Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

all hail HRCFollow

#152 Jul 14 2016 at 6:08 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,230 posts
Almalieque wrote:
TLW wrote:

No, I'm literally citing a the publicly available press report.
Your quote supports my comment. Having an unsecure system doesn't translate into not being able to detect it. That's why he said "likely".

TLW wrote:
I am not avoiding the "real issue". This is an issue. The mis-classification of documents, is another, separate, and in my opinion moderately less damning one.
Which only solidifies that you don't understand how this works. The classification IS the issue. Securing the system is and will always be second. You having classified information on a fully secured unclassified network is much worse than having classified information in an unsecure classified network. That is a fact.

TLW wrote:
I was being facetious here, because it was funny to me that Jophiel doesn't appear to care about the security of diplomatic cables, but then cares a lot about hackers and whistle-blowers revealing the poorly secured information publicly. I implied that if there was just quietly hacked he'd be broadly OK with it, because it lets the Democratic establishment save face.

Also, I'm not "confusing the security of the system with the security of the information"; that's an nonsensical conclusion.
You say that you're not confusing the security of the system with the security of the information, but says that Jophiel doesn't appear to care about the security of information because of his opinion on the email scandal, while being concerned about revealing secured information. That is literally what you are doing. The two that you are comparing are not contrary to each other.


I really don't know how to explain this any clearer to you. Sorry.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#153 Jul 14 2016 at 6:15 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
TLW wrote:

I really don't know how to explain this any clearer to you. Sorry.
How about correctly? There's a lot of stuff in the world that I don't know, but MY GOD, I LIVE THIS EVERYDAY. It is my job. Unless you have some insight, then you are mistaken. Man up and own it.

When you claim that the a spillage is second to an unsecured system, then you clearly don't know what you're talking about.
#154 Jul 14 2016 at 6:37 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,230 posts
Almalieque wrote:
TLW wrote:

I really don't know how to explain this any clearer to you. Sorry.
How about correctly? There's a lot of stuff in the world that I don't know, but MY GOD, I LIVE THIS EVERYDAY. It is my job. Unless you have some insight, then you are mistaken. Man up and own it.

When you claim that the a spillage is second to an unsecured system, then you clearly don't know what you're talking about.


I am talking about my concerns with Hilary, not my concerns with the State Dept. in General.

Using a system without any of the recommended security is a choice which demonstrates poor judgement and or lack of technical knowledge.

Telling someone to send to just **** it and send classified documents through that insecure, non-classified system shows this as well

Having it standard practice not to properly mark documents with their classification label, leading to people putting things through systems not intended for that classification level is also a serious problem that should be fixed, but it is endemic to the State Department, according to the report. I don't pin as much of the blame here on Hillary, as a whole clown car of people contributed to that **** up.

My point is, that someone's personal actions and choices the things of concern in evaluating someone's competence for a role. I don't see why you keep throwing out "well there were other problems at the state department that show there were tons of incompetent people, so why not focus on that". We aren't evaluating Joe, the document control handler who chugged mai tais instead of labeling documents, for the Presidency.

Edited, Jul 14th 2016 8:41pm by Timelordwho
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#155 Jul 14 2016 at 6:46 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
16,937 posts


Only thing I thought of while reading that little exchange.

____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#156 Jul 14 2016 at 7:03 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
Gbaji wrote:


I am talking about my concerns with Hilary, not my concerns with the State Dept. in General.

Using a system without any of the recommended security is a choice which demonstrates poor judgement and or lack of technical knowledge.

Telling someone to send to just **** it and send classified documents through that insecure, non-classified system shows this as well

Having it standard practice not to properly mark documents with their classification label, leading to people putting things through systems not intended for that classification level is also a serious problem that should be fixed, but it is endemic to the State Department, according to the report. I don't pin as much of the blame here on Hillary, as a whole clown car of people contributed to that **** up.

My point is, that someone's personal actions and choices the things of concern in evaluating someone's competence for a role. I don't see why you keep throwing out "well there were other problems at the state department that show there were tons of incompetent people, so why not focus on that". We aren't evaluating Joe, the document control handler who chugged mai tais instead of labeling documents, for the Presidency.
I have a saying, there's a difference between taking responsibility for an action vs being responsible for an action. That doesn't directly apply here as she was responsible for some of the actions, but the point is, as a leader, she has to take responsibility for what the state department did. That's part of being a leader. However, that's not the same as being responsible for the perennial State Department issues. The rules are written the way they are for a reason. That reason includes the likelihood of a spillage occurring. In cases like these, it almost always end up with people trying to be more efficient. This is evident given that the State Department server was compromised and not reliable.

