Slashdot Mirror


Russia Is Behind Cyberattack On Saudi Petrochemical Plant, Researchers Say (zdnet.com)

U.S. researchers from FireEye have linked a Russian research lab to a cyberattack on a Saudi petrochemical plant. The malware strain called Triton -- or Trisis -- "was designed to either shut down a production process or allow SIS-controlled machinery to work in an unsafe state," reports ZDNet, citing technical reports from FireEye, Dragos, and Symantec. From the report: The group behind the malware, which FireEye has been tracking under the codename of TEMP.Veles, nearly succeeded last year, when it almost caused an explosion at a Saudi petrochemical plant owned by Tasnee, a privately owned Saudi company, according to a New York Times report. The malware's origins were a mystery when FireEye first discovered Triton in 2017 and remained a mystery even after the New York Times report in March 2018.

But in a report published today, FireEye says that following further research into incidents where the Triton malware was deployed, it can now assess with "high confidence" that the Central Scientific Research Institute of Chemistry and Mechanics (CNIIHM), a government-owned technical research institution located in Moscow, was involved in these attacks. FireEye's report does not link the Triton malware itself to CNIIHM, but the secondary malware strains used by TEMP.Veles and deployed during the incidents where Triton was deployed. Clues in these secondary malware strains used to aid the deployment of the main Triton payloads contained enough artifacts that allowed researchers to identify their source.

81 comments

  1. Fortunately the malware went to a consulate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    And then a was dismembered in a fist fight

  2. Obviously, some believe it ;) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but seriously...

  3. Re:Does the word 'obsession' mean anything here? by Tailhook · · Score: 1

    Hey; don't knock it too much.

    Prior to 2016 Russia could do no wrong. The establishment and its admirers were the same Russian apologists that they'd been since the 1920's. At least now they have their fucking eyes open; yes Virginia there are actually bad folk over there, just like Romney tried to tell your dumb ass.

    --
    Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
  4. Mixed signals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Which side am I supposed to be rooting for on in this one?

    1. Re:Mixed signals by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Which side am I supposed to be rooting for on in this one?

      The side that doesn't kill or threaten journalists would be a good place to start.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    2. Re:Mixed signals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Which side am I supposed to be rooting for on in this one?

      The side that doesn't kill or threaten journalists would be a good place to start.

      Which immediately raises the question: Which side am I supposed to be rooting for on in this one?

    3. Re:Mixed signals by PopeRatzo · · Score: 0

      Which immediately raises the question: Which side am I supposed to be rooting for on in this one?

      The Democrats, silly.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    4. Re: Mixed signals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess some animals are worth more than others after all, especially if they are politicians or, OMG Journalists. Then it's time for real rage and WW3. They kill a million simple ordinary people? Psssh who cares? Did I adequately capture you're critical thinking skills, numb skull?

    5. Re:Mixed signals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which side am I supposed to be rooting for on in this one?

      You're supposed to be watching what Mossad are up to while this circus is going on, you thick little cunt.

    6. Re:Mixed signals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mutual destruction appears to be a good thing too root for. But then again too many innocents would have to suffer in the process.

    7. Re:Mixed signals by GrimSavant · · Score: 4, Informative

      Which side am I supposed to be rooting for on in this one?

      The side that doesn't kill or threaten journalists would be a good place to start.

      Which immediately raises the question: Which side am I supposed to be rooting for on in this one?

      That's the joke.jpg

      Russia's already been threatening and killing journalists that have been thorns in their side, and now we see the Saudis are capable of doing that as well at an even more audacious level.

      Russia has an interest in doing this on a purely economic level too, since Saudi Arabia is a dominant power in fossil fuel production and export, and Russia's economy is heavily dependent also on fossil fuel exports. Busting up the competition like this with cyberwarfare is a fairly obvious move in the amoral cartel world that these guys are operating in.

    8. Re:Mixed signals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blame Israel. That didn't take long.

    9. Re: Mixed signals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      democrat party murdered thousands of journalists, but it was oky because clinton and 0bama did it.

