Hawaii café bans Trump voters - "no Nazis" allowed

Page 7 of 10 [ 150 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

Kiprobalhato
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2014
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Posts: 29,119
Location: מתחת לעננים

06 Jan 2017, 12:46 am

EzraS wrote:
Even the events regarding Podesta and the Clinton tech people seems very fishy. Is someone who's achieved John Podesta's position, really supposed to be that stupid and gullible?


you have to remember, these people are not digital natives. they merely adopted the computer screen and thus tend to be less competent with them on average, we were born in them, molded by them.

they didn't see emails until they were already men.


:jester:


_________________
הייתי צוללת עכשיו למים
הכי, הכי עמוקים
לא לשמוע כלום
לא לדעת כלום
וזה הכל אהובי, זה הכל.


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

06 Jan 2017, 12:58 am

Kiprobalhato wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Even the events regarding Podesta and the Clinton tech people seems very fishy. Is someone who's achieved John Podesta's position, really supposed to be that stupid and gullible?


you have to remember, these people are not digital natives. they merely adopted the computer screen and thus tend to be less competent with them on average, we were born in them, molded by them.

they didn't see emails until they were already men.


:jester:


I think I resemble that remark. :lol:


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


green0star
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2016
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,415
Location: blah

06 Jan 2017, 9:40 am

Sounds legit but in the business world, their money is still green bruh :p



friedmacguffins
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,539

06 Jan 2017, 11:50 am

What are you being offered, and on what terms.



JohnPowell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2016
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,806
Location: Palestine

06 Jan 2017, 1:12 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
There wasn't anything sophisticated at all about the alleged "hacks", yes a 14 year old could of done it easily. I'll take Julian Assange's word as someone that knows technology over unnamed sources and media talking heads that specialize in warmongering. The CIA should not be trusted ever, they are shrewd political players and liars. Bob Barr is not a credible source of anything. Unless the person was a rank amateur they wouldn't be able to trace this, I don't think it is possible retroactively, it is very simple to not only cover your tracks but to make them look like they came from someone else too.

John Podesta gave his own password away, there was no brute force cracking or some sort of 80s movie hacker ****. Almost always when there is some major breach it's because some dumby screwed up, they get the information they want from simple techniques like phishing or social engineering. A lot of people haven't seemed to grasp yet the concept of a secure password, you'd think the dodos out there would of stopped using password as there password 20+ years ago but passwords like that still seem like the norm with a lot of people unless forced to do otherwise. Podesta stupidly clicked on a fake email which was verified incompetently by one of the Clinton tech people who seemed to have a lot of problems.


Well, if you watch CNN this morning, you'll find that very issue is being discussed. Can the CIA be trusted? Not always, no, but Assange and Putin have far greater trust issues. Trump had originally said Assange should have been executed, till wh***y started covering for him, while Putin has a long history of interfering with the elections of foreign countries he's hostile to. Plus, Assange has worked with the state run Russian news service, making their collusion all the more likely. What Trump's forgetting is, as President he will need US intelligence, but his rejection of their findings on this matter will at the very least lead to a frosty relationship in the next four years.
Have you considered the possibility that you support Trump on this matter simply because you support Trump in general?


You watch a lot of CNN don't you? Assange is a very honest man. When has Assange "worked with" RT? What findings?


_________________
"No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?"


friedmacguffins
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,539

06 Jan 2017, 1:54 pm

In online gossip, disgusted Democrats supposedly unseated Hillary, from inside of domestic intelligence agencies.

Loyal Democrats are still desperately trying to salvage a narrative, in which cyberwarfare turns hot, to keep Hillary out of prison.

No matter what you think of her, I find it difficult to believe that she puts her name on documents, which are actually important, and just leaves them unattended. It was either a limited hangout, or just as specious as blaming Nakoula for Benghazi.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

06 Jan 2017, 7:30 pm

JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
There wasn't anything sophisticated at all about the alleged "hacks", yes a 14 year old could of done it easily. I'll take Julian Assange's word as someone that knows technology over unnamed sources and media talking heads that specialize in warmongering. The CIA should not be trusted ever, they are shrewd political players and liars. Bob Barr is not a credible source of anything. Unless the person was a rank amateur they wouldn't be able to trace this, I don't think it is possible retroactively, it is very simple to not only cover your tracks but to make them look like they came from someone else too.

