The Deep State War Heats Up :ph34r:

[4merper4mer]

2 minutes ago, ALF said:

If Putin wants to throw the West into chaos , he is succeeding .  jmo

LOL.  If he has succeeded in throwing anything into chaos it is the morons in the US press and the morons in Congress.  The west is transacting business just fine every day while ignoring these buffoons.  

 

Newsflash: These morons were in chaos before Putin and they will be in chaos long after he is gone.  Because despite whatever lofty positions they have, they are morons.

[Tiberius]

1 minute ago, PearlHowardman said:

 

Here is your evidence.  When do we bring Treason charges against former President Barack Obama?

 

 

DR has posted that many times. Politicians have more flexibility after elections, that Poli Sci 101 duh! 

 

 

[PearlHowardman]

14 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Hillary, Hillary, Hillary!!   Trump TV all day! Are you just DR signed in under another name? 

 

The Bill and Hillary Clinton 2016 US Presidential election scam failed.  Strozk, Comey, illegal FISA warrants, etc, were all a part of the failed Clinton election scam.

 

5 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

DR has posted that many times. Politicians have more flexibility after elections, that Poli Sci 101 duh! 

 

Wrong!  Obama committed Treason (or High Treason) when he suggested that RUSSIA change their nuclear plans.  That helped Obama win the 2012 US Presidential election.

 

Obama needs to go to jail!

 

Edited July 13, 2018 by PearlHowardman

[Tiberius]

1 minute ago, PearlHowardman said:

 

The Bill and Hillary Clinton 2016 US Presidential election scam failed.  Strozk, Comey, illegal FISA warrants, etc, were all a part of the failed Clinton election scam.

 

Sure DR, that's why Comey announced his investigation of Clinton ten days before the election. We have always been at war with Eurasia! 

[oldmanfan]

6 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

 

 

I don't like Russia because I don't like commies.  It is the same reason I don't like Democrats and many Republicans.  

 

But it if you are going to call making a Facebook page an act of war, then you are going to have to acknowledge that many countries are committing acts of war against many other countries all the time.  That's a lot of wars.  What if a country actively funded a campaign against the leader of another country?  Would that be an act of war?

To answer your last question, yes.  It violates the sovereignty of the country.

[PearlHowardman]

2 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Sure DR, that's why Comey announced his investigation of Clinton ten days before the election. We have always been at war with Eurasia! 

 

Wrong!

 

Comey had no choice but to reopen his investigation against lying scumbag Hillary Clinton.  The toxic Clintons have more skeletons in their closet than shoes.

[oldmanfan]

5 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

DR has posted that many times. Politicians have more flexibility after elections, that Poli Sci 101 duh! 

 

 

Obama was absolutely horrific on foreign policy.  

10 minutes ago, PearlHowardman said:

 

Here is your evidence.  When do we bring Treason charges against former President Barack Obama?

 

 

Where in that statement did he conspire to act against our government and our election?  I think Obama was horrible at foreign policy.  But this statement did nothing to actively interfere without electoral process, for example.

[4merper4mer]

7 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

To answer your last question, yes.  It violates the sovereignty of the country.

So how should Israel have reacted to this supposed act of war perpetrated by the USA?

[3rdnlng]

12 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Dan Coates and Mike Pompey have testified in Congree that Russia interfered.  Members of the current administration.

I have no idea.  If there is evidence they did it should be investigated.

 

A foreign government interfered with our elections.  That is an act of war.  Why do some here want to ignore that?

It would appear to me that you guys are discussing apples and oranges. First of all anyone who has not been following this for the last 1 1/2 years or more probably has missed out on some important information. Yes, Russia did attempt to cause confusion and interfere in our election. They weren't very effective with their FB ads, etc. They also were given way too much credit, not by a big consensus of the Intelligence Community but by a few selected members of the IC. They most likely infiltrated Hillary Clinton's private server but I'm sure a ton of other people did too.

 

The DNC was not hacked, but information was stolen by an insider or by break in. It's already been determined by those in the know that the download speed of info from the DNC server was way too fast for it to be hacked via the internet. So, the information that was gleaned from the DNC server cannot be attributed to the Russians, although it is possible that they were behind a break in or convinced an insider to give them the information.