    10. Re:Mixed signals by currently_awake · · Score: 1

      The Russians want to reduce Saudi oil production in order to drive up the price of oil. They need the money. You should root for Saudi Arabia if low oil prices are your priority, for Russia if you own oil stocks.

    11. Re: Mixed signals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This message was brought to you by the NSDAP.

    12. Re:Mixed signals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Neither. It's not a game. Rooting for either side just perpetuates the conflict and I am pretty sure no one wants to see these types of conflicts reach their logical conclusion. Most people do not want to see US-China or US-Russia conflicts just to see who really wields the most powerful military. Nobody wants to see the end results of a global cyber war just so they can see once and for all who has the best technology.

      And why is the US being hounded for not throwing SA under the bus? Why are the Chinese, Russian, European, South American, Indian, Japanese, Australian, and pretty much every other country on the planet of consequence not being criticized for their lack of response in regards to the SA incident? The US is not the only country that has private and government business ties to the Saudis. The US only imports a very small token of oil from SA these days and could stop buying SA oil without incurring any problems. Hell the US could replace oil imports from the entire OPEC cartel and still face no problems. The US is the worlds leading oil producer not to be confused with the largest oil exporter. There is a big difference between producer and exporter. The same thing applies to natural gas production and exports. The US could stop all oil imports and still remain energy independent by exporting less. China and Europe are the top importers of Saudi oil. The Saudis have substantial business ties and financial dealing with all the major countries on the planet but only the US is being asked to torpedo all US-SA ties all in the name of human rights.

    13. Re:Mixed signals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why are the Russians not being criticized? Are you going to pretend that there's a lack of criticism leveraged towards Russia on /.? Are we even reading the same FA here?
      Other countries get plenty of criticism because of the recent events and their continued trading with Saudi-Arabia while most of their officials have vilified what happened in Turkey. Sanctions would be the answers, but apparently Saudi-Arabia is too important as a trade partner in the end, which limits actions to empty gestures. /. contributors not being concerned that much with these countries however don't appear to cover it. So why don't you submit an interesting story about this?

    14. Re: Mixed signals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      eh? (citation needed)

    15. Re:Mixed signals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which side am I supposed to be rooting for on in this [conflict between Saudi Arabia and Russia]?

      The side that doesn't kill or threaten journalists would be a good place to start.

      Which immediately raises the question: Which side am I supposed to be rooting for on in this one?

      The Democrats, silly.

      Sorry I must have missed something ... which of Saudi Arabia and Russia are "The Democrats" here?

  5. Re:Does the word 'obsession' mean anything here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Prior to 2016 Russia could do no wrong.

    On the contrary. We had them well boxed in, and NATO was on the move. Brzezinski's plan has been working flawlessly for 40 years now.

    The "Russians" didn't do anything more than buy ad time. If there is a problem, it's the dumbass Americans that believe the bullshit and keep voting for democrats and republicans because they are tribal primitives who see no flaw in themselves while engaging in this blame passing (projection) to divert attention.

  6. amateurish tit for tat by DanDD · · Score: 1

    This might be a belated but amateurish tit for tat.

    The problem with failing at covert actions is that they become, ah, not covert, and provide justification for a more conventional response.

    --
    "Every time I see an adult on a bicycle, I no longer despair for the future of the human race." - H. G. Wells
    1. Re:amateurish tit for tat by ArylAkamov · · Score: 1

      the most monumental non-nuclear explosion and fire ever seen from space

      Absolutely NEATO

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

    No kidding, linking X to Y on the internet is the easiest thing to fake.

  8. America's? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Saudi's didn't purchase America when it paid Elliot Boidy, and Crown Prince Bonesaw funded Kushner co's projects. It bought a few people and a bit of influence. Kushner lost his security clearance after CIA data made its way to bonesaw. Some adults did their duties, some Republicans did put country before party:

    https://edition.cnn.com/2018/02/27/politics/jared-kushner-security-clearance/index.html

    And the Mueller probe and all the convictions and pending ones show there are adults regarding Russia. Trump got power, got the unredacted PP tape, and the names of the Russians that verified the veracity of the PP story. Then those people were arrested for spying and that was the last we heard of them. And Russia claimed *they* were behind any US election hacking.... right.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/25/world/europe/sergei-mikhailov-russian-cybercrimes-agent-arrested.html

    Yet Canada blocked Trump from putting Putin in the G7, and some Republicans blocked him from bringing Russian police over to investigate Russia's election interference. And from Russian led 'cooperation' with Russian forces in Syria. i.e. he was prevented from putting US troops under Russian Generals in Syria. All that Helsinki crap he agreed to, was blocked by Congress.