John Podesta gave his own password away, there was no brute force cracking or some sort of 80s movie hacker ****. Almost always when there is some major breach it's because some dumby screwed up, they get the information they want from simple techniques like phishing or social engineering. A lot of people haven't seemed to grasp yet the concept of a secure password, you'd think the dodos out there would of stopped using password as there password 20+ years ago but passwords like that still seem like the norm with a lot of people unless forced to do otherwise. Podesta stupidly clicked on a fake email which was verified incompetently by one of the Clinton tech people who seemed to have a lot of problems.


Well, if you watch CNN this morning, you'll find that very issue is being discussed. Can the CIA be trusted? Not always, no, but Assange and Putin have far greater trust issues. Trump had originally said Assange should have been executed, till wh***y started covering for him, while Putin has a long history of interfering with the elections of foreign countries he's hostile to. Plus, Assange has worked with the state run Russian news service, making their collusion all the more likely. What Trump's forgetting is, as President he will need US intelligence, but his rejection of their findings on this matter will at the very least lead to a frosty relationship in the next four years.
Have you considered the possibility that you support Trump on this matter simply because you support Trump in general?


You watch a lot of CNN don't you? Assange is a very honest man. When has Assange "worked with" RT? What findings?


Assange sold himself as an honest man. But if this is all proven to be true, then he is anything but.
And if he's so honest, why hasn't he exposed Putin's abuses? Bill Maher asked him why he hasn't exposed Trump's tax returns, and just got a brush off. Seems Julian is pretty selective in who he exposes, which means he's hardly the crusader he claims to be.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


JohnPowell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2016
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,806
Location: Palestine

06 Jan 2017, 8:03 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
There wasn't anything sophisticated at all about the alleged "hacks", yes a 14 year old could of done it easily. I'll take Julian Assange's word as someone that knows technology over unnamed sources and media talking heads that specialize in warmongering. The CIA should not be trusted ever, they are shrewd political players and liars. Bob Barr is not a credible source of anything. Unless the person was a rank amateur they wouldn't be able to trace this, I don't think it is possible retroactively, it is very simple to not only cover your tracks but to make them look like they came from someone else too.

John Podesta gave his own password away, there was no brute force cracking or some sort of 80s movie hacker ****. Almost always when there is some major breach it's because some dumby screwed up, they get the information they want from simple techniques like phishing or social engineering. A lot of people haven't seemed to grasp yet the concept of a secure password, you'd think the dodos out there would of stopped using password as there password 20+ years ago but passwords like that still seem like the norm with a lot of people unless forced to do otherwise. Podesta stupidly clicked on a fake email which was verified incompetently by one of the Clinton tech people who seemed to have a lot of problems.


Well, if you watch CNN this morning, you'll find that very issue is being discussed. Can the CIA be trusted? Not always, no, but Assange and Putin have far greater trust issues. Trump had originally said Assange should have been executed, till wh***y started covering for him, while Putin has a long history of interfering with the elections of foreign countries he's hostile to. Plus, Assange has worked with the state run Russian news service, making their collusion all the more likely. What Trump's forgetting is, as President he will need US intelligence, but his rejection of their findings on this matter will at the very least lead to a frosty relationship in the next four years.
Have you considered the possibility that you support Trump on this matter simply because you support Trump in general?


You watch a lot of CNN don't you? Assange is a very honest man. When has Assange "worked with" RT? What findings?


Assange sold himself as an honest man. But if this is all proven to be true, then he is anything but.
And if he's so honest, why hasn't he exposed Putin's abuses? Bill Maher asked him why he hasn't exposed Trump's tax returns, and just got a brush off. Seems Julian is pretty selective in who he exposes, which means he's hardly the crusader he claims to be.


Bill Maher!! !! !! !! !! !! ! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Have you even watched the Assange interviews with Pilger and Hannity? Until you have, don't bother replying.


_________________
"No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?"


EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

06 Jan 2017, 11:20 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:

Assange sold himself as an honest man. But if this is all proven to be true, then he is anything but.


How so? He's just giving his appraisal of the current situation, the same as me. Except his appraisal is considerably more educated than mine. If it turns out to be true, that just means we both were simply incorrect, not dishonest.

I do note however, that you're still saying if it's proven true. Meaning it hasn't been yet in all this time, despite headline accusations and sanctions from Obama.

