler, quite literally.

  35. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are forgetting all wester European countries since the second world war. In most western European countries the community party would have won a fair and square election in the 60's and 70's if the CIA had not messed with it.

  36. Re:Better question or net access over power by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    Most electrical grids carry signals, some provide internet service over the power lines too.

    If it's got a signal and energy and it changes, it can transmit information.

    Did you think there were magic gremlins adjusting systems?

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  37. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by mi · · Score: 1

    Now we have co-ordinated efforts

    Are you claiming, the earlier efforts were not coordinated? That citizens of USSR could afford to spend millions of dollars on their own, without government providing the funds and coordinating the expenditures?

    not to propagandize or support their ideology, but to spread hatred and division through deception

    They've been doing that. Do you honestly think, USSR gave a rat's ass about the rights of Blacks in the USA? Of course, not. They sponsored "Black liberation" to spread hatred and division.

    There are Russian trolls posing as Trump supporters, posing as diehard Hillary supporters

    Yes, I do agree, that, whereas USSR of old was primarily supporting foreign Leftists, today's Russia is "omnivorous" — feeding German Leftists and France's Le Penn from the same purse.

    It does tell us a few things about Russian leadership today (and their lack of principles), but my point was not about them, but about us here.

    If collusion — such as coordinating one's political efforts with a foreign power, receiving money from same, promising the enemy quid pro quo — is wrong, then why is not "Black Panther" a dirty label, and Senator Kennedy's memory not a disgrace?

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  38. Putin's gotta go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Putin needs to be removed in a way that sends a clear message to jackasses everywhere for generations to come.

    1. Re:Putin's gotta go by Nikkos · · Score: 1

      What is this stupidity? Removing Putin would be like removing any other first-world leader - instant world-ending war.

      I'm so tired of these fools who can't seem to get it through their head that Russia is a global military superpower. That Russia is NOT a cowardly bully. Cowardly bullies act out because of their own insecurities and lack of agency.

      Putin has no insecurities. He has successfully moved his country forward. Crime rates, wages, standards of living are all significantly better than when he first took control of Russia. However questionably and brutally he did it, the simple fact is that he was successful, and the Russian people are by and large pragmatic and results-orientated. Their lives are better, Putin is responsible for that. End of Story.

      Russia has no lack of agency. Russia can hit a button and kill us all.

      Russia simply wants to no longer be treated like some second or third-class citizen in the world. You don't like that they fucked with our politics? Too bad. We've been fucking with theirs for YEARS. You don't like that they hacked us? What the fuck do you think the US has been doing?

      People should go watch Oliver Stone's Putin interviews. While the whole anti-Russia crowd whined about Stone being some fawning Putin sycophant, what was ignored is that 80% of what Putin said was absolutely correct. NATO expansions, US treaty violations, outright abuses of the openness that Russia had to America in the post-soviet years. The US had the opportunity to bring Russia into the 21st century as friends, allies, and economic partners. Instead the old cold-war guard kept kicking the downed dog. Is it any wonder that now that the dog has healed and can bite back, it is?

      Russia can now do to us as we've been doing to them - perhaps they're even better at it.

      Anyone with a real global outlook can see that Russia is not the real problem, China is. China is far more totalitarian, far more 'evil', far more repressive, more racist, more sexist, and has far grander plans of world domination - and far further along on those plans. Russia is a potential solution to a huge future problem, but the US can't pull its backwards-looking head out of its indignant idealistic ass to see it.

      The US policy has been one of containing Russia and keeping it econmically depressed, while letting China grow into a beast that is now weilding massive political and economic influence within our own country to our detriment.

    2. Re: Putin's gotta go by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      Seize his offshore money. $200 billion according to some estimates.