    It's election time right now. If you poll people, and they claim to be Republican on the phone, they will be full on KKK. The opinions you will get will be ultra extreme. And Republicans under election pretend to be in sympathy with them because its election time and they cannot lose the Trump/KKK vote.

    But not all of them will put party before country. You give in too easy.

  9. Oh boy, it's them-Russians-did-something-bad time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    US main stream media is throwing up another smoke screen around the murder of that journalist to distract us.

  10. Re:Does the word 'obsession' mean anything here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, Ivan, I'm rushin' to vote Democrat.

  11. Selector change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They don't. They're really not more gullible than everyone else.

    I saw yesterday on Reddit, somebody doing a 'look at the hypocrisy of Republicans' claim. He'd measured them on key issues back in 2016, he measured them on key issues now, and concluded Republicans had massively shifted to the extreme right. Which he called 'hypocrisy'. Suddenly Republicans are all pro-Russian, black-hating, want healthcare taken away, and toddlers prisons at the border, out in the hate extremes of politics.

    *But* all that's happened is the *subset* of people who identify as 'Republican' has shifted to the right. The middle ground Republicans have been driven away. In the 2016 sample, he was sampling a mixture of middle ground and extreme Republicans, in the 2018 one, he's sample only among the nazi fringe.

    In the individual people, their views only shifted a little.

    The Democrats gained some Republicans, so the overall sample views of Democrats shifted a little to the right, and the Republicans lost the middle ground shifting them to the extreme right.

    Fox News still does it's attempted manipulations, but the audience wises up, and they have to replace the tainted presenter. That's why they line up new ones, so Tucker Swanson McNear Carlson, is lined up to replace Hannity. Just as Glenn Beck was overshadowed and replaced by Bill O'Reilly.

    1. Re:Selector change by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1, Troll

      I saw yesterday on Reddit,

      OK, there's your problem, right there.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    2. Re:Selector change by Plus1Entropy · · Score: 1

      I assume you are talking about this post.

      They surveyed people in the Republican party... and then later they surveyed people in the Republican party. Whether the people are the same and the views have changed, or the views are the same but the people have changed, is irrelevant. It's still a survey of the Republican party.

      --
      Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
    3. Re: Selector change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The Democrats are just as bad, but since the Republicans are "in control" they consider their own malice justified at the moment. It's what Prof. Hubert Farnsworth would call "perfectly symmetrical violence" or something along those lines.

      The problem is that political parties, and more importantly their mouthpieces, are pushing members towards the extremes. They're constantly promoting the lie that you have to accept the ideology in its entirety or your opinion simply does not matter. You can't support gun rights and be pro-choice and be taken seriously by Republicans or Democrats. Your peers will berate and exclude you until you agree, and nobody wants to be picked on.

    4. Re:Selector change by ArylAkamov · · Score: 0

      I can't believe I agree with you on something.

    5. Re:Selector change by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      Idiots say agreeable things all the time. Hell just look at half my posts.

    6. Re:Selector change by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      There has been some digging-in and over-the-top rhetoric on the Right, sure; but not to the extent the Left has moved further to the Left. This ridiculous argument that the problem with the country is that the Right has moved further right just needs to die. The whoosh one hears is the doppler effect of the Left moving rapidly towards the left (blue shifting), and seeing conservatism as red shifted from their relative position.

      To wit: A few years ago, openly embracing socialism was taboo and democrats vehemently denied it. Today, Ocasio-Cruz is a bit of a young democrat rock star among a large subset of democrats. Many of the protests and riots over the past few years, whether BLM, Antifa, or others, have curiously seen representation of the Communist party.