 

I suggest that anyone who hasn't been keeping up on this take the time to read through this entire thread. It should clear up a lot of misconceptions.

[oldmanfan]

3 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

So how should Israel have reacted to this supposed act of war perpetrated by the USA?

 

3 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

So how should Israel have reacted to this supposed act of war perpetrated by the USA?

Demanded accountability and if they didn't get it expel all Americans from their country and consider declaring war.  

 

[4merper4mer]

13 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

So you just excuse it away, no problem. And Trump campaign working with the Russians on throwing the election? There is proof, but since it helped Republicans, your partisanship makes you ignore it. 

I don't really excuse Zuckerberg for lack of controls in allowing pages like that to pop up, but it has to be put into perspective.  Zuck was busy trying to cash in on his new features that allowed the kidnap and torture of developmentally disabled kids to be broadcast live.

 

It would be interesting to see the proof that Trump colluded with Russia.  Are you saying when Nancy Pelosi says she hasn't seen any that she is lying?

2 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

 

Demanded accountability and if they didn't get it expel all Americans from their country and consider declaring war.  

 

This ignores the fact that Netanyahu is a big meanie so Obama was justified.

[oldmanfan]

6 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

I don't really excuse Zuckerberg for lack of controls in allowing pages like that to pop up, but it has to be put into perspective.  Zuck was busy trying to cash in on his new features that allowed the kidnap and torture of developmentally disabled kids to be broadcast live.

 

It would be interesting to see the proof that Trump colluded with Russia.  Are you saying when Nancy Pelosi says she hasn't seen any that she is lying?

This ignores the fact that Netanyahu is a big meanie so Obama was justified.

The latter ignores that the Israeli people have the right to choose their leaders.  Like we did last election.  But that right was affected by the Russians.

 

One of the fundamental aspects of democratic societies and governments is that the people choose their leaders by fair elections.  If that is violated then the entire underpinning of government is called into question.

[Tiberius]

8 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

I don't really excuse Zuckerberg for lack of controls in allowing pages like that to pop up, but it has to be put into perspective.  Zuck was busy trying to cash in on his new features that allowed the kidnap and torture of developmentally disabled kids to be broadcast live.

 

It would be interesting to see the proof that Trump colluded with Russia.  Are you saying when Nancy Pelosi says she hasn't seen any that she is lying?

This ignores the fact that Netanyahu is a big meanie so Obama was justified.

Nancy Pelosi?? What? 

 

The Trump Tower meeting to get stolen emails is proof of collusion, then they lied about it and lied some more. They they obstructed justice. Turn off Trump TV for awhile

[DC Tom]

47 minutes ago, ALF said:

If Putin wants to throw the West into chaos , he is succeeding .  jmo

 

An important, oft-missed point.  Putin's indirect interference in our current government is far more effective than his interference in the election.

[oldmanfan]

Just now, DC Tom said:

 

An important, oft-missed point.  Putin's indirect interference in our current government is far more effective than his interference in the election.

Good point

[Bray Wyatt]

33 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

The latter ignores that the Israeli people have the right to choose their leaders.  Like we did last election.  But that right was affected by the Russians.

 

One of the fundamental aspects of democratic societies and governments is that the people choose their leaders by fair elections.  If that is violated then the entire underpinning of government is called into question.

 

I dont think any one is really disputing the gist of this statement, but the bolded part is what I think is causing an issue. I think they tried to impact the election (why wouldnt they when we do it to other countries we have an interest in), but I do not think they succeeding in changing any outcome, and the intelligence people also seems to agree on this point. If the results of the election were not changed, what impact did the Russians really have on it then? 

 

 

[DC Tom]

39 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

The latter ignores that the Israeli people have the right to choose their leaders.  Like we did last election.  But that right was affected by the Russians.

 

...by insipid Facebook posts?

 

If we can't have fair elections because people are too stupid to not be influenced by obvious social media bull ****, then American democracy has much bigger problems.

