It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Guccifer 2.0 just drops new hacked DNC documents

page: 7
79
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 12:33 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

We need to stop trolling the thread. I didn't mean for that to go so wild back there.

If it makes you feel any better, the GOP is the same wicked animal as the DNC. Just 2 warring factions of 1 tyrannical machination. Ebb and flow, they bicker about stem cells and that kind of crap but the REAL issues like American Imperialism, the Police State, the War On Drugs, etc, stay the same because they both tow that line. They're all puppets man, where the design is for us to be the play things of the puppets!

Take the immigration, or rather the OPEN BORDER issue. Not to make this a conversation herein (I have on old thread on topic we can go there), I'm merely using it as an illustration.
I suggest that the whole reason it was left that way (initially anyways), why no matter who was "in charge", where despite everybody agreeing it needed serious effort, even in the face of "terrorists walking over it with suitcase nukes" (post-911) it just stayed the same. What I've come to believe is to maintain the War On Drugs Model, it needs to be open the way it has been. Gotta keep them drugs rolling in every which way AND those 'undocumented gang bangers' (not to imply that all illegal immigrants are gangbangers) to push the stuff, to keep them militarized cops goosestepping, keep them jails full, the judges/lawyers etc etc etc etc. Regardless of lip service, neither has REALLY tried ANYTHING to fix the 'wall' or the WOD. DNC can speak against the WOD, here and there, as long as they keep the wall open then still "need" a WOD. GOP can talk about the wall, here and there, as long as still support the WOD then we still "need" the WOD.
And sure enough, onevery issue, each side as their followers totally set on their 'way to deal with it' (which normally basically doesn't exist) where sure enough every issue its the EXACT opposite of the "other" guys. The only stuff that in practice they ever prove to agree on are the REAL issues like American Imperialism, the Police State, the War On Drugs, etc. This kind of effect across every sphere of our society / system.

Right now the DNC is my hotseat because #1 they've had their 8 years now and #2 they've gone way over the top this round with this PC stuff that has the nation AT WAR WITH ITSELF this election. The new model now is they play it cool there first term, and once re-elected, like the next month the dictatorial executive orders and the like come exploding out of their secret red briefcase. Each time they stack new snip on top of their predecessors dark deeds. You can only do this for so long until totalitarianism is all that's left to be done.

These parties need to go! You give either one of them the full 8 years (which they usually seem to get) the past 20 or so years and they batter across like a wrecking ball. Each time the rubble pile is just bigger and bigger, while the wrecking ball gets bigger and bigger each 4 year election cycle. Following this pattern, the earth's core will explode during the next few elections (if it doesn't before then)!

We need a new way. A new movement. A new model. A new government. A new system (or the system heavily modified and then REBOOTED). We need an Alt/Alt....


edit on 14-9-2016 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 12:39 AM
link   
you know, when these leaks happen I really wish ATS would pull its finger out and create a thread where no one argues back and forth but instead.. they provide links or screen shots of emails they find interesting for one reason or the other.

has anyone bothered to look at the leak and find anything of value to be discussed?

is there another site that actually looks at the emails and posts items they think need discussion?

or am i dreaming..



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Agit8dChop

I didn't mean for it to get so messy.

I've been thinking about suggesting they make a forum category where ON TOPIC is the key (especially considering we're not supposed to 'define' in an OP how a thread ought to play out).


originally posted by: theantediluvian
I can only assume because you are detailed oriented and because you are capable of critical thought, that it frustrates you to see people blathering out of pure ignorance in a stampede of idiots?


As long as its funny then fun. But it got old a while ago how it always plays out in the Trump thread 'oh but Hillary' vice versa. And its so hard not to, as most of the key core examples people refer to (personality traits) in the way can be said about the other one. The other thing that's been bugging me more & more is how everytime someone posts a link to a site that is clearly against their view people start ranting about such & such how tragic someone would post that here kind of thing to effectively troll the thread. I mean imagine if every single time someone cited sy an NBC News article, the front end of the thread was riddled with outcrying. BTW anyone of this way, if you always shield yourself from opposing views you are turning your cheek to the oncoming sucker punch of your own ignorance-fueled self-delusions. When it comes to truth there is NO safe space!
edit on 14-9-2016 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: sirlancelot
Not sure if this is correct but it looks like the DNC fundraising XLS from mostly appointed ambassadors.



Geez the DNC fundraising arm was and is hard at work! Kinda a play then pay approach ain't it?