  39. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only in your mind. Meddled in foreign powers is a fairly broad accusation, and devoid of any analysis of positive vs negative. How many people have died or been maimed due to jihadis? Wasn't starvation happening under Sadam as well, how is it we get the blame for that? Not everyone in Iraq was sorry to see Sadam go. If fact, I think the people who were pissed off the most were the terrorists. I'd say mission accomplished there. A lot of people in Iraq are thankful for what we did. In spite of the poor execution. I might add that the poor execution was not for lack of trying. It was more a lack of deep appreciation for the task at hand by the generals chosen to do the job.

  40. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by ljw1004 · · Score: 1

    But none of it was important, until Trump won the elections

    Why do you say that? Obama "was deeply concerned... he wanted the entire intelligence community all over this." https://www.washingtonpost.com...

    Obama’s approach often seemed reducible to a single imperative: Don’t make things worse. As brazen as the Russian attacks on the election seemed, Obama and his top advisers feared that things could get far worse. They were concerned that any pre-election response could provoke an escalation from Putin.

    ...the principals and their deputies had by late September all but ruled out any pre-election retaliation against Moscow. They feared that any action would be seen as political and that Putin, motivated by a seething resentment of Clinton, was prepared to go beyond fake news and email dumps... "Our primary interest in August, September and October was to prevent them from doing the max they could do," said a senior administration official. “We made the judgment that we had ample time after the election, regardless of outcome, for punitive measures."

    So there it is: this was considered crucially important before the election, but Obama's administration made the careful deliberate decision to delay action until after the election so as not to make it partisan and to avoid worse harm.

  41. oligarchs for everyone! by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    well, that's one way the CoDominium could be established.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  42. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The "community" party?

    Of course, it's amazing that you think the CIA was so amazing that they controlled elections in over a dozen nations, without ever the slightest hint of it escaping. After all, look how secret they kept their Iran meddling... oh, wait, everyone has known about that for decades.
    Well, maybe the CIA kept all their Cuba shenanigans secret? Oh, wait, we know all about those, too.

  43. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by Antiocheian · · Score: 1

    Sure. It is perfectly natural for a happy, prosperous country to advocate its own way of life.

    You mean Russia ?

  44. Re: Russians have been covertly meddling for decad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This comment brought to you by the Internet Research Agency - trolling enemies of Mother Russia since 2014.

  45. Re: Russians have been covertly meddling for decad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The "horrible dictator" of Chile (US-sponsored) left his country the number one economy in the South America.

    So Chile inherited Brazil from Pinochet?

    But no, the Chicago Boys committed a fraud that was quickly exposed.

  46. Re: More proof the Republicans want to start anoth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Quite right. She should say, "Please don't hack our country and kill your opponents Mr Putin, if you don't mind, not that we're suggesting you'd do such a thing".

  47. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    US has meddled in the elections and politics of other countries for decades

    And it's terrible foreign policy and you'll be hard-pressed to find someone complaining about the Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election that didn't already believe that before 2016. Yes, the United States is being hypocritical, but that doesn't mean they're wrong.

  48. Re:Better question or net access over power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are two very separate concepts:
    1) powerlines carrying internet signals (e.g. by voltage fluctuation)
    2) power network control computers being connected to the internet.

    Having internet carried via powerlines is safe.
    Having power network control computers on the internet is unsafe and stupid.

  49. Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Once this becomes an emergency, Trump will be free to declare himself Emperor for life.

  50. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Pro tip: in English it's spelled "Yeltsin".

    Seriously, is this the level of training you IRA goons get? Or are you just an amateur?

  51. Re: FAKE NEWS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go do some work Donny.

  52. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by harrkev · · Score: 1

    Russia could have interfered in the elections in a way that the Democrats would approve of. Just put a million Russians on boats and send them to California. California would have been happy to let them vote. Then, the Russians get back on the boats and go home.

    --
    "-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
  53. Confusing times for you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah he's reluctant ... you don't need to be a mindreader to get that. You're reluctant too, recalcitrant even.

  54. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by aod7br7932 · · Score: 1

    Put Brazil 2014, and the entire latin/central america in this list, for the last 50 years. Christ they even funded an INVASION of CUBA

  55. The kid's well drowned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Strictly speaking it is not hacking at all, but cracking.

