Russian and alt-right Interference in democracies.

osmiumartist

http://www.rt.com/op-edge/369614-western-media-brexit-russia/
Another Russophobic smear campaign destroyed. I guess it's just easier for people to say "Putin did it" than accept people don't agree with them in an election.

Elmer Blooker

osmiumartist wrote: »

http://www.rt.com/op-edge/369614-western-media-brexit-russia/
Another Russophobic smear campaign destroyed. I guess it's just easier for people to say "Putin did it" than accept people don't agree with them in an election.

RT's biggest "crime" is obviously exposing the utter hypocrisy and double standards of mainstream media. No wonder there are calls in certain quarters to have it banned.

The writer, one Caroline Baylon, alleges that RT may have influenced the vote in favour of ‘leave.’ Hilariously, she fails to even mention mainstream UK newspapers like The Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph, Daily Express and The Sun, all of whom openly campaigned for Brexit and have a far greater reach in Britain than this network.

How do people continuously fall for this formula?

Quoting an unnamed "senior US official", the Washington Post said.....

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38273933

RandomName2

demfad wrote: »

Yes i am. And white supremacist. Nazi also. The myriad of groups that are supported by Bannon and Putin reflects this range.
E.g The alt-right identarian group in Austria is headed by a former neo-nazi.
We saw Spencer and his 'alt-right' followers recite Hitler in German and use Nazi salutes.
The ultra right are trying to alter the message slightly in order not to alienate as many people, with the odd slip up. Best to call them what they are.

Jesus - looks like someone has to watch Jonathon Pie.

It's people like you who got Trump elected: not mythical bots, fictitious hacks, or conspiracy theories involving Spetnaz troops parachuting into Pennsylvania to alter ballot papers. It wasn't helped by Clinton's failings - but the high handed pseudo liberal filibustering of "everyone who doesn't agree with me is an extremist" would make Cicero's ghost groan for its jingoistic and alienating rhetoric.

But go ahead, call everyone who disagrees with your personal political views Nazis and see how many people you manage to win over. Which is not to say that you won't have many people who support your viewpoint, but it will merely be within an echo chamber.

Gatling

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

RT's biggest "crime" is obviously exposing the utter hypocrisy


How do people continuously fall for this formula

Often wondered why people read and copy and paste from rt while ranting and raving about msm and western media and censorship but cant seem to find the irony or hypocrisy of opinions vs facts .

Something which is always side tracked ( facts )

InTheTrees

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

RT's biggest "crime" is obviously exposing the utter hypocrisy and double standards of mainstream media.

RT is available on most US cable systems.

Sorry to say its MSM as well as all the rest.

:cool:

K-9

Mod:

@Elmer and Gatling, either add to the debate or do not post at all. Whinging about RT or msm is not debate and is getting very old. If that means a quiet thread or it has to be closed, sobeit.

demfad

Cross party bid to intensify investigation into Russian hacking of US election confirmed.

http://www.armed-services.senate.gov/press-releases/mccain-graham-schumer-reed-joint-statement-on-reports-that-russia-interfered-with-the-2016-election

McCain, Graham, Schumer, Reed Joint Statement on Reports That Russia Interfered with the 2016 Election

Sunday, December 11, 2016
Washington, D.C. ­– U.S. Senators John McCain (R-AZ), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Armed Services, Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Member of the Senate Committee on Armed Services, Charles E. Schumer (D-NY), Senate Democratic Leader-elect, and Jack Reed (D-RI), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Armed Services released the following joint statement today in response to news reports on the CIA’s analysis of Russian interference with the 2016 election:

“For years, foreign adversaries have directed cyberattacks at America’s physical, economic, and military infrastructure, while stealing our intellectual property. Now our democratic institutions have been targeted. Recent reports of Russian interference in our election should alarm every American.

“Congress’s national security committees have worked diligently to address the complex challenge of cybersecurity, but recent events show that more must be done. While protecting classified material, we have an obligation to inform the public about recent cyberattacks that have cut to the heart of our free society. Democrats and Republicans must work together, and across the jurisdictional lines of the Congress, to examine these recent incidents thoroughly and devise comprehensive solutions to deter and defend against further cyberattacks.

