Syria and Turkey

You guys been following with things between Syria and Turkey.  Seems as though Syria shot down a Turkish jet.  Syria claims it violated it's airspace, Turkey is saying it was over international air space.  Turkey is a NATO member. If it comes to blows you think we'll get pulled in?  I hope not, I'm so sick of our foreign adventures it's insane.

Turkey's minister initially said that the jet may have strayed into Syrian airspace, then the news reports quickly changed to the jet definitively being in international airspace. If it were in Syrian airspace, who do you think would report it? Have any news agencies contacted the Syrians to hear what they have to say? So Syria and Iran. I suppose the war machines need a new war? On 26 June 2012 09:38, LRS Scout <lrsscout@gmail.com> wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Well Iraq is basically over and Afghanistan is winding down, so we have to keep KBR and Blackwater busy somehow. I'm not a fan of the social democracy/corporatocracy hybrid we've become. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Turkey is still acknowledging that the aircraft strayed into Syrian airspace, but claims the Syrians shot the aircraft down over international waters. That said I think a good case can be made for intervening simply on a humanitarian basis. I personally think that preventing massacres of the sort that the Ba'athists are doing to the majority Shia population is justification enough. But Turkey is being very restrained right now. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Well here's what I say (NSFW): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9w1BEINyxs On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Larry C. Lyons <larryclyons@gmail.com>wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Yes but elsewhere the Shia are doing the same to the Sunnis....etc. etc. It's one big circle and each side is as barbaric as the next in conditions of majority. And let's not forget how they all treat Christians. And then we shouldn't forget how Christians treated them... The Middle East seems to be one big morass of ignorance and violence. On 26 June 2012 10:05, Larry C. Lyons <larryclyons@gmail.com> wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

It really is man.  The mind set it so screwed up.  Don't even get me started on how they treat women and the wide spread acceptance of pedophilia. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

And that justifies not intervening? So you're OK with some 3 year old getting gutted because she's a Shia and some other Shias are doing the same to Sunnis? ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

By that reasoning we should be heavily involved in ground combat all over the world Larry.  Africa, Asia, South America even. We aren't a humanitarian police force, nor should we pretend to be one. On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Larry C. Lyons <larryclyons@gmail.com>wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Then stop the bellicose rhetoric and the exceptionalism bs on the part of most Americans. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

haha, you seem particularly full of venom today my friend, you good? On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Larry C. Lyons <larryclyons@gmail.com>wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Larry, who peed in your coffee? Are they making you code in .net or something?

On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Larry C. Lyons <larryclyons@gmail.com>wrote: > > And that justifies not intervening? > > So you're OK with some 3 year old getting gutted because she's a Shia > and some other Shias are doing the same to Sunnis? > I am, yes. I have no emotional stake in dead Syrians or Turks. People are fucking evil, man, and they will continue to be evil to each other whether America helps or not. So why get our people killed along with the others, when there's no real benefit? When Syrians start shooting down American planes, we'll talk.

and it is that attitude that contributes to what happened in places like Somalia, Rwanda, Bosnia. The thing is that in the long run it does affect you. Aside from the enlightened self interest here, why not just do the right and good thing? ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Then there is the other point of view. That intervening makes things worse. The point of view which says that Britain "intervening" in the Middle East centuries ago has prevented their natural growth and progression and contributed to the ignorance and oppression in that region. Intervening and supporting, in many cases installing, dictatorial and oppressive regimes has led the Middle East down the path it is on today. On 26 June 2012 11:27, Larry C. Lyons <larryclyons@gmail.com> wrote: > > and it is that attitude that contributes to what happened in places > like Somalia, Rwanda, Bosnia. The thing is that in the long run it > does affect you. Aside from the enlightened self interest here, why > not just do the right and good thing? > >

A century and a half ago, there was still the philosophy of extreme mercantilism - use your army to take over and establish a colony. Strip the country bare. Rinse and repeat. I am hoping we are somewhat more enlightened now. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

So why not just take over the world and make them all live under our law? On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Larry C. Lyons <larryclyons@gmail.com>wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

And US law is the best? ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:27 AM, Larry C. Lyons <larryclyons@gmail.com>wrote: > > and it is that attitude that contributes to what happened in places > like Somalia, Rwanda, Bosnia. The thing is that in the long run it > does affect you. Aside from the enlightened self interest here, why > not just do the right and good thing? > Because America always get's bitched-slapped for trying to do the right and good thing, and then Americans die, and then it escalates, and it turns into some 10 year clusterfuck. The path to hell truly is lined with good intentions. Then the politics start.....dems claimed Bush went into Iraq for oil or to get Cheney rich and republicans would claim Obama went into Syria looking for a political victory (the country rallies behind a war time president, especially a new war, with "good intentions")....and through it all...American soldiers keep dying. The world is full of bad people who like to kill each other. America can't change that, and I'm sick of trying.