According to the Foreign Service act of 1980, 3) Contributions to political campaigns should not be a factor in the appointment of an individual as a chief of mission. Though it is dubious, and these appointments have soared under Obama, it isn't illegal, nor even new.

An article on the topic from 2007:

Ambassadors: should patronage picks matter?


edit on 14-9-2016 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 01:49 AM
link   
Argh.

Moving on, does anybody know if this is supposed to be "that last" data dump, or if there's others still yet to follow?



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 02:12 AM
link   
Here's goes a lesson in Diversionary Propaganda, folks:

Hacker 'Guccifer 2.0' Releases More DNC Docs — Including Tim Kaine's Cell Number (NBC News)

First note the title. CELL PHONE NUMBER BAD is how they're framing the article. Then it opens up along those lines to get people all offended. Then in THE MIDDLE they spend less than 10% of the article covering the actual umph materials. While all the rest might as well be drivel (or it is).

NOTE: It is well known in human memory research, especially concerning viewing media, that we tend to only truly remember the beginning and the end!


What do we remember more: the beginning or ending of a presentation?
A few weeks ago, we ran a poll asking viewers whether after two days, someone would remember the beginning or the ending of a presentation. Out of 272 responses, 54% chose the beginning, and 46% favored the ending. The two numbers indicate a close debate. We can settle the ambiguity by consulting experimental research findings.

In scientific research on memory, the question about the impact of “firsts” and “lasts” is called the serial position effect. The most frequent conclusion you may have heard is that people tend to remember items at the beginning of a series (primacy effects) and the end (recency effects). The typical explanation for primacy and recency effects is that first and last items in a list, when analyzed globally, do not have “neighbors” (the beginning to the left and the ending to the right); their sheer positioning makes them more distinct than middle items, and as a result they receive more attention, which increases recall. There are situations when either the beginning or the ending is more memorable. Where presentations are concerned, these situations depend on length and delivery speed, as well as the presence of highly contrasting materials. It is important to understand the difference between short-term and long-term memory when comparing recall for beginnings versus endings. Short-term memory lasts for an average of 30 seconds, and holds up to 4 perceptual items for novices and roughly 9 for experts.





The Movie Director’s Guide to Effective Teaching
Learning Happens at the Beginning and at the End
Research has shown that learning most frequently happens at the start and at the end of a message. Your message could be a presentation, advertisement or a lecture, it doesn’t matter – people remember the beginning and ending more than the middle. It’s called the primacy-recency principle and was first studied in the 1920’s. Movie directors understand this to well – that’s why in most movies something big usually happens within the first couple minutes and the best song is left until the end. They want you to remember the start of the movie and feel good at the end. We can apply this concept and provide a better learning experience for your audience.

Use Beginnings to Grab Your Audience
It’s at the beginning where you can grab the attention of your audience and set the tone for the rest of your message. We remember more from the beginning and end of a presentation than we do of the stuff in the middle. Usually people are ‘ready to learn’ at the beginning of a session and pay close attention and typically take notes. But then something happens after a while – their eyes glaze over and they start to drift away. They check their Blackberry, complete their to-do list for the day or just plain doodle. All the while the presenter is trying her hardest to deliver her message and teach you her topic. Has this ever happened to you? What’s missing, is the attention grabbing message. Too many times we don’t do an adequate job of telling the audience why they should care about the material. And it can’t be some lame corporate directive reason either. You have to explain why your message matters to your audience in a way that’s meaningful them. You as the presenter may be passionate about a topic, and to be successful, you have to communicate that passion to the audience. Only then, when the audience has a compelling reason to listen, will true learning and retention occur.

Endings are for the Big Hollywood Finish
At the end of your talk you want your audience to leave feeling good, like they truly learned something. You want them to leave with a sense of accomplishment. That’s why it’s actually better to cover fewer topics with more depth, than a range of topics at a cursory level.


Use Beginnings to Grab Your Audience:

The hacker or hackers who claim to have broken into Democratic Party systems released more documents Tuesday, including what appeared to be the personal cell phone of vice presidential candidate Tim Kaine. "Guccifer 2.0" released over 670 megabytes of documents at a cybersecurity conference in London Tuesday. The work cell phone numbers, personal email addresses and personal cell phone numbers of top Obama White House officials were also included in the cache.


Endings are for the Big Hollywood Finish:

Also on Tuesday, hackers linked to the Russian government released documents claimed to be drug-testing files of American Olympic athletes.

The documents have not been confirmed authentic or unaltered by NBC News. Russian athletes were banned from the Rio Olympics — and Paralympics — after recommendations by the World Anti-Doping Agency due to evidence of widespread doping.