“This cannot become a partisan issue. The stakes are too high for our country. We are committed to working in this bipartisan manner, and we will seek to unify our colleagues around the goal of investigating and stopping the grave threats that cyberattacks conducted by foreign governments pose to our national security.”

johnp001

Former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan on allegations of Russian hacking of U.S. elections yesterday:

Craig Murray wrote:

The CIA’s Absence of Conviction
I have watched incredulous as the CIA’s blatant lie has grown and grown as a media story – blatant because the CIA has made no attempt whatsoever to substantiate it. There is no Russian involvement in the leaks of emails showing Clinton’s corruption. Yes this rubbish has been the lead today in the Washington Post in the US and the Guardian here, and was the lead item on the BBC main news. I suspect it is leading the American broadcasts also.

A little simple logic demolishes the CIA’s claims. The CIA claim they “know the individuals” involved. Yet under Obama the USA has been absolutely ruthless in its persecution of whistleblowers, and its pursuit of foreign hackers through extradition. We are supposed to believe that in the most vital instance imaginable, an attempt by a foreign power to destabilise a US election, even though the CIA knows who the individuals are, nobody is going to be arrested or extradited, or (if in Russia) made subject to yet more banking and other restrictions against Russian individuals? Plainly it stinks. The anonymous source claims of “We know who it was, it was the Russians” are beneath contempt.

As Julian Assange has made crystal clear, the leaks did not come from the Russians. As I have explained countless times, they are not hacks, they are insider leaks – there is a major difference between the two. And it should be said again and again, that if Hillary Clinton had not connived with the DNC to fix the primary schedule to disadvantage Bernie, if she had not received advance notice of live debate questions to use against Bernie, if she had not accepted massive donations to the Clinton foundation and family members in return for foreign policy influence, if she had not failed to distance herself from some very weird and troubling people, then none of this would have happened.

The continued ability of the mainstream media to claim the leaks lost Clinton the election because of “Russia”, while still never acknowledging the truths the leaks reveal, is Kafkaesque.

I had a call from a Guardian journalist this afternoon. The astonishing result was that for three hours, an article was accessible through the Guardian front page which actually included the truth among the CIA hype:
More...

demfad

johnp001 wrote: »

Former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan on allegations of Russian hacking of U.S. elections yesterday:

I'm sure there will be a full report when the investigation is concluded and not before:

Russian involvement is not a new or growing story:

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-37354768

demfad

Getting more serious now:

29 of the college electors who will elect the next president have sent an open letter demanding info about Russian interference and Doanld Trump and his teams involvement with Russia including if Donald Trump is currently under investigation by the FBI.

https://extranewsfeed.com/bipartisan-electors-ask-james-clapper-release-facts-on-outside-interference-in-u-s-election-c1a3d11d5b7b#.e7x7bijg5

Additionally, the Electors will separately require from Donald Trump conclusive evidence that he and his staff and advisors did not accept Russian interference, or otherwise collaborate during the campaign, and conclusive disavowal and repudiation of such collaboration and interference going forward.

johnp001

VIPS (Binney, Johnson, McGovern etc...) memo on the allegations of Russian hacking of U.S. election (link is to Consortium News article printed yesterday)

Veteran Intelligence Professionals For Sanity wrote:

Allegations of Hacking Election Are Baseless
A New York Times report on Monday alluding to “overwhelming circumstantial evidence” leading the CIA to believe that Russian President Vladimir Putin “deployed computer hackers with the goal of tipping the election to Donald J. Trump” is, sadly, evidence-free. This is no surprise, because harder evidence of a technical nature points to an inside leak, not hacking – by Russians or anyone else.

Monday’s Washington Post reports that Sen. James Lankford, R-Oklahoma, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, has joined other senators in calling for a bipartisan investigation of suspected cyber-intrusion by Russia. Reading our short memo could save the Senate from endemic partisanship, expense and unnecessary delay.

In what follows, we draw on decades of senior-level experience – with emphasis on cyber-intelligence and security – to cut through uninformed, largely partisan fog. Far from hiding behind anonymity, we are proud to speak out with the hope of gaining an audience appropriate to what we merit – given our long labors in government and other areas of technology. And corny though it may sound these days, our ethos as intelligence professionals remains, simply, to tell it like it is – without fear or favor.