If it turns out to be untrue, what does that say about Obama? What should his punishment be?



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

07 Jan 2017, 4:11 am

EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:

Assange sold himself as an honest man. But if this is all proven to be true, then he is anything but.


How so? He's just giving his appraisal of the current situation, the same as me. Except his appraisal is considerably more educated than mine. If it turns out to be true, that just means we both were simply incorrect, not dishonest.

I do note however, that you're still saying if it's proven true. Meaning it hasn't been yet in all this time, despite headline accusations and sanctions from Obama.

If it turns out to be untrue, what does that say about Obama? What should his punishment be?


When Assange reveals the obvious dirt on Putin, I'll accept that he's the honest man he's been made out to be. And yes, there is plenty of dirt on Putin.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

07 Jan 2017, 4:14 am

JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
There wasn't anything sophisticated at all about the alleged "hacks", yes a 14 year old could of done it easily. I'll take Julian Assange's word as someone that knows technology over unnamed sources and media talking heads that specialize in warmongering. The CIA should not be trusted ever, they are shrewd political players and liars. Bob Barr is not a credible source of anything. Unless the person was a rank amateur they wouldn't be able to trace this, I don't think it is possible retroactively, it is very simple to not only cover your tracks but to make them look like they came from someone else too.

John Podesta gave his own password away, there was no brute force cracking or some sort of 80s movie hacker ****. Almost always when there is some major breach it's because some dumby screwed up, they get the information they want from simple techniques like phishing or social engineering. A lot of people haven't seemed to grasp yet the concept of a secure password, you'd think the dodos out there would of stopped using password as there password 20+ years ago but passwords like that still seem like the norm with a lot of people unless forced to do otherwise. Podesta stupidly clicked on a fake email which was verified incompetently by one of the Clinton tech people who seemed to have a lot of problems.


Well, if you watch CNN this morning, you'll find that very issue is being discussed. Can the CIA be trusted? Not always, no, but Assange and Putin have far greater trust issues. Trump had originally said Assange should have been executed, till wh***y started covering for him, while Putin has a long history of interfering with the elections of foreign countries he's hostile to. Plus, Assange has worked with the state run Russian news service, making their collusion all the more likely. What Trump's forgetting is, as President he will need US intelligence, but his rejection of their findings on this matter will at the very least lead to a frosty relationship in the next four years.
Have you considered the possibility that you support Trump on this matter simply because you support Trump in general?


You watch a lot of CNN don't you? Assange is a very honest man. When has Assange "worked with" RT? What findings?


Assange sold himself as an honest man. But if this is all proven to be true, then he is anything but.
And if he's so honest, why hasn't he exposed Putin's abuses? Bill Maher asked him why he hasn't exposed Trump's tax returns, and just got a brush off. Seems Julian is pretty selective in who he exposes, which means he's hardly the crusader he claims to be.


Bill Maher!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Have you even watched the Assange interviews with Pilger and Hannity? Until you have, don't bother replying.


I mentioned Maher because he had consistently been an Assange ally. The fact that Assange did nothing about revealing Trump's tax returns left Maher bewildered.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

07 Jan 2017, 4:33 am

One thing is for sure, Trump is on the warpath with the intelligence boys. Gonna have the chairs of the House and Senate committees to investigate them. Looks like some are gonna hear "you're fired" if they don't produce something better than they have so far. This guy will be their Commander-in-Chief soon, if that reality hasn't sunk in with them yet, and he is a bulldog that's for sure. He really reminds me of a modern day Theodore Roosevelt. Don't take this post too seriously.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

07 Jan 2017, 4:42 am

EzraS wrote:
One thing is for sure, Trump is on the warpath with the intelligence boys. Gonna have the chairs of the House and Senate committees to investigate them. Looks like some are gonna hear "you're fired" if they don't produce something better than they have so far. This guy will be their Commander-in-Chief, if that reality hasn't sunk in with them yet, and he is a bulldog that's for sure. He really reminds me of a modern day Theodore Roosevelt. Don't take this post too seriously.