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, Bray Wyatt said:

 

I dont think any one is really disputing the gist of this statement, but the bolded part is what I think is causing an issue. I think they tried to impact the election (why wouldnt they when we do it to other countries we have an interest in), but I do not think they succeeding in changing any outcome, and the intelligence people also seems to agree on this point. If the results of the election were not changed, what impact did the Russians really have on it then? 

 

 

My wording was confusing.  The act of interfering, regardless of effect, violates our democracy.  To me that is an act of war.

Just now, DC Tom said:

 

...by insipid Facebook posts?

 

If we can't have fair elections because people are too stupid to not be influenced by obvious social media bull ****, then American democracy has much bigger problems.

I agree in the sense that we have a lot of people who refuse to read or be educated outside of their narrow perspective, whether that be left or right.  And that is also dangerous for our republic.

[Bray Wyatt]

Just now, oldmanfan said:

My wording was confusing.  The act of interfering, regardless of effect, violates our democracy.  To me that is an act of war.

 

This seems too idealistic and not practical though, if everyone had this thought we would have a lot more war in the world. I think sanctions were an appropriate response to an action that ultimately did nothing

[3rdnlng]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

My wording was confusing.  The act of interfering, regardless of effect, violates our democracy.  To me that is an act of war.

So, should we take this act of war seriously and target Russia's cities?

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, 3rdnlng said:

So, should we take this act of war seriously and target Russia's cities?

I would attack in cyberspace first and disrupt their communications, business systems, and the like.  And if that did not deter their actions then yes.

3 minutes ago, Bray Wyatt said:

 

This seems too idealistic and not practical though, if everyone had this thought we would have a lot more war in the world. I think sanctions were an appropriate response to an action that ultimately did nothing

Sanctions are weak in my opinion.  I am independent; liberal in some things and conservative in others.  When it comes to national security I am very hawkish.  We have by far the strongest military in the world.  As president I would not hesitate to use our military to defend our national security.

[Bray Wyatt]

3 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I would attack in cyberspace first and disrupt their communications, business systems, and the like.  And if that did not deter their actions then yes.

Sanctions are weak in my opinion.  I am independent; liberal in some things and conservative in others.  When it comes to national security I am very hawkish.  We have by far the strongest military in the world.  As president I would not hesitate to use our military to defend our national security.

 

I agree with you in principle. I just think each case should be looked at on its own merits and then determine an appropriate response.

[3rdnlng]

2 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I would attack in cyberspace first and disrupt their communications, business systems, and the like.  And if that did not deter their actions then yes.

I can see where someone might want Facebook shenanigans to escalate into a nuclear war. -)  I put a couple minutes into a response to you upthread and you haven't responded. Why not?

[ALF]

On 7/9/2018 at 5:28 PM, /dev/null said:

 

So what will it be this time?  Heart attack?  Hit & run?  Home invasion?  Or a good old fashioned double tap suicide?

 

On 7/9/2018 at 10:04 PM, 3rdnlng said:

Bear.

 

https://www.ispot.tv/ad/dVwe/spectrum-on-demand-monsters-walk

 

quick little bugger

[oldmanfan]

2 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

I can see where someone might want Facebook shenanigans to escalate into a nuclear war. -)  I put a couple minutes into a response to you upthread and you haven't responded. Why not?

I went back and saw your post.  You're referring to the apples and oranges, correct?  I think we have an experienced prosecutor in Mueller whose job is to figure out exactly what went in with the Russians and the election.  We need to let him do his job and when he presents the facts take appropriate action.

[B-Man]

......

 

 

[3rdnlng]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

I went back and saw your post.  You're referring to the apples and oranges, correct?  I think we have an experienced prosecutor in Mueller whose job is to figure out exactly what went in with the Russians and the election.  We need to let him do his job and when he presents the facts take appropriate action.

Yet you are speculating about most everything here regarding the deep state war. Go back and read this entire thread. DR has done a yeoman's job on investigating the deep state and has helped many of us to gain perspective and be more informed than the typical talking head.

[TakeYouToTasker]

2 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I would attack in cyberspace first and disrupt their communications, business systems, and the like.  And if that did not deter their actions then yes.

 

All technologically advanced countries attempt to interfere in all other nation's elections.