    Yo dude! The 90s called, they want their pedantic nerds back!

    In other news "THOU falling out of use in 2nd person singular ... Grammarians alarmed!"

  56. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by loonycyborg · · Score: 1

    I don't care how their names are spelled in Barbarian. Just recall your puppet rulers back already.

  57. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by coliverhb · · Score: 1

    More clearly; They were afraid that any interference would potentially cost Hillary the presidency, and any interference from the Executive branch could be spun as corruption or undue influence (The swamp protecting one of their own.)

    So they waited until after the election - after Hillary won - and they could pursue action through her administration.

    Worked out well, didn't it? Never in their wildest dreams did they think Donald would win, and they didn't consider it as a real possibility and here we are.

  58. Obligatory: Intel CPU Backdoor Report (Jan 1 2018) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Intel PR: I warned you about -1, this is now being posted on multiple threads

    Change log:
    2018/01/01 - Added 14 Useful Links. Disable Intel ME 11 via undocumented NSA "High Assurance Platform" mode with me_cleaner, Blackhat Dec 2017 Intel ME presentation, Intel ME CVEs (CVSS Scored 7.2-10.0)

    Intel CPU Backdoor Report
    The goal of this report is to make the existence of Intel CPU backdoors a common knowledge and provide information on backdoor removal.

    What we know about Intel CPU backdoors so far:

    TL;DR version

    Your Intel CPU and Chipset is running a backdoor as we speak.

    The backdoor hardware is inside the CPU/Bridge and the backdoor firmware (Intel Management Engine) is in the chipset flash memory.

    30C3 Intel ME live hack:
    [Video] 30C3: Persistent, Stealthy, Remote-controlled Dedicated Hardware Malware
    @21:43, keystrokes leaked from Intel ME above the OS, wireshark failed to detect packets.

    [Quotes] Vortrag:
    "the ME provides a perfect environment for undetectable sensitive data leakage on behalf of the attacker".

    "We can permanently monitor the keyboard buffer on both operating system targets."

    Decoding Intel backdoors:
    The situation is out of control and the Libreboot/Coreboot community is looking for BIOS/Firmware experts to help with the Intel ME decoding effort.

    If you are skilled in these areas, download Intel ME firmwares from this collection and have a go at them, beware Intel is using a lot of counter measures to prevent their backdoors from being decoded (explained below).

    Backdoor removal:
    The backdoor firmware can be removed by following this guide using the me_cleaner script.
    Removal requires a Raspberry Pi (with GPIO pins) and a SOIC clip.

    2017 Dec Update:
    Intel ME on recent CPUs may be disabled by enabling the undocumented NSA HAP mode, use me_cleaner with -S option to set the HAP bit, see me_cleaner: HAP AltMeDisable bit.

    Useful links (Added 2018 Jan 1):
    Disabling Intel ME 11 via undocumented HAP mode (NSA High Assurance Platform mode)
    me_cleaner: Set HAP AltMeDisable bit with -S option
    Blackhat 2017: How To Hack A Turned Off Computer Or Running Unsigned Code In Intel Management Engine
    EFF: Intel's Management Engine is a security hazard, and users need a way to disable it
    Sakaki's EFI Install Guide/Disabling the Intel Management Engine
    Intel ME bug storm: Hardware vendors race to identify and provide updates for dangerous Intel flaws.

  59. Re: Russians have been covertly meddling for decad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Brazil has a population of about 208 million, Chile has 17.5 million. Obviously the only meaningful comparison is per capita.

    IMF GDP per capita (2017)
    Chile: $24,588
    Brazil: $15,500

  60. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, I didn't. The "horrible dictator" of Chile (US-sponsored) left his country the number one economy in the South America.

    Then that makes all the murders okay.