Word. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

When was the last time we did the right or good thing?  WWII? Eric Roberts Owner/Developer Three Ravens Consulting owner@threeravensconsulting.com http://www.threeravensconsulting.com tel: 630-881-1515 On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:27 AM, Larry C. Lyons <larryclyons@gmail.com>wrote: > > and it is that attitude that contributes to what happened in places > like Somalia, Rwanda, Bosnia. The thing is that in the long run it > does affect you. Aside from the enlightened self interest here, why > not just do the right and good thing? > Because America always get's bitched-slapped for trying to do the right and good thing, and then Americans die, and then it escalates, and it turns into some 10 year clusterfuck. The path to hell truly is lined with good intentions. Then the politics start.....dems claimed Bush went into Iraq for oil or to get Cheney rich and republicans would claim Obama went into Syria looking for a political victory (the country rallies behind a war time president, especially a new war, with "good intentions")....and through it all...American soldiers keep dying. The world is full of bad people who like to kill each other. America can't change that, and I'm sick of trying.

Even then Roosevelt and Churchill tricked us into the war through conspiracy and allowing Perl Harbor to occur.  Pre-civil war.  Maybe the civil rights era, but a suspicious man could have looked at that as an attempt to expand certain voting blocks. On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Eric Roberts < owner@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

I do not know whether you were being sarcastic or starting to wear a tinfoil hat. Seriously Tim that story has been debunked so long ago that its really in the black helicopter type of conspiracy. The Japanese IJN were planning the attack for at least a year and a half, probably longer. They sent several planning groups to look at the damage that the British raid on Taranto did to the Italian fleet. The US Navy could not have obliged them more. They dismissed radar reports. There were even some warnings a week ahead of the raid. The command (Kimmel et al., ) dismissed the possibility of an air raid, and thought the most likely attack was from local Japanese Americans. So to prevent sabotage, the aircraft were aligned up nicely down the middle of the tarmac. Unfortunately it made the aircraft very vulnerable to air attack. In the harbour same thing. Battleship row was great for ground security, and even more vulnerable than the Regina Marina in Taranto. So I really don't think it was  a Churchillian and Roosevelt conspiracy. The Japanese had almost the best navy at that point. If it were not for Midway and breaking the IJN codes they would have won the Pacific Theatre. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Read Day of Deceit by Robert B. Stinnett.  It contains all the radio transcripts and documents and evidence I need to say this with some certainty, they allowed it to happen. Next you'll be telling me that the Gulf of Tonkin incident wasn't a false flag operation. On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 7:43 PM, Larry C. Lyons <larryclyons@gmail.com>wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Eric Roberts < owner@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: > > When was the last time we did the right or good thing?  WWII? > Wow, that is some question. I never pull the whole "you hate your country" schtick, but I have to ask: If you don't think your country has done ANYTHING good since 1945....that would make it kind of hard to like, wouldn't it?

Kosovo, Bosnia, Cyprus, Liberia, Sierra Leone, East Timor, the famines in east Africa (x 3). There are more than a few more. Give me a bit of time and I'll come up with about 5 or 6 more. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

> I have no emotional stake in dead Syrians or Turks. People are fucking > evil, man, and they will continue to be evil to each other whether America > helps or not. > True Dat. They still don't believe in the Genocide of my Armenia ancestors.

Unfortunately on of Obama's broken promises.  He promised to recognize it and when he caught flak from Turkey and from Republicans for saying that, he backed off.   My great uncle, who I grew up pretty close to,  was Armenian...so that is something that near and dear to me as well. Eric Roberts Owner/Developer Three Ravens Consulting owner@threeravensconsulting.com http://www.threeravensconsulting.com tel: 630-881-1515 [mailto:casey@uberwebsitesolutions.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 12:28 PM To: cf-community Subject: Re: Syria and Turkey > I have no emotional stake in dead Syrians or Turks. People are fucking > evil, man, and they will continue to be evil to each other whether > America helps or not. > True Dat. They still don't believe in the Genocide of my Armenia ancestors.

