Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Absolute Proof Russia Was Behind 2016 Election Hacking
www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2018/01/new-report-says-dutch-have-abso
lute-proof-russia-was-behind-2016-election-hacking/

The Dutch newspaper de Volkskrant (“The People’s Paper”) has quite the intriguing story today. Apparently AIVD, the Dutch equivalent of the CIA, broke into the computer systems of a nondescript building in Moscow a few years ago. They had no idea what was there, but eventually they figured it out. It was the workplace of Cozy Bear, Russia’s most infamous hacking group:

That’s how the AIVD becomes witness to the Russian hackers harassing and penetrating the leadership of the Democratic Party, transferring thousands of emails and documents. It won’t be the last time they alert their American counterparts. And yet, it will be months before the United States realize what this warning means: that with these hacks the Russians have interfered with the American elections. And the AIVD hackers have seen it happening before their very eyes.

….The Cozy Bear hackers are in a space in a university building near the Red Square. The group’s composition varies, usually about ten people are active. . . .

---

Try telling this to rappy and some others here. He still thinks there is no proof russia interfered in our elections. How is it possible after all this time, and all the intel reports, along with all the media coverage regarding this, for someone to not believe it? Not to believe they are still at it when everything points to they are?

It's not, so trolls they must be.


T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Absolute Proof Russia Was Behind 2016 Election Hacking

by

www.motherjones.com

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Absolute Proof Russia Was Behind 2016 Election Hacking

by

www.motherjones.com

---

lol

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Absolute Proof Russia Was Behind 2016 Election Hacking

by

www.motherjones.com

---

lol

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Absolute Proof Russia Was Behind 2016 Election Hacking

by

www.motherjones.com

---

lol

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Today’s Dilbert comic was written especially for 6ixStringJack http://dilbert.com/strip/2018-01-26

6ixStringJack: “Dilbert is a total narcissist. He refuses to admit when he’s wrong.”

Asok: “How would this situation look any different to you if he’s actually right most of the time and you’re too dumb to know it?”

6ixStringJack: “I don’t understand your point.”

Asok: “According to you, that makes me a narcissist.”

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

The fact that the irony of your post is completely lost on you amuses me.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

The fact that the irony of your post is completely lost on you amuses me.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Funny guy! So articulate! Even your very first comment from 2006 shows you are intelligent, far smarter than me. You deserve to be happy with your life, contented with all you have accomplished. http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=2&tid=21787&mid=326575
#326575

But all those additional comments you made over the years after that first one shows you are not happy. And it is not really Washington DC’s fault. Your sense of direction might not be that accurate. Your GPS system programmed by the GOP has been sending you along too many of the wrong right-hand forks in the road and you find yourself facing a dead end. Or maybe it is lake. I saw a picture in today’s newspaper about a guy who drove into a lake because the GPS (or is it the GOP?) told him to. Funny guy thinks he can sue the GPS for misleading him when, instead, he should have been using his head and his eyes.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

I haven't changed much since then. The entire country has gone nuts in the last 12 years.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

I haven't changed much since then. The entire country has gone nuts in the last 12 years.

---

No, you haven't. You were bitching about the movie Serenity back then and you have been bitching about The Last Jedi now.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

I haven't changed much since then. The entire country has gone nuts in the last 12 years.

---

No, you haven't. You were bitching about the movie Serenity back then and you have been bitching about The Last Jedi now.

---

Wow. That is a really stupid observation. Apples to Oranges.

What are you trying to say. I hated what Serenity meant to the possibility of bringing back Firefly, compared to how I have no interest in watching any new Star Wars movies because they are a Disney cash grab and are full of identity politics...

Somehow this explains how I vehemently denounced nearly every move that GWB made, yet I don't jump on the Hate Trump bandwagon?

What exactly is your point here again?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
LOL...

Remember the Dilbert comic strip that you were projecting on to me?

You telling me that my opinion on a movie is wrong is a perfect illustration of said irony.

Halfwit.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Really man, I have no idea what you're on about. From the looks of it, I'm the only one who has improved their life at all here in the one year of my sobriety. I'm not going to bother bringing up again all the ways it has been drastically improving since I hit my depths. Everybody else here seems to be static characters.

I've got a healthy distrust in the general Government. I'm unapologetic of that.

You, on the other hand, seem to believe that the Democrats are everything good and right with the world while the GOP is the exact opposite.

Comparing my dislike of what the movie Serenity did to Firefly, to Americans voting for Nixon and a 20/1 kill ratio in Vietnam. Just who the hell do you think you are anyway?

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

In other news:

“Don’t forget, we’re still in two different wars that I started.” - George Bush

Actor Will Ferrell revived his portrayal of President George W. Bush on Saturday Night Live to deliver a reminder about the 43rd president, whose approval ratings have skyrocketed recently: Just because Trump is a bad president doesn’t mean Bush was a good one.

