Coming February 6, 2024 . . .
MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Pre-order at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
Coming February 6, 2024 . . . MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE by Michael Wolraich Pre-order at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop |
Former NSA experts say it wasn’t a hack at all, but a leak—an inside job by someone with access to the DNC’s system.
Comments
Oh, the VIPS monkeys again. I had file transfer acceleration software during this time period that could have easily blown these idiots' numbers out if the water, and any good hacker moving large files would have the same - from several vendors or roll their own. The article comments make it clear the author and VIPS are full of shit, making naive newbie calculations that are utterly indefensible.
Morons - how do they keep getting press? Is The Nation so obsessed with libeling the DNC they'll write any load of bollocks?
by PeraclesPlease on Thu, 08/10/2017 - 8:43pm
Agree. Gotta ask startling questions and sow Comet Pizza like theories to get click$. I like Digby's "you must skip the first 1000 words of bs "edifices, great gravity...."
Nothing authenticates the unscrupulousness dishonesty of the 'deep state' on Russian involvement with DNC emails more thoroughly of course than once again hauling out the 50's Mossadegh coup. Lawrence takes no chances however, and nails his uncanny clairvoyance by also throwing in chicanery relating to the Sandanistas, Ho Chi Minh and....yes....the 1890's USS Maine sinking.
Additionally, he has easily noted, glaring inconsistencies, in his theorizing:
Patrick Lawrence this article, August:
Patrick Lawrence in May:
A Glenn Greenwald wannabe?
by NCD on Fri, 08/11/2017 - 4:06pm
Digby slaps down VIPS
by PeraclesPlease on Fri, 08/11/2017 - 12:20pm
Patrick Lawrence’s conclusion may be totally wrong and right now the proof one way or another seems to rely on the claims about possible download speeds. I have been finding claims on both sides but nothing yet that convinces me one way or the other. No one, not one person yet, that I have heard who claims to sounds like they know what they are talking about [on either side of the issue] has used your retort that available download-speed-up-programs could have actually sped up the download to the rate that is claimed necessary for it to have been a hack. Many other claims are made and then disputed but I have only seen you make that particular one. I hope to see something definitie on that question. Of course I have also seen many hollow ad hominem attacks such as “Oh, the VIPS monkeys again”. Here are the 'monkeys' most pertinent to this issue.
There are many possibilities. These men may all be Russian dupes, maybe even willing agents, who were never discovered to be so during their high level government service in the very positions that supposedly give them insights and ability to intelligently study and comment on the issue now. Maybe they are telling deliberate lies. But, It is at least possible IMO that there is something to their conclusions.
by A Guy Called LULU on Fri, 08/11/2017 - 2:38pm
Something, probably my mistake, caused part of my comment to not post. Here is my intended first paragraph.
The published retorts are piling up and they rely mostly on one very strong point. To believe the most critical evidence offered we must give credence to anonymous sources. That does not, however, distinguish the article’s claims one iota from most of the claims we hear that come from supposedly reliable but also anonymous sources within the government. To say that we should not even consider the claims made in the Nation article because some of the sources do not identify themselves is a strong example of selective belief. To consider anonymous leaks from our intelligence services to be reliable sources that we can count on as being the un-spun truth requires a willful disregard for known history. To unquestionably go with the government’s story because it confirms what we want to believe is a blatantly ridiculous disregard of the many deceptions that our government has put out in the past. While the New York Magazine goes hard on the uncritical belief in anonymous sources, as any journalistic endeavor should, it ignores any credibility that might be given to the sources that are identified.
by A Guy Called LULU on Fri, 08/11/2017 - 2:47pm
Read the comments to the story. They rather well debunk it. Read Digby. Go to www.signiant.com or google file transfer acceleration for I assume a half dozen software solutions that can speed this up on laptop and even smartphone. For transferring videos and any other large content. One company regularly claimed 20-70x speedup over doing regular ftp depending on size of files, distance, etc. I've personally seen at least 20x on some content/long hauls, others down below 10 when running over WiFi, forget all the scenarios I looked at, but I was given this about 3 years ago, and it's been around for much longer, including some registered protocols and proposed standards.
These guys' analysis is like predicting server data warehousing speeds based on running Microsoft Access on a laptop - or as Bullwinkle used to say, "I've got 2 words for you, Rocky - IM-POSSIBLE".
by PeraclesPlease on Fri, 08/11/2017 - 4:39pm
I accept the evidence in your favor that the download speed limit used by VIPS is probably wrong. For you to be thinking and super confidently saying that their entire case is proven a sham because that one piece of evidence does not hold up is a mistake. Bloomberg has a very good article examining VIPS as a group and this issue in particular. One thing pointed out is the internal differences of opinion within the group and how not all of them sign on to all its public statements. One who didn't sign on to this one is Scott Ritter who makes his own case on the issue in a very good article at Truthdig. There is a picture in the Bloomberg piece of Hillary Clinton under which it say's [I doubt the caption is by the author of the article but it is IMO a very important question if the answer is in any doubt] "What if it isn't Russia's fault".
by A Guy Called LULU on Sat, 08/12/2017 - 5:21pm