Let me see if I understand this. Turkey and Syria are in a shouting match and its a possible foreign adventure for us? We're such good allies with which party there? Just because Turkey is part of NATO does not mean that Obama will change the current stance we have in regards to Syria...especially in an election year. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

I can only hope you're right my friend. Don't get me wrong I would love to see the Syrian Baathists toppled, just not by us. On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Michael Dinowitz < mdinowit@houseoffusion.com> wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

So should we not  uphold our treaty obligations? Or are those just the benefit of the US and not for the other signers? ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

I didn't say that Larry. I think that being involved in organizations like NATO and the U.N. violate our sovereignty, that being said I'm in charge of nothing, and the agreements were ratified.  If a real shooting war starts over this I know we will have to be involved, I just hope we are able to do so in a limited manner. On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Larry C. Lyons <larryclyons@gmail.com>wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Do they really? Some of the earliest agreements of the US did similar stuff. For instance the ban on piracy, cooperating with the British and other countries to end the west african slave traffic. That is an old tired saw that should have been retired 100 years ago. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Look we're never going to agree here, but simply dismissing my ideas doesn't make them any less relevant.  I can call you a globalist lefty, you can call me an Nazi and we don't get anywhere you know? On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Larry C. Lyons <larryclyons@gmail.com>wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Have I used that phrase? ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Damn you're being unnecessarily difficult today man. On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Larry C. Lyons <larryclyons@gmail.com>wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Of course we should We just don't have to shoulder the majority of the cost/troops/whatever. What are our requirements and what can we give that will actually help? On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Larry C. Lyons <larryclyons@gmail.com>wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

I suspect it will be logistical again. Supplying munitions etc. Turkey has a huge very well experienced army and a fairly competent air force and Navy. If there is a shooting war they will take the brunt of the fighting. Other NATO countries will probably help in air support, special forces etc. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Last time we supported the overthrow of a 'dictator' we got the Muslim Brotherhood in charge of our largest Arab ally. We're damned if we do and damned if we don't. The 'Arab spring' has not made things any better and for some it's definitely worse. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Egypt is a mess man.  I hate what's going on there.  I did my first deployment in the Army to the Sinai in 2000/2001, the 2nd intifada kicked off while I was there and the Cole bombing happened in Yemen.  Egypt was a decent place, I don't want to know what it's going to turn into to with those butchers in charge. On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Michael Dinowitz < mdinowit@houseoffusion.com> wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Its called the democratic process - messy and yes people will get in whom we do not like. That's democracy deal with it. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

I don't believe in democracy remember? On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Larry C. Lyons <larryclyons@gmail.com>wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

"Democracy is like a streetcar, When you come to your stop you get off." Tayyip Erdogan - Prime minister of Turkey The democratic process has been hijacked by Islamists time and time again. Remember the Ceder Revolution? On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Larry C. Lyons <larryclyons@gmail.com>wrote: > > Its called the democratic process - messy and yes people will get in > whom we do not like. That's democracy deal with it. >

I've also noticed that Erdogan has been following the democratic model in Turkey. You have to admit since the start of his party's control of parliament, the standard of living in Turkey has doubled. And that has been encouraging mainly small business and free enterprise. Given the choice between a right wing dictatorship and Erdogan, I'll go for the moderate. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Look at the economic reports for Turkey and you'll see that the standard of living is half illusion and half a system that's on its way to bust. Look at the policies he's put into effect, moving Turkey from a secular republic back towards a religious one. Look at the arrests and political moves he's made and tell me it's democracy and not a dictatorship. And look at his rhetoric and tell me again that he's a moderate. On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 11:24 AM, Larry C. Lyons <larryclyons@gmail.com>wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

The NATO agreements say he will if he needs to. The mutual defense pact requires it. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

See that's my fear.  It might not be much of a choice. On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Jerry Milo Johnson <jmiloj@gmail.com>wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Is the level of aid specified? Do we have to send in the 5th fleet or can we send in a single company? On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Jerry Milo Johnson <jmiloj@gmail.com>wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

We've gotten screwed by NATO time and again in Afghanistan with how much money the other states are willing to spend or how many troops they are willing to send, so I think it is lose.  Maybe we can send like a team of advisers or something? On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Michael Dinowitz < mdinowit@houseoffusion.com> wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Two PHP programmers and a popsicle. :) ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Word On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:27 AM, Michael Dinowitz < mdinowit@houseoffusion.com> wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Send a worm. Stuxnet II. . > > We've gotten screwed by NATO time and again in Afghanistan with how much > money the other states are willing to spend or how many troops they are > willing to send, so I think it is lose.  Maybe we can send like a team of > advisers or something?