      A huge contingent of democrats, including those in media and entertainment abandoned all notion of guilty until proven innocent (and reason) over the Kavanaugh hearing. The fact that it was not a criminal hearing is irrelevant; the notion, the right, is immutable.

      Screaming, chanting, angry mobs harassing Republicans whether at work or on personal time is actually championed (and on video) by the likes of Maxine Waters and Eric Holder, (you don't see that happening to Democrat lawmakers by conservative protesters) and doxxing of republicans has occurred by democrat staff, not to mention the shooting of Repub senator Steve Scalise at a baseball game, over politics.

      The new Democrat motto, unspoken, seems to be, "The ends justifies the means because we're just right, dammit". Any debate over illegal immigration descends immediately into strawman arguments, conflating illegal with legal immigrants, appeals to emotion, and (more often than not, false) charges of racism. In fact, almost any contentious topical discussion almost immediately degrades into emotional keywords rather than the rationally debated consequences, boiling down to accusations of racism, sexism, and bigotry in lieu of a factual rebuttal.

      Meanwhile, CNN, NBC, CBS, MSNBC have had to let go of, or suspend, no shortage of tainted anchors who can't seem to tell the truth or keep their hands off women. If you want to discuss manipulation, look at how CNN covers the candidates they like vs Trump. Look at how NBC famously edited the 911 audio tape of George Zimmerman to remove the question of the operator as to the race of Trevon Martin, instead making it appear as though Zimmerman was using race as the sole reason to call 911. Then, they came up with the subversive "white latino" term to stir up more racial division and further drive a wedge that generally results in bigger headlines and sensationalism.

      All in all, society has been moving more liberal and open over the decades. Most societies do. Major societal changes reflect this reality, from the integration of minorities into more aspects of life, including positions of government or corporate power, to the adoption of gay marriage, to the changing values seen on the great mirror of society: media, from television to movies, to magazines to the Internet.
      Just compare today's lifestyles to the stereotypes of the 1950s, 60s, 70s, and 80s, and this becomes self-evident.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
  12. Good. by ArylAkamov · · Score: 1

    Fuck the Saudis.
    I think this is something that both political extremes in the US can and should agree on.

  13. It's not quite the same by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Republican politicians should be targeting ALL potential voters, including the group who will not currently identify as Republican for the survey (due to Trump). A survey of people prepared CURRENTLY to vote Republican is not the same as a survey of everyone who COULD POTENTIALLY vote Republican.

    This is where I think Cruz is making a mistake.

    He's gone ultra right. Instigators in the crowd scream "lock him up", referring to Beto O’Rourke, his competitor. Ted Cruz then says, "he can share a cell with Hillary Clinton". i.e. Cruz is following the crowd, the crowd isn't following Cruz. Worse he's following a *fringe* in the crowd. Often you'll get partisan manipulators at these thing, and he's the one being manipulated when he echoed them.

    Dumb ass. He has to keep the everyday Republicans too. If he drives them away, there aren't enough KKKs to keep him in power.

    The problem will occur at the next Primaries, the only people who will be voting for Republican candidates will be out there in the Purge fringe.

    1. Re:It's not quite the same by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Informative

      Republican politicians should be targeting ALL potential voters

      Nope. If they do that, they lose in the primaries to someone willing to focus on the base.

      If you want moderate government, you should support open non-partisan primaries. Several states already have them, and middle-grounders tend to do well.

      Open primaries in the United States

    2. Re:It's not quite the same by dj245 · · Score: 1

      Republican politicians should be targeting ALL potential voters

      Nope. If they do that, they lose in the primaries to someone willing to focus on the base.

      If you want moderate government, you should support open non-partisan primaries.

      There is nothing stopping people from voting in the primary of the opposite party. I do so, since my district will likely be won by my 2nd choice party anyway. Might as well vote in the primary for a candidate who actually has a chance of being elected.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    3. Re:It's not quite the same by s4080326 · · Score: 1

      Or you could switch to preferential voting to make third parties viable, the whole US voting system was designed prior to electronic communications and needs a serious overhaul.