    Fucking numbnut Trumpanzee sperg

  61. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    It is thanks to America, that millions of South Koreans enjoy the prosperity and the human rights of Capitalism.
    Do you really think that? Then you are an idiot.

    Look at Vietnam e.g. it is united and has capitalism, and capitalism is probably the worst economy system we have.

    You missed the disaster in South America.

    No, I didn't. The "horrible dictator" of Chile (US-sponsored) left his country the number one economy in the South America.

    After killing a million. Killing the rightful elected government. And "number on economy" my ass. I don't really want to know where you get your news from.
    What about the rest of South America? Hu?

    The point of this threat is: how many innocent america has killed. And you are not far behind Russia or China. If you think capitalism is better than the European controlled markets then stick in your backyard, have fun there. And avoid disclosing that you are an american if you ever are tempted to visit a country you tried to bomb back into the stone age.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  62. In Soviet Russia... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Energy Grid hacks you!

  63. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by another_twilight · · Score: 2

    Meddled in foreign powers is a fairly broad accusation, and devoid of any analysis of positive vs negative

    Meddling is meddling. You can try to justify it by claiming that it was for a noble purpose, but that's ignoring the fact that it's still meddling

    Wasn't starvation happening under Sadam as well, how is it we get the blame for that?

    When you got involved. Until then, the starvation was Saddam's fault. Once you stepped in, it became yours. Or do you only want to claim responsibility when you succeed?

    Not everyone in Iraq was sorry to see Sadam go

    That doesn't mean it wasn't meddling, nor that you stop being responsible for the deaths you caused directly, indirectly or as a result of removing the government and infrastructure that lead to yet more deaths. But hey, as you say 'mission accomplished'.

    I might add that the poor execution was not for lack of trying. It was more a lack of deep appreciation for the task at hand by the generals chosen to do the job.

    Incompetence doesn't absolve responsibility, and no one outside of primary school cares how hard you tried or what you really meant to do.

    ---

    To be clear, I'm a citizen of a country that sent troops to Iraq. I protested in most of the fashions legally available to me, but as it was my government who directed troops into Iraq, I am, ultimately, responsible for the deaths of those people. I take the privilege of voting seriously and understand that when a soldier obeys a legal order, that the authority traces back to the government and hence to those who could vote. Not just those who did vote, nor just those who voted for that government (I didn't). I am disgusted at the orders my government gave. I consider it a violation of the trust of those who have sworn an oath to obey. I am ashamed at being party to the invasion of a sovereign nation and I consider the death and suffering to be unacceptable.

    No matter what justification you use.

    People died because our governments gave orders to our soldiers. That makes _us_ responsible, and no amount of hand wringing will change that.

  64. using Big Words when you don't know WTF they mean by Uberbah · · Score: 1

    His post not only isn't "whatabboutery", it's nothing close to it.

  65. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

    Nur zur Info, mi ist ein ukrainischer Neurechter, der nach Amiland gezogen ist, ist also nur ein Moechtegernami. Und ein Depp ist er sowieso.

    --
    "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
  66. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by GrimSavant · · Score: 1

    Not really helping your case that you are calling the language that you are currently using Barbarian. That's some amateur hour propaganda, right there.

  67. Re: Russians have been covertly meddling for decad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Brazil has a population of about 208 million, Chile has 17.5 million.
    Obviously the only meaningful comparison is per capita.

    IMF GDP per capita (2017)
    Chile: $24,588
    Brazil: $15,500

    2017? Pinochet died in 2006. He stepped down as president of Chile. in 1990, and as Army commander in 1998.

    At a minimum, you're two decades out of touch, maybe closer to three.

    Sorry mi, your methodology is unsound.

  68. Yet more neocon russian bogeyman waffle .. by najajomo · · Score: 1

    How did it come to this, that slashdot is reduced to repeating US neocon waffle on a technology site.