“I’m suddenly popular AF,” Ferrell, who hosted SNL on Saturday, said. “A lot of people are saying, ‘Man, I wish George W. Bush was still our president right about now. So I just wanted to address my fellow Americans tonight and remind you guys that I was really bad.”

Sixty-one percent of Americans now say they have a favorable view of Bush, according to a CNN poll conducted by SSRS released this week, including 54 percent of Democrats. When he left office in 2009, his favorability was at just 33 percent overall and 11 percent among Democrats. This is a perfect example of how easily Americans, including Democrats, forget precisely what went wrong in the past, which makes it impossible to avoid nearly the same mistakes in the present.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
I see you're trying to engage SECOND in an actual discussion, Jack. Let me know if you have any luck. Because as far as I can tell, SECOND is here to bitch, moan, troll, and feed his ego. Nothing more.

---

Quote:

---

Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.

---

Quote:

---

The distinction between lying and bullshitting is fairly clear. The liar asserts something which he himself believes to be false. He deliberately misrepresents what he takes to be the truth. The bullshitter, on the other hand, is not constrained by any consideration of what may or may not be true. In making his assertion, he is indifferent to whether what he is says is true or false. His goal is not to report facts. It is, rather, to shape the beliefs and attitudes of his listeners in a certain way.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
As if you're being paid by the word, you guys are big on engaging in discussion, but your "discussions" never amount to anything useful or interesting.

---

Quote:

---

It always devolves, year after year and thread after thread, into your hurt feelings or your angry denouncements. Except in your imagination, this is not the right place for engaging in something so civilized as debate about the issues of the day. Firefly is the wrong TV show for what you want to do. Maybe you ought to try debating with fans of Star Trek Discovery? I hear it has more complexity and uncertainty about good and evil.

Before reading the following story, the words “bad faith” need explanation. Some examples of bad faith include: a company representative who negotiates with union workers while secretly having no intent of compromising; a prosecutor who argues a legal position that he secretly knows to be false; an insurer who uses language and reasoning which are deliberately misleading in order to deny a claim. And now to the story:

Fascism Is Speaking In Bad Faith
http://miniver.blogspot.com/2017/12/fascism-is-speaking-in-bad-faith.h
tml
Labels: antifa, BS, Trumpism

It is important to understand that fascism is not a political ideology in the same way that communism is. Communists have a detailed policy program which they espouse and pursue. Fascists do not; their policy prescriptions are often outright incoherent.

Fascism is better understood as a political method. And a key part of that method is speaking in bad faith: falsely describing what they want and care about, as a way of disrupting the process of political discussion itself. The vigor with which fascists do this is difficult to understand unless one has encountered it.

I have talked about this before, when talking about Milo Yiannopoulos, the Alt Right, and free speech:

We should not defend that as free speech; we need to recognize it as an attack on free speech. .... This is a method and it has a purpose. If we look at the history of far right movements, we can recognize the basic pattern. These movements are not simply opposed to liberalism-as-in-the-Democratic-Party; they are opposed to liberalism-as-in-liberal-democracy. They oppose universal human rights and equality. They aim to discredit liberalism by turning its systems against itself, making them impracticable, perverting the meaning of words like “free speech”.

In this we see a continuity between the fascists of the early 20th century and the fascists and para-fascists of today. Sartre's Reflections on the Jewish question describes this pattern in a troublingly familiar way.

Quote:

---

Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.

---

This is not restricted to the specifics of anti-semitism. It is a general rhetorical style. Here is Harry Frankfurt, the author of the wonderful short book On Bullshit summing up the method.

Quote:

---

The distinction between lying and bullshitting is fairly clear. The liar asserts something which he himself believes to be false. He deliberately misrepresents what he takes to be the truth. The bullshitter, on the other hand, is not constrained by any consideration of what may or may not be true. In making his assertion, he is indifferent to whether what he is says is true or false. His goal is not to report facts. It is, rather, to shape the beliefs and attitudes of his listeners in a certain way.

---

I bet you can guess who Frankfurt was talking about in the essay where he said that. (“Donald Trump Is BS, Says Expert in BS” http://time.com/4321036/donald-trump-bs/ )

To get a feel for how this works in governance, I vigorously recommend the (exceedingly fun) party game Secret Hitler ( http://secrethitler.com/ ), in which players pretend to be a parliament where fascists are trying to pass legislation and get their leader elected Chancellor. In the game, the fascists know who each other are but the liberals don't; this makes the gameplay include the fascists lying about their intentions and pretending to be liberals. The player who is their secret leader tries the hardest to appear to be a liberal. The game is structured such that the fascists are always outnumbered. But they usually win.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
hmmmmm... no mention of quantitative easing in there. Surely that has something to do with it, even though I'm sure Trump won't mention it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Once again, I'm not a Republican.

