Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

FBI, DHS release report on Russia hacking

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
    What Russia has done is far more than simply endorse a particular candidate. The US Intelligence agencies state with a high level of confidence that Putin ordered an entire 'influence campaign' to help Trump and harm Clinton.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/06/u...port.html?_r=0
    Booga booga! Not "influence"... GASP!! A public endorsement by a foreign leader is exactly "influencing public opinion", so what the PM of France did should receive the same outrage from you hypocrites.
    That's what
    - She

    Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
    - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

    I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
    - Stephen R. Donaldson

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Tassman View Post

      The Intelligence agencies are apolitical and the public, has no choice other than to trust them.
      Each and every head of the members of the Intelligence Community is appointed by the President of the US. They are political appointments, and as such, are not apolitical.
      That's what
      - She

      Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
      - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

      I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
      - Stephen R. Donaldson

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Tassmoron View Post
        What Russia has done is far more than simply endorse a particular candidate. The US Intelligence agencies state with a high level of confidence that Putin ordered an entire 'influence campaign' to help Trump and harm Clinton.

        https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/06/u...port.html?_r=0
        Again with the vague accusations. So they "influenced the election". What does that even mean? What did they do? How did they do it? To what extent, if any, did it influence the election? What about other foreign leaders who tried to influence the election by openly endorsing Hillary and criticizing Trump? Or what about our own media's attempts to influence the election with biased reporting and fake polls that had dupes like you and JimL convinced that a Hillary victory was guaranteed and that the election itself was just a formality?

        And now you've been duped again by fake memos from Hillary's campaign that even hacks like CNN, Buzzfeed, and Mother Jones have admitted cannot be verified!

        Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
        But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
        Than a fool in the eyes of God


        From "Fools Gold" by Petra

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
          If the Intelligence agencies cannot be relied upon to provide accurate information they should be scrapped.
          If you say so.
          Note what I'm saying is not about them being reliable gatherers of evidence. Relying on evidence that someone gathers and presents would be one thing. Blindly trusting them on their mere say-so while they refuse to back it up with evidence, while they also have a history of unreliability and lying is another.

          But it's a sad day when the public trusts the word of a declared enemy of the USA, Putin, over and above the Intelligence-based assessments of the agencies whose role it is tho protect the nation.
          I said nothing at all about trusting Putin. And being skeptical is not the same thing as trusting/believing/affirming the contrary. (Aren't atheists frequently pointing that out?)

          Intelligence agencies cannot provide sources or methodology without compromising themselves and their agents in the field.
          That limits their trustworthiness and usefulness in a government by the people.

          In a representative government you could at least allow the representatives to see and evaluate the evidence (hope you also trust Congress). Is that taking place? I think I had heard that particular congressmen and the House Intelligence Committee were complaining that they were not getting to see any evidence either.

          The Intelligence agencies are apolitical and the public, has no choice other than to trust them.
          As I said before, "The agencies are made up of human beings, who, like all human beings, are fallible, have their own individual desires, agendas, etc."

          But for you they just have to say: We have evidence. Great evidence. The best evidence.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Joel View Post
            If you say so.
            Note what I'm saying is not about them being reliable gatherers of evidence. Relying on evidence that someone gathers and presents would be one thing. Blindly trusting them on their mere say-so while they refuse to back it up with evidence, while they also have a history of unreliability and lying is another.


            I said nothing at all about trusting Putin. And being skeptical is not the same thing as trusting/believing/affirming the contrary. (Aren't atheists frequently pointing that out?)


            That limits their trustworthiness and usefulness in a government by the people.

            In a representative government you could at least allow the representatives to see and evaluate the evidence (hope you also trust Congress). Is that taking place? I think I had heard that particular congressmen and the House Intelligence Committee were complaining that they were not getting to see any evidence either.


            As I said before, "The agencies are made up of human beings, who, like all human beings, are fallible, have their own individual desires, agendas, etc."

            But for you they just have to say: We have evidence. Great evidence. The best evidence.

            Good points. It's interesting to compare the level of scepticism Tassman exercises towards things he does want to believe vs things he dos want to believe.

            The gospels: 'I need objective, verifiable evidence.' 'They're hearsay, second-hand evidence'. 'The expert opinion of scholar X doesn't count, because he's a Christian and therefore biased.'

            Allegations about Trump: 'Officials said it, so it is true.'

            It's a good object lesson for us all, to be aware of our cognitive biases and predispositions in evaluating evidence.
            ...>>> Witty remark or snarky quote of another poster goes here <<<...

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
              If the Intelligence agencies cannot be relied upon to provide accurate information they should be scrapped. But it's a sad day when the public trusts the word of a declared enemy of the USA, Putin, over and above the Intelligence-based assessments of the agencies whose role it is tho protect the nation.

              . . . snip . . .