We have gone through the various claims about hacking. For us, it is child’s play to dismiss them. The email disclosures in question are the result of a leak, not a hack. Here’s the difference between leaking and hacking:

Leak: When someone physically takes data out of an organization and gives it to some other person or organization, as Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning did.

Hack: When someone in a remote location electronically penetrates operating systems, firewalls or any other cyber-protection system and then extracts data.

All signs point to leaking, not hacking. If hacking were involved, the National Security Agency would know it – and know both sender and recipient.

In short, since leaking requires physically removing data – on a thumb drive, for example – the only way such data can be copied and removed, with no electronic trace of what has left the server, is via a physical storage device.
More...

osmiumartist

Why is "alt-right" in the thread title? Has somebody claimed they hacked DNC e-mails or is this just an extreme form of Godwin's law?

osmiumartist

osmiumartist wrote: »

Why is "alt-right" in the thread title? Has somebody claimed they hacked DNC e-mails or is this just an extreme form of Godwin's law?

Hmmm, my question appears to have murdered the thread!
So we can take it the topic could just as easily be "Russian and Visigothic Interference in democratic elections."?

KingBrian2

Will we have more investigations to those members of Congress who benefitted from arms sales to Muslim dictators?

demfad

osmiumartist wrote: »

Why is "alt-right" in the thread title? Has somebody claimed they hacked DNC e-mails or is this just an extreme form of Godwin's law?

Please read the OP.
The thread title is about 'influencing' rather than hacking and the reasons are set out in the OP.
That would include alt-right real and troll accounts working in conjunction with Russian trolls and bots on twitter in the US election.
That would include the influence of Breitbart and Cambridge analytica (Mercer/Bannon) on the US election and Brexit, moving on to France and Germany.
That would include the alt-right pooling of resources and strategy in Europe and America.
That would include Russian funding of ultra right Euro parties and providing fake news sites and stories for same in order to damage opponents.
A common goal of Russia and the alt-right is the destruction of liberal democracy.
The interference is in order to help achieve this goal.

osmiumartist

demfad wrote: »

Please read the OP.
The thread title is about 'influencing' rather than hacking and the reasons are set out in the OP.

[International] Russian and alt-right Interference in democratic elections.

OK, I must need a new monocle here, but please point out the word "influence" for us in that title. Thanks in advance.

Count Dooku

demfad wrote: »

Please read the OP.
The thread title is about 'influencing' rather than hacking and the reasons are set out in the OP.
That would include alt-right real and troll accounts working in conjunction with Russian trolls and bots on twitter in the US election.
That would include the influence of Breitbart and Cambridge analytica (Mercer/Bannon) on the US election and Brexit, moving on to France and Germany.
That would include the alt-right pooling of resources and strategy in Europe and America.
That would include Russian funding of ultra right Euro parties and providing fake news sites and stories for same in order to damage opponents.
A common goal of Russia and the alt-right is the destruction of liberal democracy.
The interference is in order to help achieve this goal.

You forgot to include using of Russian brides as tool to influence US elections
Vanity Fair: White Trump Voters Wanted 'Submissive' Russian Women

There are many reasons for this shift—the end of the Cold War, the collapse of American manufacturing, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the election of Barack Obama, China, ISIS, the weakening and decentralization of America’s two-party system—and one reason that Russia would appear a likely benefactor. While Europe has embraced socialists and Muslims, among other groups, Russia appears a final redoubt of white pride. At least, this is how Russia has portrayed itself to, and is viewed by, many on the new American right—the angry horde, the white-nationalist base who wants their country back. There were glimmers of this in the ‘90s and the aughts, when angry, white men flew to Moscow, and then St. Petersburg and Kiev, and then Tomsk and Omsk and Vladivostok, in search of beautiful, Russian women to replace their feminist wives in America. (I wrote a story about these men, “From Russia with Pre-Nup,” for GQ.) What they loved about Russian women, I learned, was not just that they were gorgeous, but rather that they were submissive. They had their values straight. When these men talked about American women, they always sounded bitter. American women didn’t know how to please a man; they didn’t wear makeup; they didn’t cook; they let themselves go. These men came from Arkansas, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, and the Central Valley of California, and they had fallen in love with Russia because it was full of pretty white girls who acted the way they thought girls should act.

WinnyThePoo

osmiumartist wrote: »

[International] Russian and alt-right Interference in democratic elections.