Now if you want to criticize her foreign policy decisions, that is legitimate criticism. Criticizing her for doing the norm and not realizing incorrectly marked emails is not a legitimate criticism. So, I don't see how this plays into judging her for president. Do you believe as president that she will use her personal server again? On the other hand, if she is "too hawkish" now, then she'll probably be "too hawkish" then. You see the difference?
#157 Jul 14 2016 at 7:18 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,230 posts
Quote:
Criticizing her for doing the norm and not realizing incorrectly marked emails is not a legitimate criticism.


Again, that's not what I'm criticizing. I don't know where you keep fabricating these things from. I am criticizing the decision to set up a non-secure server to handle her emails instead of using the state department provided system, which was ostensibly secure and designed to handle the types of correspondence she was routinely dealing with. I don't know which is worse, if she did not understand why this would be a problem, or if she knew it was not secure and just didn't care. I don't see how that possibly isn't "a legitimate criticism".
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#158 Jul 14 2016 at 7:31 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
TLW wrote:
I am criticizing the decision to set up a non-secure server to handle her emails instead of using the state department provided system
How many times do I have to say that the state department server was COMPROMISED and unreliable. Her having a server was obviously not an issue since EVERYONE knew about it, as stated by the FBI and common sense. Again, you're focusing on the wrong stuff. The unsescure server is not the issue. The spillage is the issue.
#159 Jul 14 2016 at 7:42 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,264 posts
Quote:
The classification IS the issue. Securing the system is and will always be second. You having classified information on a fully secured unclassified network is much worse than having classified information in an unsecure classified network. That is a fact.


I gotta hand it to you Alma, I am starting to side with Gaxe. If you are the best and brightest army money can buy, my fears may have been mildly overblown. Suddenly, I think I am perfectly ok leaving things in your capable hands.
____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#160 Jul 14 2016 at 7:51 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
angrymnk wrote:
Quote:
The classification IS the issue. Securing the system is and will always be second. You having classified information on a fully secured unclassified network is much worse than having classified information in an unsecure classified network. That is a fact.


I gotta hand it to you Alma, I am starting to side with Gaxe. If you are the best and brightest army money can buy, my fears may have been mildly overblown. Suddenly, I think I am perfectly ok leaving things in your capable hands.
?
#161 Jul 14 2016 at 8:00 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,230 posts
Almalieque wrote:
TLW wrote:
I am criticizing the decision to set up a non-secure server to handle her emails instead of using the state department provided system
How many times do I have to say that the state department server was COMPROMISED and unreliable. Her having a server was obviously not an issue since EVERYONE knew about it, as stated by the FBI and common sense. Again, you're focusing on the wrong stuff. The unsescure server is not the issue. The spillage is the issue.


So, not only was the state department server compromised and unreliable, but everyone knew that she had an unsecure server, and used it to conduct secret* business?

I guess my fears were overblown.





*Please don't infer that i mean classification level...
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#162 Jul 14 2016 at 8:03 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,264 posts
Almalieque wrote:
angrymnk wrote:
Quote:
The classification IS the issue. Securing the system is and will always be second. You having classified information on a fully secured unclassified network is much worse than having classified information in an unsecure classified network. That is a fact.


I gotta hand it to you Alma, I am starting to side with Gaxe. If you are the best and brightest army money can buy, my fears may have been mildly overblown. Suddenly, I think I am perfectly ok leaving things in your capable hands.
?


My point exactly.
____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#163 Jul 14 2016 at 8:10 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
TLW wrote:
So, not only was the state department server compromised and unreliable, but everyone knew that she had an unsecure server, and used it to conduct secret* business?
You're saying that she used bad judgement for using an existing well known and reliable network in order to get work done as opposed to a compromised unreliable network. Smiley: dubious

Angrymnk wrote:

My point exactly.
?
#164 Jul 14 2016 at 8:28 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,230 posts
Almalieque wrote:
TLW wrote:
So, not only was the state department server compromised and unreliable, but everyone knew that she had an unsecure server, and used it to conduct secret* business?
You're saying that she used bad judgement for using an existing well known and reliable network in order to get work done as opposed to a compromised unreliable network. Smiley: dubious

Angrymnk wrote:

My point exactly.
?


Serenity Now.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#165 Sep 02 2016 at 4:13 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,230 posts
Some relevant things.

1
2
3
4

Copy of redacted docs.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
Necro Warning: This post occurred more than thirty days after the prior, and may be a necropost.
#166 Sep 02 2016 at 6:50 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,264 posts
Timelordwho wrote:
Some relevant things.