              The Intelligence agencies are apolitical and the public, has no choice other than to trust them.
              It is a sad day in this once great nation when huge numbers of citizens do not feel they can trust anything the government says. Why do you suppose this is? Could not be all the lies and misinformation and outright corruption we have seen in all parts of government.

              And Intelligence agencies being apolitical? Who appoints the heads of these agencies?
              Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                It is a sad day in this once great nation when huge numbers of citizens do not feel they can trust anything the government says. Why do you suppose this is? Could not be all the lies and misinformation and outright corruption we have seen in all parts of government.

                And Intelligence agencies being apolitical? Who appoints the heads of these agencies?
                Well you have the choice of supporting Trump whom many, even in his own party, consider an “utterly amoral pathological liar OR the Intelligence agencies whole role it is to gather information so as to protect the US against hostile nations...including Russia.
                “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                  Well you have the choice of supporting Trump whom many, even in his own party, consider an “utterly amoral pathological liar OR the Intelligence agencies whole role it is to gather information so as to protect the US against hostile nations...including Russia.
                  I do not support, actively, either of them. I do not trust the government agencies since they are indeed not at all non-partisan. I hope Trump will surprise me and make a worthwhile president.
                  Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                    I do not support, actively, either of them. I do not trust the government agencies since they are indeed not at all non-partisan. I hope Trump will surprise me and make a worthwhile president.
                    Well I share your hope re Trump, if only for the sake of world peace, but I'm not holding my breath. In the meantime, unless you're planning to sit it out in a remote cave somewhere, you have little choice other than to support the organisations who's role it is to gather secret information and protect the US against hostile incursions.

                    The fact that Trump openly disregards these agencies to the extent that he openly accuses them of plotting against him is dangerous. At his press conference, he said “who knows, but maybe the intelligence agencies” were behind the story of him engaging in inappropriate acts with Russian hookers. He may think, in his arrogance, that he knows more than they do but he doesn't and it's foolish to alienate them, because he will need them.
                    Last edited by Tassman; 01-12-2017, 04:46 AM.
                    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                      It is a sad day in this once great nation when huge numbers of citizens do not feel they can trust anything the government says.
                      Why is that a sad day? Political philosophers of the past warned that government was dangerous, ever-encroaching, corrupting, and required constant vigilance. I'd think that increased skepticism, questioning, and vigilance among the people would be a good thing.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                        Well you have the choice of supporting Trump whom many, even in his own party, consider an “utterly amoral pathological liar OR the Intelligence agencies whole role it is to gather information so as to protect the US against hostile nations...including Russia.
                        That's a false dichotomy. Essentially you are saying that you must either affirm a claim that is negative for Trump, or you are supporting Trump. And you are implying that one ought to affirm the claim because Trump is awful and it's a claim that is negative for Trump. What about seeking and supporting the truth, whatever it might be regardless of who finds it favorable? Trump is awful, but I'm not going to embrace claims because they are negative for Trump, but based only on whether I think they are true.

                        And (again) being skeptical of a claim is not the same as affirming its contrary.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                          It is a sad day in this once great nation when huge numbers of citizens do not feel they can trust anything the government says.
                          I've never trusted what the government says. As a wise man once said, governments are a necessary evil at best, and an intolerable evil at worst.
                          Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                          But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                          Than a fool in the eyes of God


                          From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Joel View Post
                            Why is that a sad day? Political philosophers of the past warned that government was dangerous, ever-encroaching, corrupting, and required constant vigilance. I'd think that increased skepticism, questioning, and vigilance among the people would be a good thing.
                            It is sad because I see it as evidence that the government is encroaching more and is more corrupt.
                            Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                              It is a sad day in this once great nation when huge numbers of citizens do not feel they can trust anything the government says.
                              It's even sadder when citizens only don't trust government when it either does or doesn't work in their partisan favor. It's amazing that Assange was an iconic hero to the left. Now he's an anathema to them. And vice versa.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                                It is sad because I see it as evidence that the government is encroaching more and is more corrupt.
                                That's possible. I don't know.

                                It's true that the size of government and extent of government interference keeps growing and is bigger than ever, but opposition to that has gone up and down in waves, as the growth continued. E.g. in the 70s mass distrust of government became significant, including tax revolts that even reduced property taxes in California, and resulted in Ronald Reagan sweeping 44 states and over 90% of the electoral college, on the promise of rolling back the government. But that movement died off over time as the government continued to grow despite electing Reagan. And it hasn't ever come back as strong as that, I think.

                                As for corruption, I suspect it isn't much different than in the past. It may be like how every generation in history has thought that the morals of the youth of their day are worse and declining more than ever before. Human nature isn't different. Perhaps the internet's wider exposure to differing viewpoints, blogging, fact-checking, and access to information has only exposed more of the corruption that goes on. On the other hand it may be that the increasing power corrupts increasingly, or increasingly attracts the corrupt to it, or permits corruption to do greater damage.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                160 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                400 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                114 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                198 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                379 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X