OK, I must need a new monocle here, but please point out the word "influence" for us in that title. Thanks in advance.

eh...

Interfere

Influence

eh...

demfad

osmiumartist wrote: »

[International] Russian and alt-right Interference in democratic elections.

OK, I must need a new monocle here, but please point out the word "influence" for us in that title. Thanks in advance.

Yes, my mistake. Interference is what was used and is more accurate. Whats your point? Why the big writing?

osmiumartist

demfad wrote: »

Yes, my mistake. Interference is what was used and is more accurate. Whats your point? Why the big writing?

What do you mean "what's my point"? I asked in what way the alt-right were interfering with democratic elections. You then told me some nonsense about influencing and you misread the topic title. You still haven't told me how they were interfering.
You could just have admitted you were wrong instead of making some awful attempt at turning the tables here.

osmiumartist

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

eh...

Interfere

Influence

eh...

Interfere and influence are the same thing now... right. Every American and half the world "influenced" the US election. You're telling me they all "interfered"?
Influencing children v interfering with children? No difference?

WinnyThePoo

osmiumartist wrote: »

Interfere and influence are the same thing now... right. Every American and half the world "influenced" the US election. You're telling me they all "interfered"?
Influencing children v interfering with children? No difference?

You know what the thread is about. You are trying to argue over the thread title as a deflection.

You are not making any sense now.

osmiumartist

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

You know what the thread is about. You are trying to argue over the thread title as a deflection.

You are not making any sense now.

You're telling me "influence" and "interfere" are the same thing and I'm not making any sense?
Go on then. Tell me how the alt-right "interfered" with the elections. Please. Otherwise you're off topic as that the title of this thread.

WinnyThePoo

osmiumartist wrote: »

You're telling me "influence" and "interfere" are the same thing and I'm not making any sense?
Go on then. Tell me how the alt-right "interfered" with the elections. Please. Otherwise you're off topic as that the title of this thread.

Your making less sense now.

Also your the person pulling the this off topic.

osmiumartist

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

Your making less sense now.

Also your the person pulling the this off topic.

The topic is "Russian and alt-right interference".
You are telling me about "influence". Are you saying interference and influence are the same thing? Can you please just say so if you believe that?
If they aren't (they aren't) they YOU are off topic.
Funny how when people can't form a logical argument around here the default is "you're not making any sense...". It'd almost a reflex at this stage.

WinnyThePoo

osmiumartist wrote: »

The topic is "Russian and alt-right interference".
You are telling me about "influence". Are you saying interference and influence are the same thing? Can you please just say so if you believe that?
If they aren't (they aren't) they YOU are off topic.
Funny how when people can't form a logical argument around here the default is "you're not making any sense...". It'd almost a reflex at this stage.

You are making no sense . You know what the thread is about. You are deflecting .

What has you so hyped up about the words Influence and Interfere?.

osmiumartist

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

You are making no sense . You know what the thread is about. You are deflecting .

What has you so hyped up about the words Influence and Interfere?.

Because the thread is asking about "alt-right interference" and as yet (you included now) not one person has managed to present even one tiny snippet of half baked evidence to back this up. The title may as well be "Russian and late 18th century Bavarian hatmakers Interference in democratic elections."
Why are you so upset about being asked to stay on topic?

Yourself isit

Given the alt right exist in the US I can't see now they couldn't influence the election.

osmiumartist

Yourself isit wrote: »

Given the alt right exist in the US I can't see now they couldn't influence the election.

I've already said that everybody influenced it!
Now, did they "interfere" in it as per the thread title? How exactly did they undermine US democracy itself?

K-9

osmiumartist wrote: »

The topic is "Russian and alt-right interference".
You are telling me about "influence". Are you saying interference and influence are the same thing? Can you please just say so if you believe that?
If they aren't (they aren't) they YOU are off topic.
Funny how when people can't form a logical argument around here the default is "you're not making any sense...". It'd almost a reflex at this stage.

Mod:
Leave the modding to the mods, thank you.

I'd suggest looking up fallacy, fallacy. Stating something doesn't make logical sense without saying why is actually a logical fallacy itself. It's just a fancy way of saying "you are wrong".

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy

Good podcast on it here:
https://youarenotsosmart.com/2016/01/22/yanss-067-the-fallacy-fallacy/