Don't try to disguise your insults, Second. You're not half as clever as you think you are.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
And I'm not half as rich as you are either, Mr. Genius 6ixStringJack.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
And I'm not half as rich as you are either, Mr. Genius 6ixStringJack.

---

That could very well be one of the most true things you've ever said on this board.

I don't actually believe you have any money Second. I don't think anybody here does, beyond the human tenancy to give a tiny bit of trust that somebody is who they say they are as long as that trust can't somehow burn them.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
And I'm not half as rich as you are either, Mr. Genius 6ixStringJack.

---

That could very well be one of the most true things you've ever said on this board.

I don't actually believe you have any money Second. I don't think anybody here does, beyond the human tenancy to give a tiny bit of trust that somebody is who they say they are as long as that trust can't somehow burn them.

---

You're always talking about which personalities offend you of people using pseudonyms. Think about something more tangible that could change your life if it was structured correctly. Trump's infrastructure plan is not the correct plan:

Trump gave a big number, $1.5 trillion, for infrastructure spending in his SOTU address. But a leaked draft of his plan says that it will involve only $200 billion of federal money. The rest is supposed to be induced spending from private investors. That’s quite a trick. How does it work?
www.axios.com/draft-white-house-infrastructure-plan-1516644555-0d43f41
7-6ccd-43f7-9eae-3ccbe711314d.html

The answer is that it doesn’t work. Private investors won’t spend on public infrastructure unless guaranteed a return. This only works if they’re given ownership, and the ability to collect future revenue from the public.

First point: lots of infrastructure just can’t work that way. There’s no way to turn sewer systems, protective levees on rivers, and lots of other stuff (flood control in Houston) into profit centers.

Second, even where it does work — say, on toll roads and bridges — that private investment doesn’t come free; it’s in return for the ability to collect fees from the public, which is just taxation in another form. And there’s no evidence that doing public investment this way saves any money. On the contrary, it usually ends up costing taxpayers more than just having the government build the thing.

Wait, it gets worse. Where does even the $200 billion come from? It’s not at all clear that it’s new money; much of it would probably be money that would have been spent on public projects anyway.

What this means is that we aren’t talking about a program to build infrastructure so much as a plan to convert what should have been public projects into private ventures, presumably with big tax breaks.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

I'd tell you to stay on topic, but we all know by now that this would fall on deaf ears.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

I'd tell you to stay on topic, but we all know by now that this would fall on deaf ears.

---

6ix, the topic is the same old "Democrats Only". It is not about your touchy personality or your uninformed opinions.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

The topic is whatever I say it is, bitch.

Stop quoting me and then changing the topic completely by posting another article by vox or motherjones.

If you can't speak to me directly, I don't want my words in any of your quotes before your mindless drivel.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
lol... awwwwwwww. Poor Second. Nothing left but personal attacks, huh?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Hey man... the one thing I've got is that I'm real.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THGRRI:
Funny video SECOND. As for Jack I agree. We've all looked into the soul of the man for years. His conscious and unconscious unvarnished mind. He's a perv with a history of disgusting and psyche revealing posts.

He may admit to that but he can't remember most I'm sure. Therefore he doesn't know the degree to which he revealed his inner thoughts. It's not my intent to punish the man but his lack of concern for what Trump is doing, the way Trump treats our intel agencies, our media and our judicial system. The way Trump and Jack trash the people working in these institutions, demands action.

Why should Jack cry foul? Whining like a baby because someone speaks truthfully about him and he doesn't like it. When it concerns him he acts like it is uncivilized. What a joke.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Hey man... the one thing I've got is that I'm real. Nobody here doubts who I say I am, or what I've said I have, even those who think I'm an idiot. Flaws and all, my stories remained consistent about my own situation in life whether I was drunk or sober.

You might notice that I have actual conversations with people here, and yes, some of them happen to disagree very much with me on political topics. But I can actually get along with at least some people from both "sides", which is something you can't say for yourself. The only reason a few of the regulars here tolerate you is because you post from websites they also read and they see your presence here as somewhat of an ally. Nobody on your "side" ever has a real conversation with you.

You were able to manage a human interaction for one single post. And everything in that post was you being off tilt and trying to get a rise out of me. Why did you do that? Because even you believe I am who I say I am and I've done what I say I've done.


I'm done letting you lord your "superiority" around here, moral or otherwise. I'm calling your bullshit. You aren't rich. You don't run a major company. You likely live with your parents and haven't been able to do anything with that worthless liberal arts college degree they paid for. It would certainly explain all of your free time.

The funny thing is, I'll bet your parents that you live with are Texas Republicans.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---