Anonymous Hack's Palin's Yahoo Email, page 4
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6    7  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 27 times


reply posted on 17-9-2008 @ 06:37 PM by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by shipovfools



i don't know if this has been posted yet, but doesn't this play into the whole "palin as a trojan horse" thread a couple weeks ago here on ATS?


reply posted on 17-9-2008 @ 06:42 PM by mybigunit
To all those who said this is theft yea maybe it is but it serves her right for doing government work on personal emails so she can delete stuff. Hacking is going to be part of wars now so get used to it.

Edit to add

It has been shown that she uses this personal email for government issues so she doesnt have to keep record as shown here
www.washingtonpost.com...

Anything that is government issues as far as Im concerned is fair game. Anything personal however should be kept that way. She is a civilian too and has rights to privacy just like us all. Maybe this will be a lesson to her quit trying to beat the system rules are there for a reason. (Try telling that to Bush)

[edit on 17-9-2008 by mybigunit]



reply posted on 17-9-2008 @ 07:03 PM by Areal51
FYI: The story has gone mainstream.

www.nytimes.com...

(I, for one, am glad that somebody here at ATS has thoroughly debunked the backfire theory!

I don't know why the McCain-Palin campaign would want to associated Sarah Palin with the term "backfire" anyway. )



[edit on 17-9-2008 by Areal51]


reply posted on 17-9-2008 @ 07:12 PM by Sublime620
reply to post by Areal51



Well, I took a warn for it, but I had to. I can't sit here while someone takes advantage of a story to spin it into something it's not.

People keep saying that anything bad that happens to Palin is going to backfire against Obama. Funny, so many things have backfired against him and he's steady in the polls.

This is a story of some guys hacking her account to see what they can find. Nothing else. If this "backfires" against anyone but the hackers themselves then America is stupid.


reply posted on 17-9-2008 @ 07:20 PM by Areal51
reply to post by WERE_ALL_GONA_DIE


Hey, that's a reasonable conspiracy theory. I thought the same thing. How better to get rid of evidence than to stage a hack and blame it on famous hackers?

Though, unless Anon. deny responsibility, there's no reason to doubt that they did in fact do the deed.


reply posted on 17-9-2008 @ 07:21 PM by Freenrgy2
Originally posted by d11_m_na_c05
How bout we wait and see what dirt's brought out.


How 'about not. Despite your political affiliation (and I speak to a general audience), it is absolutely disgusting for any of us to revel in the fact that someone's privacy was deliberately invaded in order to discredit them. As much as I dislike Obama, I would have the same feelings if this happened to him.

How about the loss of security with regards to the Patriot Act. Weren't we all screaming about that (and still are)? But, because it was hacked, it's o.k. to see whatever "dirt" there is? Coverup? Hardly. Protecting one's privacy? Absolutely. I'd do the same thing if it were me and I was a high profile individual.

There has to be some boundry that shouldn't be crossed. But, now that this has happened, it will become media fodder for the remainder of the week/weekend, especially if any "dirt" is mysteriously leaked.

Would any one of us be willing to let our privacy be so blatently invaded and published and then not try to stop it? But because she's running for VP, this makes her a fair target?

It would be wise of Obama's campaign to come out very soon and denounce this and state that this should have no bearing on the individual.

For heaven's sakes, how many emails has the White House 'lost' in the Bush administration? You want a coverup, how about looking there.

Again, this is a disgusting act of privacy invasion and Governor Palin has every right to delete, sue to have web site posts removed, sue the individual's responsible, etc.. The fact is that this is criminal and there should be strong, very strong repercusions for this act. And to reiterate, in case you didn't catch it earlier, I would ask for the same to be done if it were Obama's email that were hacked as well.


reply posted on 17-9-2008 @ 07:24 PM by Freenrgy2
reply to post by 27jd



The difference is....these weren't cops.

And if she has done business in a private account, then there are legal channels that should be gone through. But surely NO politician has ever conducted business via a private email account...right? Not excusing it, just my belief that this probably goes on all the time, democrats and republicans alike.


reply posted on 17-9-2008 @ 07:32 PM by Sublime620
reply to post by rcwj75



I agree. Hacking into her account isn't ethical in any way.

However, it's not the big deal people are making it into. Hopefully no financial information was stolen. We should all be assuming there was no information in there that would get her in trouble, also. So that's all fine and well.

There's really nothing to see here. It's an email account that got hacked into and proved to be useless. I assume the hackers probably thought they could dig some dirt up on her, but they obviously failed at that.

As bad as I think hacking into her email is, I don't think it's the dirtiest tricks that are being used (and it's also not anyone but the hackers responsibility - no one put them up to this but themselves). So there's no need for a blame game, and there's no need to really discuss it other than a failed attempt at gaining glory through hacking.

*Edit:

To clarify, I think putting a DVD about terrorism in newspapers to sway voters is as dirty as it gets. I don't approve of fear mongering.

[edit on 17-9-2008 by Sublime620]



reply posted on 17-9-2008 @ 07:39 PM by Areal51
reply to post by rcwj75

Frankly, I think the incident was not so much an attack on Palin or Palin's privacy, than it was on secrecy. Especially since the motto of the current administration is "Secrecy is Good". They rewrote Gordon Gecko.

Anyway, I don't doubt that there is a price to pay for the revelation of secrets, and so the unveiling requires careful consideration. However, if the secrets being kept represent illegal acts and criminal activity, then those secrets don't deserve to be kept secret. In an ideal world.

The world doesn't work that way, of course, but since it does work in a way that demands secrets be kept, then all secrets are fair game for daylight. That being the logical conclusion.

To defeat the exposure of secrets, have none.

Further interest: www.eff.org...
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6    7  >>    ^^TOP^^