  14. who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FireEye who are they? Aslicon Valey company founded in 2004 by Ashar Aziz with capital provided by Sequoia Capital. Their current CEO is Kevin Mandia. He was also a United States Air Force Officer and been involved with information security for over fifteen years, beginning in the military as a Computer Security Officer at the Pentagon.

  15. Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it's weird how American or pro-American countries always "link" the countries on the current global agenda to these things, literally throwing wrenches into the works, causing anger just by putting out a "report" on these things. Russia has no reason to start a fight with Saudi Arabia, and even if they had, they wouldn't leave a trail of evidence pointing right back at them, that is simply not how intelligence services work.

    Certain intelligence services however work by making false accusations and pitting enemies against eachother. This is what we're seeing here.

    1. Re:Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Russia export oil & gas. Sanctions after the Crimea thing are hard on their economy. Higher oil prices would be good for them, getting more pay for their exports. Saudi Arabia is the biggest oil producer - anything happening to their large production would cause a jump in prices. War in the middle east happens now and then. In the meantime, sabotage is easier.

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

      Whats weird is you obviously lack even a basic understanding of geopolitics but just know your own evil gubmint is to blame because reasons.

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

      When you see American propaganda outlets (you call them media) or government release these "reports" or read about some criminal "link", it's always good to ask the question: who benefits? And interestingly, it's always America itself.

      This is not Russia attacking Saudi Arabian oil refineries and clumsily leaving plenty of evidence behind, this is America benefiting from sowing mistrust and pitting enemies against each other.

  16. Marine Le Pen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they don't have power, it doesn't matter if the next Republican is another extremist out on the fringe. They end up as a Le Pen figure, or ranting about gay frogs while trying to sell protein supplements to pay alimony.

    The risk isn't that the Republican party moves ever further to the fringe, it's that they stay in power in the process using tricks. i.e. the voter disenfranchisement games/ ballot paper 'mistakes'/ polling station tricks.

    If they lose power, it doesn't matter what they are.

    It's when you get the voters wanting one thing, and the result of the election games producing another, you get a gap. And the 'elected' seek to further remove voters and divide the remainder, no longer seeking a majority, but rather a divided opposition and mechanisms to manipulate how the vote is counted (distort the Electoral college further, gerrymandering, age limits....).

    I doubt many Republican Senators and Congressmen are happy they have to pretend to be Trump's bitch. But if Trump won't bend to the Republican agenda, and has zero investment in their party, then they're having to bend to his.

  17. Enough with this commie cyber bullshit by najajomo · · Score: 1

    Have the Saudis ever considered not runing production processes on Microsoft Windows directly connected to the Internet.

    1. Re:Enough with this commie cyber bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't need to be Internet connected to get hacked. All the Russians need to do is find someone who is unhappy in his job and pay him off.

    2. Re:Enough with this commie cyber bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The industrial software is made by a German company.

    3. Re:Enough with this commie cyber bullshit by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      Kind of like what the United States did to the Soviets back in the late '70s.

    4. Re:Enough with this commie cyber bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they committed industrial espionage to steal valuable technology relating to software/hardware used in controlling oil pipelines. Someone saw it coming and left them a little surprise. You may as well steal someone's cocaine and then bitch that it was actually Draino.

  18. Re:Does the word 'obsession' mean anything here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You must have Putin a lot of effort into that.

  19. Re:Does the word 'obsession' mean anything here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think you're right. Just given your own statement Russia can still do no wrong.

  20. Re:Does the word 'obsession' mean anything here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you so sure about that? Did you forget the entire Ukraine and Crimea thing in 2013 and 2014?
    The vast majority of the Western world heavily criticized Russia. The West also put heavy sanctions into place. Or are you trying to tell us that Obama was way too lenient and should have done something way more drastic over Crimea?

  21. Students. by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

    So we can assume that Students at a government-owned technical research institution located in Moscow, are behind the cyberattack.

    Just like students at MIT have done things in the past that they eventually regret.

  22. Re: Trump says he had nothing to do with Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ban cis-controlled machinery! (So surprised nobody went there yet.)

  23. B-B-But Putin is Donald's FRIEND. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No way he's behind this. Betcha is was Iran!