The Russian government has denied being involved in the hacks. Russian President Vladimir Putin said in a Bloomnberg interview this month that while Russia was not behind the DNC hack, he considered the release of DNC emails a public service.

edit on 14-9-2016 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 03:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: sirlancelot
Not sure if this is correct but it looks like the DNC fundraising XLS from mostly appointed ambassadors.



Geez the DNC fundraising arm was and is hard at work! Kinda a play then pay approach ain't it?


According to the Foreign Service act of 1980, 3) Contributions to political campaigns should not be a factor in the appointment of an individual as a chief of mission. Though it is dubious, and these appointments have soared under Obama, it isn't illegal, nor even new.

An article on the topic from 2007:

Ambassadors: should patronage picks matter?



Legal or not, I hope the average voter will find it unethical.

It's pathetic and we're sick of seeing politicians write laws to benefit themselves



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 03:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Konduit

So that's part of their heart filled campaigning for her, despite Clinton's hating Obama's. I mean sure yeah the party and all that, but she needs him to pardon her, and he needs her to "win" so she can pardon him!



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 03:53 AM
link   
These leaks give incredible credence to what Donald Trump has been saying from the beginning.

The Democratic establishment does not choose America's representatives based on merit, knowledge or experience... but whoever has dipped their hands into their money bowl. Pay-to-Play has officially become the DNC's new slogan. It's practically a tithe to the political clergy.

It's absolutely disgraceful, the entire party and it's leadership should be investigated, audited and shut down.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 04:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Konduit

True, but so should the GOP. They only look 'good' lately because they've been 'out' the past 8 years. Recall the scene when it was Dubya's last year 'in'. Then again, wasn't Fox all attack dog against Trump prior to the nomination?? I'm not positive sure, but I know the GOP was (well, which means Fox had to have been).



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 04:19 AM
link   
... just out of curiosity ... how much of this "data dump" is authentic?

I mean, which documents are real and which are faked?

And how do you know?



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 04:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
... just out of curiosity ... how much of this "data dump" is authentic?

I mean, which documents are real and which are faked?

And how do you know?


You don't know and can't know. So unless some investigative journalists dive in to this its going no where.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 04:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

The effect of it will surely be authentic.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 04:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66


originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
In other news, as breathtaking as this whole debacle already is...

The DNC rather than 'deny' or 'stall' responding to the issue they've instead effectively owned up to it by blaming Trump & Putin (deflect the "us" content within, to frame it around "them" being the 'bad guys'), while even throwing in some added fearmongering flare to the occasion by warning their flock not to open the archive because it probably contains some foreign espionage viruses or whatever.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 05:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: surnamename57
a reply to: Gryphon66

The effect of it will surely be authentic.


You bet. Watch the posturing and butt covering going on after this and you'll know why is provable.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 05:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
... just out of curiosity ... how much of this "data dump" is authentic?

I mean, which documents are real and which are faked?

And how do you know?


That's a very clever way to try and add suspicion to this.

But even if we accept your premise of adding the possibility that some of the documents are fake so we have to decide which are which there is an easier way to check.

The DNC would be able to prove the fake ones fake quickly and doing so would also cast doubt on the real ones.

Since the only people who could prove it's a fake haven't, I'm not sure what point there is in bringing it up except to try and muddy the waters.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 05:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: carewemust
I'm waiting for the leaks that will make our Judicial System take some action against Hillary! Assange says that they're coming.

The GOP keep hammering I.T. guys, looking for blood. That's ludicrous.

Nothing short of a Hillary indictment will get the job done! I take that back...if Hillary becomes a mental vegetable (i.e. catastrophic stroke) before November 8th, that would get the job done too. But I'd prefer it to happen for legal reasons, instead of medical reasons.


The judicial system is part of it.


This is the most important point made on any thread about the email server and leaks so far. I would add the FBI to the list of organisations 'in on it' too, now that we know of Comey's links to the Clinton Foundation. Like any corrupt organisation, the DNC have greased the wheels where they need to.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 06:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
... just out of curiosity ... how much of this "data dump" is authentic?

I mean, which documents are real and which are faked?

And how do you know?


I guess will find out if the DNC issues an alert to donors that credit card info has been compromised.
edit on 14-9-2016 by Throes because: Spelling



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 06:26 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

And Comey cleared Bill for Pardongate, way back.

en.wikipedia.org...



new topics

top topics



 
79
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join