 

Going to war over this reality is absurd.  Nations will always act in their own best interests, and the interconnectivity of the world has created massive pockets of overlap and interdependence.  Add to that the fact that you're essentially requiring that the world be in a perpetual state of world war; and I reject your argument, as should you after some careful consideration of the realities your preferences would bring to the fore.

 

As an aside, what are your thoughts on the Five Eyes nations conspiring with elements of our own government to fix our federal elections and then assist the losers of that election in a palace coup in order to cover up their crimes?

 

Should we begin the carpet bombing of England, Australia, and Israel; plunging the world into the brutal darkness of nuclear war?

 

Or should this sort of thing be handled on a diplomatic level in order to preserve peace, given the ramifications?

 

Might it make more sense to dole out geo-political retribution, and divest ourselves of some of the interconnectivities of our global intelligence service in order to make this sort of thing harder to do going forward?

[oldmanfan]

2 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

All technologically advanced countries attempt to interfere in all other nation's elections.

 

Going to war over this reality is absurd.  Nations will always act in their own best interests, and the interconnectivity of the world has created massive pockets of overlap and interdependence.  Add to that the fact that you're essentially requiring that the world be in a perpetual state of world war; and I reject your argument, as should you after some careful consideration of the realities your preferences would bring to the fore.

 

As an aside, what are your thoughts on the Five Eyes nations conspiring with elements of our own government to fix our federal elections and then assist the losers of that election in a palace coup in order to cover up their crimes?

 

Should we begin the carpet bombing of England, Australia, and Israel; plunging the world into the brutal darkness of nuclear war?

 

Or should this sort of thing be handled on a diplomatic level in order to preserve peace, given the ramifications?

 

Might it make more sense to dole out geo-political retribution, and divest ourselves of some of the interconnectivities of our global intelligence service in order to make this sort of thing harder to do going forward?

Interesting points.  I am not against a diplomatic approach but is that going to work with a guy like Putin?  No.  Only showing strength deters a guy like Putin.

7 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Yet you are speculating about most everything here regarding the deep state war. Go back and read this entire thread. DR has done a yeoman's job on investigating the deep state and has helped many of us to gain perspective and be more informed than the typical talking head.

I looked at a few things he posted.  I know some FBI agents and based on that I do not believe the leadership of the FBI is corrupt.  Some made bad decisions.  Comey for example deserved to be fired.  I also agree with DR that freedom of the press is paramount to a democratic society.  But do I believe there is a gigantic deep state conspiracy?  No.

[Deranged Rhino]

58 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

My wording was confusing.  The act of interfering, regardless of effect, violates our democracy.  To me that is an act of war.

 

Do you know the name Robert Hannigan? 

 

If not, do some digging. You might be surprised what you see. 

[GG]

17 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Interesting points.  I am not against a diplomatic approach but is that going to work with a guy like Putin?  No.  Only showing strength deters a guy like Putin.

 

 

You're not going to stop Putin through a show of strength.  You can try to neutralize him by hitting the weak points through the energy markets or by squeezing his oligarchs.

[TakeYouToTasker]

17 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Interesting points.  I am not against a diplomatic approach but is that going to work with a guy like Putin?  No.  Only showing strength deters a guy like Putin.

 

Please list the benefits of going to war with another nuclear super power.

 

The geo-political steps this Administration has taken in the wake of our election has been a strong rebuke, while at the same time an acknowledgement of the realities of the world, and our involvement in the affairs of other nations.

 

I looked at a few things he posted.  I know some FBI agents and based on that I do not believe the leadership of the FBI is corrupt.  Some made bad decisions.  Comey for example deserved to be fired.  I also agree with DR that freedom of the press is paramount to a democratic society.  But do I believe there is a gigantic deep state conspiracy?  No.

 

I would ask you not to take personal anecdote and scale that upwards across entire organizations.

 

People should not be trusting of power structures, especially those which have demonstrated an abject lack of accountability, and a willingness to insulate themselves from criticism; even more so those which innately manifest themselves with mechanisms which control the flow of information the populous receives, and are empowered to collect and warehouse massive amounts of information about individual citizens.  The potential for malfeasance is vast, and the reality is that such fertile ground for corruption will always attract bad actors.

