DS Forums

 
 

confirmed: Russia interfered with USA elections (secret cia assessment)


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 19-12-2016, 15:31
bollywood
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 35,196
Apart from the whoosh factor, it's 2016 and Polaroids have never lost popularity, in fact in the age of completely insecure digital technology (because that is the actual reality) i'd bet their popularity increases again, it certainly has with some of their older models and Fuji still does a good trade of their instapix (or whatever their Polaroid equivalent is called). Just one high street example:

http://www.argos.co.uk/static/Browse...7C40150931.htm

You really should check your information before posting... all of it... not just Polaroids.
Lol you think the the CIA uses an £89 camera that doesn't work well at night.

No wonder you want more evidence.
bollywood is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 19-12-2016, 16:13
Grafenwalder
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 4,949
Lol you think the the CIA uses an £89 camera that doesn't work well at night.

No wonder you want more evidence.
Standard kit for every budding intel agent, easily concealed and very discreet!
Useful for close quarters surveillance.
Grafenwalder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-12-2016, 16:18
Doctor_Wibble
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,873
Standard kit for every budding intel agent, easily concealed and very discreet!
A thing of beauty that many of us would love to have on display, if only we had the space for the rotating pedestal and soft lighting
Doctor_Wibble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-12-2016, 18:49
Jenny_Sawyer
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 5,360
http://i63.tinypic.com/2u56tlz.jpg
Jenny_Sawyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-12-2016, 18:51
Nodger
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: A bunker
Posts: 5,957
Lol you think the the CIA uses an £89 camera that doesn't work well at night.

No wonder you want more evidence.
BIB: Precisely point out where I said anything of the sort... go on?

What was it I said about checking your information?
Nodger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-12-2016, 19:08
Happ Hazzard
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chesterfield, Derbyshire
Posts: 1,639
The only thing the Russians are guilty of is giving out true information that the Democrats wanted to hide.
Happ Hazzard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-12-2016, 19:11
D_Mcd4
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 4,456
The only thing the Russians are guilty of is giving out true information that the Democrats wanted to hide.
Yes that's the claim. Interfering in an election to discredit one side.
D_Mcd4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-12-2016, 22:45
reglip
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 3,954
Yes that's the claim. Interfering in an election to discredit one side.
It seems to me that much of what was given to wikileaks would have come from a disgruntled staffer because many of the leaks focused on how they conspired within to push out bernie sanders. I dont know why there is an assumption that wikileaks has relevant information on the republican party. Not very likely. Also because wikileaks will keep its sources secret it allows for this position to accuse anyone they like as there is no way to refute it. I doubt russia has much control over wikileaks even if they are allowing key figures respite in their country to avoid prosecution from the USA. Certainly this is something putin denies. He says that he has no influence over wikileaks or even much in the way of communication with them, simply allows him to stay within russia.
reglip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-12-2016, 23:04
el_bardos
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,969
Lol you think the the CIA uses an £89 camera that doesn't work well at night.

No wonder you want more evidence.
I'd say I'm surprised you haven't got the joke yet, but....
el_bardos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-12-2016, 23:52
Alrightmate
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,724
The DNC were blaming the Russians for hacking their emails months ago.
So...why did Clinton and her party tell Donald Trump that the electoral process couldn't be tampered with when he suggested that he might not accept the result?
They even said that it was an attack on democracy and actually dangerous to question the validity of the election result.
Why at the time didn't they say "Yes, the Russians could fix the election"? They said nothing at the time. Nothing whatsoever. They said that there was no voter fraud which could swing the election.
Alrightmate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-12-2016, 01:18
bollywood
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 35,196
The DNC were blaming the Russians for hacking their emails months ago.
So...why did Clinton and her party tell Donald Trump that the electoral process couldn't be tampered with when he suggested that he might not accept the result?
They even said that it was an attack on democracy and actually dangerous to question the validity of the election result.
Why at the time didn't they say "Yes, the Russians could fix the election"? They said nothing at the time. Nothing whatsoever. They said that there was no voter fraud which could swing the election.
? It has nothing to do with voter fraud though. No one has accused the Russians of hacking into election results, have they.
bollywood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-12-2016, 01:19
bollywood
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 35,196
It seems to me that much of what was given to wikileaks would have come from a disgruntled staffer because many of the leaks focused on how they conspired within to push out bernie sanders. I dont know why there is an assumption that wikileaks has relevant information on the republican party. Not very likely. Also because wikileaks will keep its sources secret it allows for this position to accuse anyone they like as there is no way to refute it. I doubt russia has much control over wikileaks even if they are allowing key figures respite in their country to avoid prosecution from the USA. Certainly this is something putin denies. He says that he has no influence over wikileaks or even much in the way of communication with them, simply allows him to stay within russia.
Pure speculation, whereas the evidence from the intelligence sources is that a person claiming not to be Russian, was.
bollywood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-12-2016, 01:21
bollywood
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 35,196
The only thing the Russians are guilty of is giving out true information that the Democrats wanted to hide.
It was private information. Just as the RNC had, or you could have in your private conversations. And theft to take it, isn't it.
bollywood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-12-2016, 02:05
el_bardos
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,969
? It has nothing to do with voter fraud though. No one has accused the Russians of hacking into election results, have they.
In which case all we're left with is weak minded Americans prepared to turn on "saviour" Hilary at the first sign of scandal.

She was a bad candidate. Better than Trump IMO, but still a bad candidate. You have what you deserve, frankly. And I say that suffering from the BS that is Brexit...
el_bardos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-12-2016, 12:53
bollywood
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 35,196
In which case all we're left with is weak minded Americans prepared to turn on "saviour" Hilary at the first sign of scandal.

She was a bad candidate. Better than Trump IMO, but still a bad candidate. You have what you deserve, frankly. And I say that suffering from the BS that is Brexit...
I disagree she was a bad candidate. She had weaknesses that were exploited during an ugly campaign. Her health, her age and her sex worked against her in a very American way.

Republicans wanted a candidate that would bring in conservative values. And that's what they got.
bollywood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-12-2016, 10:24
bollywood
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 35,196
When conspiracy theories come from a government or the establishment a lot of people tend to believe them.
I'm surprised that so many have forgotten the lessons learned after the war In Iraq just over a decade ago. Or maybe they didn't even learn them in the first place.
Weapons of mass destruction, 45 minute warning, a 12 year olds homework used as evidence, people who had something to gain by offering evidence which was mere hearsay.

And now we've got all this crap from the Democrats about 'fake' news. Which is quite ironic when most mainstream news is based around rumour, 'expert' punditry based on what they think, or reporting on what somebody has said on Twitter as news.
But we're expected to blindly accept it on face value as truth without scrutiny or question.
Look at the title of this thread 'Confirmed'. No evidence required, but its confirmed.
It reminds me of that old episode of Brass Eye, "Now that is scientific fact. There's no real evidence for it ... but it is scientific fact"
Hasn't a private company made the same conclusion?

https://www.google.com/amp/www.pbs.o...-role-dnc-hack

That's 18 agencies and not all Democratic friendly ones.
bollywood is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:56.