That assumes we actually are behind it and not just taking credit for someone else. Well, not officially taking credit, but - nod nod wink wink. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

That was us and Israel man, I've seen others claim China and maybe Russia, but I don't buy it. On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:46 AM, Michael Dinowitz < mdinowit@houseoffusion.com> wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Well, the only company to really detect and investigate the virus(s) has been a Russian one... But as par for the course in the middle east, if its bad for the Arabs, it has to be Israel's fault. Proof? Who needs proof. We've seen it before and we'll see it again. And when it turns out to be someone other than Israel, no one will care about the accusations. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Man the times laid out pretty well where and who wrote it, even had the op names and stuff.  They had some people inside the op and everything. On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Michael Dinowitz < mdinowit@houseoffusion.com> wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Because they know better than anyone else, right? They have no direct quotes. They have the name of an op that does not have a direct connection to either of the viruses. They have nothing that would stand up to examination and be considered proof. But who needs proof when your the Times. They don't report the news, they create the news. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

I thought the WH leaked it to help with the election. . > > Because they know better than anyone else, right? They have no direct > quotes. They have the name of an op that does not have a direct connection > to either of the viruses. They have nothing that would stand up to > examination and be considered proof. But who needs proof when your the > Times. They don't report the news, they create the news.

That's what some say (McCain). But note where the leak came from. Someone writing a book. I can say anything while writing a Washington book and no one can stop me. It's either fact, concealed fact, or commentary. Never deliberate falsehood. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

So show me something with better sources I can sink my teeth into man, I'm open minded about this. On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Michael Dinowitz < mdinowit@houseoffusion.com> wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

The only AV lab to detect and analyze the virus has been Russian. Could they have an insight into the mind of the virus writers? Russia has a TON of virus writers and no compunction about rerouting the blame to others. To assume it had to be Israel is to insult every other country and assume that they could not write it themselves. Even saying it was the US and Israel together says that the US just couldn't do it alone. They needed Israel. Why? Any modern government could be behind the virus. Many modern countries would be worried about a nuclear Iran. Oh, and lets not forget money. Money is always a good reason to do something. Germany might have written it so they could damage the hardware they sold to Iran and then get orders for replacements. Enough for you teeth? Probably not. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

The US and Israel wrote Stuxnet. http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/06/confirmed-us-israel-created-stuxnet-lost-control-of-it/ http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2012/06/12/researchers-find-code-connecting-stuxnet-and-flame-computer-viruses/ http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/01/world/middleeast/obama-ordered-wave-of-cyberattacks-against-iran.html?_r=2 You can provide no information to say otherwise :-) On 26 June 2012 12:20, Michael Dinowitz <mdinowit@houseoffusion.com> wrote: > > The only AV lab to detect and analyze the virus has been Russian. Could > they have an insight into the mind of the virus writers? Russia has a TON > of virus writers and no compunction about rerouting the blame to others. > >

Again, the 'confirmation' is from a book written by a journalist. No proof, just supposition and innuendo. I can't disprove something that has not been proven to begin with. But if those articles are enough proof for you then there's no facts I can bring to the table that will change your mind. Anything I say will be measured against the so-called facts of those articles and will be found wanting. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Uh, there was quite the uproar on capitol hill/white house about the leaks confirming US/Isreal involvement. There is supposed to be better operational discipline, though obviously leaks happen in every administration. The other side of the aisle had right-wing blogs trashing the White House for leaking it intentionally to make themselves look tough. Holder has appointed 2 prosecutors to investigate leaks. McCain has called out the investigation a sham and said that Holder has no credibility and that the White House is responsible for the leaks. Not a single person, inside or outside the White House, has denied the revelations. Come on dude, we did it. The administration admits it. Sorry if you don't like that they admitted it, but they did. Judah ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

The uproar about the leaks did not say that the US had a hand in the viruses, just that there were leaks. No one in the government has said that we did it. A wink/nod here and a supposed leak to a journalist there is not fact, just supposition. If there was proof then Iran would/could go to the UN and complain. I'm sure we did it but until I see something more than speculation and unsubstantiated 'leaks' to journalists that have not attribution, I'm going to have to say there is no 'proof'. No facts that say we did it, just a connect the dots of "well, we had to - who else would". I hold the media to a high standard. Speculate all you want but tell people that it is speculation and/or commentary. Do not make up facts where they do not exist. Do not misrepresent facts to fit your interpretation. Do not hide facts that are not comfortable. If you are reporting news then report facts, not make up fiction. Oh, and "Olympic Games" is a Bush era cyber war campaign that Obama has made use of. Another example of how the current president is no different than the previous one? ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