  24. Re:Does the word 'obsession' mean anything here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Until they draw real blood, you don't have a case. "Influence peddling" is a bullshit charge from the weak minded. You present day McCarthyites are no different than the SJWs. You eat from the same trough.

    All throughout we have proven to be the aggressors, but we don't seem to have guts to finish the job. The object seems to be to keep the game going. Good for diverting attention away from internal corruption and introspection.

  25. Python versus alligator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will be an interesting fight. Russia will use poison and S. A. will lure Russians into embassies to be hacked into little pieces. Who will win???

  26. Re:Does the word 'obsession' mean anything here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If this diverts you from internal corruption and introspection then that is a problem with your own short attention span.
    We in the real world here have learned that there can be multiple problems at the same time and if you let other problems pile up while you get distracted with this one issue (SJWs seem to preoccupy your mind quite a bit), things usually only get worse.
    But what can you expect from whiny bitch trolls and apologists.

  27. Air gap ; know it, use it, love it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Air gap ; know it, use it, love it.
    Is it really THAT hard?

  28. Re:Does the word 'obsession' mean anything here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey, I don't care one way or the other. It is merely an observation of facts.

  29. Lol, set to -1 and look at the Putinbots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Out in full force to sweep this narrative under the rug.

    1. Re:Lol, set to -1 and look at the Putinbots by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      Thank you for admitting this is propaganda.

  30. Re:Or ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The quick -1 speaks more to who is looking at /. than that they are incorrect.

  31. And Yet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Donald bellows in his best stentorian Preacher's Voice:

    No Collusion! No Collusion! No hacking, Putin denied it, he was Very Strong! What can I do, I'm only the President of the United States!

    Where there's smoke, there's Presidential BS.

  32. If I Read Russia's Intentions Right... by Fluffymuffin+Cocobut · · Score: 1

    If I'm reading Russia's intentions right, it *sounds* like they are trying to get the Saudi's to increase oil production to lower the price of a barrel of crude - that sneaky Putin.

    --
    imagine a soft, buttery paw gently pressing down onto a sleeping soldier's face. forever.
  33. Re:Does the word 'obsession' mean anything here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People who question your statements being McCarthyist is an observation of facts?
    That's about as desperate as what actual McCarthyists do, who may really believe that Russia is lurking behind every corner.
    Just because one of the big parties in the US has chosen them as their scapegoat and boogeyman, does not make them harmless. A foreign enemy of the enemy in your own country is not harmless to you or even your friend. Better keep watching out for them as well. That doesn't mean you have to ignore other issues while you do so. That is my observation of facts.

  34. Re:Does the word 'obsession' mean anything here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Welp. like I said, the democrats had them boxed in, since 1978. They (democrats) kinda fucked up though, when they sent the neo-nazis into Ukraine to start trouble because they didn't like the alliances they were making with Russia. Russia was provoked there, and they were provoked in Afghanistan. And they are useful when we need them. The democrats successfully destabilized North Africa and most of the Middle East to chase away Russian/Chinese investments, crashed the price of oil, etc etc. And if Hillary had won, we probably would have driven them out of Syria by now. Until Trump, we had them on the run. So, they bought some ad time on mass media and facebook during the election, and people get all hysterical over that. You all should spend more time reading the DNC emails. That's the real story.

  35. Moron by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are a moron. Just wanted to put that there, out front.

    You complain about the Left becoming more "left", when it isn't even your business whether they do or not. You aren't identifying with the Left, so piss off. It's no business of yours.

    Next, you complain about what the Left "says". Meanwhile, some right wing nut sends bombs, and still the right wing finds excuses. Nothing but excuses and hypocrisy there, courting the extremists, encouraging them, baiting them, then pretend it's "nothing to do with us!"

    Nor is this new. Remember how a different right wing nut ran down and killed a demonstrator in Charlottesville? Same deal. In fact the whole Charlottesville neo-Nazi march tells us everything important about the modern Right. Invite the Nazis and racists in, encourage them, promote and protect them.

    But it's the Left who is extreme. Sure, OK.

    1. Re:Moron by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      Keep it coming, Boris.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.