  69. Why are these things even connected on the net? by RFjunkie · · Score: 1

    https://www.us-cert.gov/ncas/a... Why are US utilities, businesses and government connecting -anything- important to the intertubes? If you have staff on site, why would you connect important industrial/process controls and information, including government/military stuff, to the net, where evil people can access them? Even more, why don't we see any explanation of this issue? We sanction Russia and China for invading our compooter systems, but nobody asks why these systems are accessible offsite. Even power generation systems can be operated, including frequency control, without a physical connection to the net. Of course, my engineering degree is rusty and dusty, I'm retired and old, so I may be totally wrong, but if that's the case, I hope someone below might address this issue. I know no better place to find the right people to ask this.

    --
    Olphart at play. Ruck FepubliKKKans. Welcome to the Worldwide Idiocracy, y'all.
  70. Russian Much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They examples you chose are suggestive that you are a Russian troll, or a Russophile, or anti-US.

    In which case, the Russians did far worse in 3/5 of your own examples. This whole line of argumentation, where anyone who does anything ever, which then disqualifies them from ever having some good in them, is bullshit. Also bullshit? The idea that Russia is morally, governmentally, and judicially "the same as" the United States.

    For all it's failings the U.S. is far freer, more just, and accountable than Russia has ever been. Russia today is little better governed than it was under the Tsars.

  71. Re:using Big Words when you don't know WTF they me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was wondering if you were gonna show up in this post about how Russiagate is truly a real thing and try to pretend like it isn't :)

  72. Trump Had No Choice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These sanctions were mandated by Congress which passed a law last year REQUIRING the Trump administration to act. It even had a deadline by which that action was required to take place (sometime last January).

    The fact that the Cheeto-in-Charge waited some 45 days past the deadline to do anything speaks volumes about how much he was behind these sanctions. The Donald still sees Vlad as a friend and ally.

    C'mon Republicans, are you really going to continue to ignore what this bozo is doing to our country? Impeach him and put Pence in charge. Believe me, no Democrat wants someone like Pence in charge, but at least he's not bat shit insane like Trump (I hope so, anyway).

  73. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's good to know McCarthyism still has adherents willing to peddle whatever easily disproven propaganda they can just to get laughed at. You do realize that the vast majority of people in the world (just not in the US) knows how wrong you are on every single link you posted? Your script needs updating from Mr. Koch, I believe.

  74. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh the historical revisionism! South Korea also has some of the most ruthless death camps presently in the world. Did you know that? Of course you didn't; you're an emotionally blinded illogical American.

    Pinochet is by every standard the worst thing that's ever happened to Chile. You should ask a Chilean about Pinochet, and see how angry they get. Nevermind the well known and multiply proven fact that Chile never recovered economically until they returned to socialist economy. This is extremely easy to research and find out on your own, but you refuse to bear the weight of your cognitive dissonance, so are doomed to remain forever ignorant on the world around you.

    I truly pity you, you sad little person.

  75. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You were already thoroughly disproven upthread about your laughable claims of USSR funding the Black Panthers. Why do you persist in your easily debunkable lies? You're only proving your own gullibility and ignorance.

  76. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    Gut zu Wissen :D

    Ich kenne leider ein paar von der Sorte, die jetzt in Deutschland leben, und z.B. absolute Türkenhasser sind ... unglaublich.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  77. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by loonycyborg · · Score: 1

    What case? I don't advocate any case. Just communicating what I'm feeling. Not everything follows some narrative. And the fact that I'm getting compared to IRA just for sharing what I think convinces me that all this is bullshit. Because I do know that I'm just yet another person and not some imaginary shady paid troll. Of course what I think doesn't matter to you but who cares..

  78. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    I checked how his name is spelled in Cyrillic. "Yeltsin" is how it reads, not "Eltsin". (The "i" in both cases should be pronounced like "ee" in English.)

    If you were a halfway competent Russian troll, you'd know that.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  79. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    The Bay of Pigs invasion was done mostly by Cuban exiles, funded, armed, trained, and organized by the US. It's a mess, but it's at least partly civil war and not a US invasion.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  80. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    You're missing the point. Everybody does propaganda. That's not a problem. Giving money to groups in other countries is also common. Interfering with elections directly is the problem.