> The uproar about the leaks did not say that the US had a hand in the > viruses, just that there were leaks. No one in the government has said that > we did it. A wink/nod here and a supposed leak to a journalist there is not > fact, just supposition. If there was proof then Iran would/could go to the > UN and complain. So, the NYT author made up every single source, specifying people who were in multiple situation room meetings, and while multiple branches of the government are investigating the leaks they can't be bothered to deny even a single one? That's your story? That is a level of willful ignorance that's just frightening. I suppose that you also didn't believe in Watergate until Deep Throat was finally outed. > Oh, and "Olympic Games" is a Bush era cyber war campaign that Obama has > made use of. Another example of how the current president is no different > than the previous one? I agree there. Of course, I also believe that Olympic Games exists and you don't seem to, so make of it what you will. Judah

> So, the NYT author made up every single source, specifying people who > were in multiple situation room meetings, and while multiple branches > of the government are investigating the leaks they can't be bothered > to deny even a single one? That's your story? That is a level of > willful ignorance that's just frightening. > Read it again. This is not a NYT investigation. This is an article adapted from a book, as they clearly say on each page: This article is adapted from ?Confront and Conceal: Obama?s Secret Wars and Surprising Use of American Power,? to be published by Crown on Tuesday. This is not an investigative news piece but essentially a retelling of something that someone claims in a book. I see "according to participants in the program" and other vague mentions of sources who claim that Obama said this and Biden said that but nothing concrete, especially in connection to Stuxnet. We have a fact (Olympic Games) combined with a speculation (the US/Israel is behind Stuxnet) and the author is saying that the fact proves the speculation without providing any real proof. Show me the sources of the quotes, especially when it comes to the claim that America was behind Stuxnet. Isn't there transcripts of these meetings? > I suppose that you also didn't believe in Watergate until Deep Throat > was finally outed. > The facts were cross referenced and found to be true in the Watergate case. We don't have that here. We don't have fact tracing Stuxnet to the US. Just a 'deep throat' in a book. Now if we get an actual fact beyond an unnamed source then I'm more than happy to say that we're behind Stuxnet. Until then I can only say I believe that we are behind it, I can't say I know for fact. > Oh, and "Olympic Games" is a Bush era cyber war campaign that Obama has ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- Please re-read my posts. I don't cast ANY doubt on the Olympic Games operation. It exists. It's been confirmed by actual sources. Any claim that I don't believe that Olympic Games exists is a false one. Sorry. Let me say again. I'm just asking that the claim about America's involvement in Stuxnet be substantiated with real facts, not speculation. I believe that the US and/or Israel had a hand in Stuxnet. I don't know that as a fact, just as a belief

> Read it again. This is not a NYT investigation. This is an article adapted > from a book, as they clearly say on each page: > This article is adapted from ?Confront and Conceal: Obama?s Secret Wars and > Surprising Use of American Power,? to be published by Crown on Tuesday. ...written by David Sanger, Chief Washington correspondent for the New York Times. The NYT, Washington Post, Guardian, etc all draw from the work in the book. > This is not an investigative news piece but essentially a retelling of > something that someone claims in a book. I see "according to participants > in the program" and other vague mentions of sources who claim that Obama > said this and Biden said that but nothing concrete, especially in > connection to Stuxnet. We have a fact (Olympic Games) combined with a > speculation (the US/Israel is behind Stuxnet) and the author is saying that > the fact proves the speculation without providing any real proof. The book and the articles springing out of it recount direct interviews with sources who describe (and corroborate) in person meetings on the subject with the President and senior advisors. There are only two options here. Either Sanger is faithfully reporting interviews about events that really happened or else people are flat out lying and making this all up in a coordinated fashion. > Show me the sources of the quotes, especially when it comes to the claim > that America was behind Stuxnet. Isn't there transcripts of these meetings? Seriously? Ok, I give up. I don't like anonymous sources either. None the less, if you think that the senior NYT Washington correspondent is going to make up a bunch of interviews and sources, confirming an attack on Iran, and not get called out by the White House if it wasn't true...well, I just can't help you there. That is a level of denial that is largely unbridgeable. Good luck getting transcripts of situation room meetings on attacks on foreign IT systems out of the White House. I'm sure we'll all be glad to see you finally come around in 50 years. Ju