As much as I dislike the CIA, if it comes down to believing them or Putin, I'll take the CIA, because the Russian strongman yearns for the day when America is reduced to a fallen power. If Trump doubts that, then he's a bigger fool than I thought.
By the way, Teddy Roosevelt would never have put a hostile foreign power ahead of his own country.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

07 Jan 2017, 4:59 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
One thing is for sure, Trump is on the warpath with the intelligence boys. Gonna have the chairs of the House and Senate committees to investigate them. Looks like some are gonna hear "you're fired" if they don't produce something better than they have so far. This guy will be their Commander-in-Chief, if that reality hasn't sunk in with them yet, and he is a bulldog that's for sure. He really reminds me of a modern day Theodore Roosevelt. Don't take this post too seriously.

As much as I dislike the CIA, if it comes down to believing them or Putin, I'll take the CIA, because the Russian strongman yearns for the day when America is reduced to a fallen power. If Trump doubts that, then he's a bigger fool than I thought.
By the way, Teddy Roosevelt would never have put a hostile foreign power ahead of his own country.


Believing Putin or Assange or Trump has nothing to do with it as far as I'm concerned. Does the CIA via NBC have a solid case or not? That's all I'm focusing on, not all these background names and anonymous souses and so on. All that matters to me is, do they have a solid case? So far they really haven't produced one. Lots of smoke and mirrors obfuscation, that's for sure, but so far nothing has been presented as solid proof. I really don't see how Trump demanding an investigation of mighty fishy anonymous CIA reports means putting Russia before of the US. But I do see that as the propaganda plan. I saw that from the very beginning.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

07 Jan 2017, 5:22 am

EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
One thing is for sure, Trump is on the warpath with the intelligence boys. Gonna have the chairs of the House and Senate committees to investigate them. Looks like some are gonna hear "you're fired" if they don't produce something better than they have so far. This guy will be their Commander-in-Chief, if that reality hasn't sunk in with them yet, and he is a bulldog that's for sure. He really reminds me of a modern day Theodore Roosevelt. Don't take this post too seriously.

As much as I dislike the CIA, if it comes down to believing them or Putin, I'll take the CIA, because the Russian strongman yearns for the day when America is reduced to a fallen power. If Trump doubts that, then he's a bigger fool than I thought.
By the way, Teddy Roosevelt would never have put a hostile foreign power ahead of his own country.


Believing Putin or Assange or Trump has nothing to do with it as far as I'm concerned. Does the CIA via NBC have a solid case or not? That's all I'm focusing on, not all these background names and anonymous souses and so on. All that matters to me is, do they have a solid case? So far they really haven't produced one. Lots of smoke and mirrors obfuscation, that's for sure, but so far nothing has been presented as solid proof. I really don't see how Trump demanding an investigation of mighty fishy anonymous CIA reports means putting Russia before of the US. But I do see that as the propaganda plan. I saw that from the very beginning.


You're entitled to your opinion. As a matter of fact, though, the CIA is presenting proof that Putin was the guilty party.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

07 Jan 2017, 11:26 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
One thing is for sure, Trump is on the warpath with the intelligence boys. Gonna have the chairs of the House and Senate committees to investigate them. Looks like some are gonna hear "you're fired" if they don't produce something better than they have so far. This guy will be their Commander-in-Chief, if that reality hasn't sunk in with them yet, and he is a bulldog that's for sure. He really reminds me of a modern day Theodore Roosevelt. Don't take this post too seriously.

As much as I dislike the CIA, if it comes down to believing them or Putin, I'll take the CIA, because the Russian strongman yearns for the day when America is reduced to a fallen power. If Trump doubts that, then he's a bigger fool than I thought.
By the way, Teddy Roosevelt would never have put a hostile foreign power ahead of his own country.


Believing Putin or Assange or Trump has nothing to do with it as far as I'm concerned. Does the CIA via NBC have a solid case or not? That's all I'm focusing on, not all these background names and anonymous souses and so on. All that matters to me is, do they have a solid case? So far they really haven't produced one. Lots of smoke and mirrors obfuscation, that's for sure, but so far nothing has been presented as solid proof. I really don't see how Trump demanding an investigation of mighty fishy anonymous CIA reports means putting Russia before of the US. But I do see that as the propaganda plan. I saw that from the very beginning.


You're entitled to your opinion. As a matter of fact, though, the CIA is presenting proof that Putin was the guilty party.


I will be very interested to see what they finally at long last produce.

Hopefully it won't turn out to be like this kind of intelligence report:



Still sounds mighty convincing doesn't it? Turns out though of course their anonymous source was full of crap. How many millions were convinced it was true and refused to listen to those debunking it?