    Could you give me an actual pointer to a claim that Ted Kennedy got help from Russia/the USSR? Your cite is useless in tracking that down.

    Considering how blacks were treated before the Civil Rights movement, you're going to have a hard sell to convince me that black liberation actually increased hate and division in the US.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  81. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    That would have approximately no effect. A temporary move like that, even if California let them vote, would not increase California's representation in Congress or its electoral votes.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  82. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by harrkev · · Score: 1

    But might be enough to swing the electoral vote a different way.

    Anyways, it was a joke.

    --
    "-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
  83. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by GrimSavant · · Score: 1

    Idiomatic speech is difficult, isn't it? Harder than translating and transliterating proper nouns, and it should be a lot harder than not outing yourself as a troll by hurling an epithet at the language that you are using. I hope for your sake that you aren't getting paid for posting this nonsense, because you'll need to find another job if you are.

    Calling Putin a viceroy is pretty rich though, I hadn't heard that one before.

  84. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

    mi ist vor Allem ein Russenhasser. Aber sowas von.

    --
    "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
  85. Why is this stuff accessible from the intertubes? by RFjunkie · · Score: 1

    These power plants, industries, universities, government compooters, etc. are in places that have people present always. Yes, I understand that power generation facilities have to regulate their operations to maintain frequency standards, so they need to know what the rest of the system's doing and work accordingly. Even that function doesn't need to be connected to the 'net, they can do this manually. There's very little they need to do that requires internet connections. I just fail to understand why things like power plant SCADA operations are connected to the net. It's obvious that's not a good thing, having such critical compooter systems connected, potentially open to a smart person/group with nefarious intentions. Can't these things be done by the people that are onsite? What are the compelling reasons they're connected? I've asked many times, many places, since this issue became a thing, and nowhere has anyone responded. Sure, the folks that don't know should stay quiet, but I don't see anyone else asking this question, and nobody talks about the issue. They complain, they punish Russia(too little too late, thanks Trump/RepubliKKKans), but these critical compooter systems remain connected. Why?

    --
    Olphart at play. Ruck FepubliKKKans. Welcome to the Worldwide Idiocracy, y'all.
  86. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by Uberbah · · Score: 0

    They were afraid that any interference would potentially cost Hillary the presidency, and any interference from the Executive branch could be spun as corruption or undue influence (The swamp protecting one of their own.)

    Obama already did that by not prosecuting Hillary's dumb ass for her email server, while being absolutely ruthless with anyone else who mishandled classified evidence. Even David Petraeus, despite getting a slap on the wrist at the end, was prosecuted for his actions.

    Never in their wildest dreams did they think Donald would win, and they didn't consider it as a real possibility and here we are.

    Speaking of Obama, he (very politely) called out Hillary for her laziness and sense of entitlement. He would go to red districts to campaign, and while he might still lose by ten points, thats better than losing by 40 points. Hillary couldn't be bothered to campaign in Iowa, Michigan, Pennsylvania or Wisconsin, yet we're supposed to blame a few thousand dollars in Facebook ads for her loss in a $9+ election.

  87. Re:using Big Words when you don't know WTF they me by Uberbah · · Score: 0

    Uh huh. Found Saddam's WMD's yet or his personal notes on planning 911 yet? If you're a dipshit-dumbfuck running up to kick the CIA's football, that's your call, but don't expect other people to join you.

  88. Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade by loonycyborg · · Score: 1

    Nitpicking at grammar mistakes is the most boring, half-hearted kind of trolling. Probably you actually are paid for this, since coming up with something creative is more than your job's worth. Yet I came up with non-boring reply, even though you don't deserve it.

  89. Re: Russians have been covertly meddling for decad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "came up with non-boring reply"

    Excuse me, I believe you dropped an article, comrade.