Remember Patricia Smith? She made up quotes for 4 years. I don't want to say that reporters make up quotes all of the time but 'poetic license' about what someone said is rampant. I'll just end this argument with a classic Regan quote: Trust but Verify Anyway, the book is seen by some as coming out right in time for the election to show how Obama is better than you think when it comes to our security. There will be no denials, clarifications, or refutation until after the election. Oh, and in case I missed it, has there been any official word from the White House about the books claims? Just wondering. On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Judah McAuley <judah@wiredotter.com>wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

You call for facts, but all I see in your messages is confirmation bias. Would you be so quick to reject this out of hand if the claim was that Iran was behind a cyber attack on Israel? > Show me the sources of the quotes, especially when it comes to the claim > that America was behind Stuxnet. Isn't there transcripts of these meetings?

> You call for facts, but all I see in your messages is confirmation bias. > How so? I believe that the US and/or Israel was behind Stuxnet. I've said so numerous times. I'm calling into question the book/reporter/source/whatever that claims that my belief is fact. I want corroboration. I want to see some facts. That's all. The best way to argue this with me is to show some source that shows the US/Israel was behind the virus without referring to the book as evidence. I've read lots of articles where its implied. Where a wink or interpreted sentence is taken as 'close enough to fact'. I'm tired of those. Would you be so quick to reject this out of hand if the claim was that > Iran was behind a cyber attack on Israel? > If it was stated in a news article without any confirmation, the answer is yes. I've seen the news used as a weapon and soap box more often than I'd like. I've seen lies by omission and commission. I've seen selective quoting, misrepresentation, and reinterpreting of facts/events. If anyone is reporting something, especially something big/important, then I want to see some facts. I want truth. When we've heard in the past that Microsoft was buying CF or Adobe was dropping it, did we believe or do we check? ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

I think initially at least it seemed as though you thought the Russians were behind it. On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Michael Dinowitz < mdinowit@houseoffusion.com> wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

It was in response to your claim of "That was us and Israel man, I've seen others claim China and maybe Russia, but I don't buy it." My response basically asked 'why not?' It could be Russia because the virus was detected by a Russian company. Why discount them? I later expanded on that with a speculation/question about Russia (programmers mindset), Germany (money), and just about any modern government. I didn't have any speculation about China. I should have. No insult to them was intended. They are advanced enough to have done it. > > I think initially at least it seemed as though you thought the Russians > were behind it. >

excellent, for us! > > The US and Israel wrote Stuxnet.

I'm not a fan of where Stuxnet might be leading us in terms of modern warfare. Remember, if we can do it, THEY can do it. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Someone told me that by giving it to them they now have it to modify and send back to us. . > > I'm not a fan of where Stuxnet might be leading us in terms of modern > warfare. Remember, if we can do it, THEY can do it.

Infrastructure shouldn't be tied to an outside network anyway. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Ask Captain Adama... ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Nice On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Scott Stewart <webmaster@sstwebworks.com>wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

+1000 Ask Captain Adama... ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

The current operating theory, as I understand it, is that it was introduced to their internal network by a double agent. Judah ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

USB stick. Which is why those 'lil ports should be disabled on Production systems by GPO. Full stop. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Only if THEY team with Israel. ;) (note my sarcasm from previous posts about it's never America alone in these things, always with 'help' from Israel) ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:39 AM, Michael Dinowitz < mdinowit@houseoffusion.com> wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- I think Israel just crashed my .net console app......no other explanation makes sense.

It can vary depending on the country. For instance in Libya, it was the other NATO countries with the US just in a logistical role. Contributions varied from some countries sending a few aircraft to involving their whole military. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

I thought we also contributed drone and strike aircraft?  Also I've seen some stuff about Special Operations and SMU support. Libya was a mess, we ended up supporting leaders that directly had American blood on their hands from fighting as insurgents in Iraq. On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:27 AM, Larry C. Lyons <larryclyons@gmail.com>wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

The current stance is not to upset Putin. . > > Just because Turkey is part of NATO does not mean that Obama will change > the current stance we have in regards to Syria...especially in an election > year.

turkey = good place for us to use airspace, and bases, isnt it?? ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

When they let us, but they like to say no a lot.  It caused some pretty big problems during the invasion of Iraq and led to the 173rd Airborne parachuting into northern Iraq. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----