 

Put another way:  there were no gentle hearted plantation overseers. 

 

I implore you to read through the totality of the evidence that Greg (Deranged Rhino) has presented over the course of the last year plus.  If you were to ask him, I'm almost positive he would direct you to a well sourced compendium he has created on this web forum.  It's a vital read for anyone who considers themselves to be a concerned and responsible citizen.

[oldmanfan]

12 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Do you know the name Robert Hannigan? 

 

If not, do some digging. You might be surprised what you see. 

I'll check it out.

[3rdnlng]

45 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Interesting points.  I am not against a diplomatic approach but is that going to work with a guy like Putin?  No.  Only showing strength deters a guy like Putin.

I looked at a few things he posted.  I know some FBI agents and based on that I do not believe the leadership of the FBI is corrupt.  Some made bad decisions.  Comey for example deserved to be fired.  I also agree with DR that freedom of the press is paramount to a democratic society.  But do I believe there is a gigantic deep state conspiracy?  No.

This thread is 136 pages. It tells a story so to speak and you cannot get a decent picture by looking at a few things DR posted. You state that you do not believe that there is a deep state conspiracy but you neglect to really look into it. Not a good way to find out the real truth.

Edited July 13, 2018 by 3rdnlng

[oldmanfan]

Just now, 3rdnlng said:

This thread is 136 pages. It tells a story so to speak and you cannot get a decent picture by looking at a few things DR posted. You state that you do not believe that there is a deep state conspiracy but you neglect to really look into it. Not a good to find out the real truth.

DR asked me to read about this Hannibal guy which I will do.  I do read a lot and don't have to rely on this thread to form opinions but am always open to more info.

Hannigan guy I meant

[TakeYouToTasker]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

DR asked me to read about this Hannibal guy which I will do.  I do read a lot and don't have to rely on this thread to form opinions but am always open to more info.

Hannigan guy I meant

 

No one is required to read anything in particular in order to form an opinion.  Individuals are free to be as uninformed or as misinformed as they want.

 

What I would posit is that  there is a very deliberate attempt to control the flow of information to the public in order to cultivate a misinformed public for the purpose of creating a blind spot in which very powerful bad actors act with impunity.

 

Power attracts those whom would seek out power.

 

Ask yourself what sorts of people seek our power, and towards what ends.  Use history as your guide.

 

What Greg has done is report news that the state controlled media has failed to report in their efforts to perpetuate the narrative of the powerful.  The veil is being torn.  It's a vital read.

 

 

[row_33]

22 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

No one is required to read anything in particular in order to form an opinion.  Individuals are free to be as uninformed or as misinformed as they want.

 

What I would posit is that  there is a very deliberate attempt to control the flow of information to the public in order to cultivate a misinformed public for the purpose of creating a blind spot in which very powerful bad actors act with impunity.

 

Power attracts those whom would seek out power.

 

Ask yourself what sorts of people seek our power, and towards what ends.  Use history as your guide.

 

What Greg has done is report news that the state controlled media has failed to report in their efforts to perpetuate the narrative of the powerful.  The veil is being torn.  It's a vital read.

 

 

 

but in this day and age we are free to completely ignore the Dan Rathers of today, we choose to look at them for amusement or some kind of sadistic self-torture

 

 

[outsidethebox]

1 hour ago, Bray Wyatt said:

 

This seems too idealistic and not practical though, if everyone had this thought we would have a lot more war in the world. I think sanctions were an appropriate response to an action that ultimately did nothing

Oldman had no skin in the game. Why should he care if we go to war. He's too old to fight. Let's have a war with Russia and have millions of people suffer and die over facebook. Tibs would love it though?

[oldmanfan]

1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Do you know the name Robert Hannigan? 

 

If not, do some digging. You might be surprised what you see. 

Just read one interview with him detailing the difficulty in using cyberwarfare to counter information theft.  Very interesting, thanks for suggesting his name.  

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

Just read one interview with him detailing the difficulty in using cyberwarfare to counter information theft.  Very interesting, thanks for suggesting his name.  

 

 

 

Did you notice when he was fired?