1
2
3
4

Copy of redacted docs.


Sigh, she is so lucky she has T as her opponent this time around. I would complain more, but nothing really changed. I already heard pplz on D side declare that his is pure hogwash -- just like Bengazi. Good job Rs. Good job.
____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#167 Sep 02 2016 at 7:09 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
13,230 posts
angrymnk wrote:
Timelordwho wrote:
Some relevant things.

1
2
3
4

Copy of redacted docs.


Sigh, she is so lucky she has T as her opponent this time around. I would complain more, but nothing really changed. I already heard pplz on D side declare that his is pure hogwash -- just like Bengazi. Good job Rs. Good job.


In other news, DWS won her race. bleh.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#168 Sep 02 2016 at 7:24 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
That's, like, two days ago news.

I'm not sure what angle I'm supposed to be approaching the "smashed with a hammer" story from. Am I supposed to be outraged that they destroyed the phone or "lol they used a hammer"? 'Cause physical destruction of media is usually about the most effective means of stopping it from being read -- assuming they smashed the storage and didn't just crack the screen and call it good.

In other HRC news, I just received this t-shirt in the mail from Smash. Between that, my Clinton Paper Doll book and my Clinton "Funko Pop!" brand figure, I think Smash plans on drowning me in Clinton merchandise.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#169 Sep 02 2016 at 7:25 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,010 posts
Number 1 above is kinda amazing (and shows just how little she appears to have been qualified for or even cared about her job as SoS, other than as a means of padding her resume). Um... So because the subject line (which is commonly edited and changed during email exchanges) doesn't contain a "C" marking, she's in the clear, despite the content containing it? Was this what was meant by "partial markings" in the investigation? Cause if so, that's... not remotely excusable.

Does she really think that simply changing the subject line of an email magically makes the content no longer classified? I'm again and still baffled at what appears to be a conscious desire to just not follow the bread crumbs on this (by anyone at Justice it appears). I'll make the same point I made with the whole bs Valerie Plame thing. The point at which a crime is committed is when someone who is inside the circle of secrecy moves secret information from within that circle to outside of it. Now, it's entirely possible that these changes were made prior to Clinton receiving the documents via email, but then maybe someone should be following that chain back to find out how they got outside a secured environment and into someone else's email server? Even if you rabidly want to protect Clinton from potential fallout for being associated with this, maybe these investigators should care about protecting their nations secrets even more than her political career?

Just a thought. It honestly bothers me more than the appearance of protection of Clinton. It's that in the process of doing that, they don't seem to want to look into how this happened in the first place and maybe prevent it from happening next time. If this really is just "the way things are done", then IMO there's a serious need for housecleaning at State. Heck. We're more careful with intellectual property in the private sector than they are with national security. And that's sad.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#170 Sep 03 2016 at 10:34 AM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,518 posts
Jophiel wrote:

In other HRC news, I just received this t-shirt in the mail from Smash. Between that, my Clinton Paper Doll book and my Clinton "Funko Pop!" brand figure, I think Smash plans on drowning me in Clinton merchandise.

I'll try to come up with some more verses to Plastic Clinton.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#171 Sep 04 2016 at 8:16 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,046 posts
Yes, you men see to fall apart at the thought of a Strong woman being in a position of power and have to try to tell us why we can't be due to faults that actually would get praised if we were men. (except Joph, he's good in my book and that due to marrying a Strong Woman who won't take **** from him.)

Well I am one women that had enough and from now until Nov. 8th I will yell from every forum I am on praising her for all she great things she has done. Stop believing all the lies that have been made about her. She has done more for advancing the rights of children the poor and disable then anyone currently in Congress. I know I am not a good writer, so when I feel better, I'll flood you with Jim Wright of Stonekettle Station and David Garrold's essays about how not to drink the Repub's cool-aid.

By the way listening to the token blacks that Trumps and the GOP have pull out of the wood work, I can't imagine them surviving much longer after the election.

Good Night. I broke 2 bones yesterday and will be laid up in bed until both are healed. Seem in getting old and disable I increase my clumsiness to +4. I broke off a small chip on left ankle and a bone in my right foot yesterday. So for the next 6 weeks may have nothing to d but read and post post online, between visits to doctors.

Oh and I am getting new glasses, have cataracts in both eyes and they seem to find more things for me to see new doctors for each time I fall. This is 3th fall since May 24th. if I ever get enough posts to earn a Title, I think it should be Clumsy +4.






I'm also started writing story of my life. Thankfully I know editors willing to take trying to tackle my prose. When editors for major publishers like Baen and Tor are saying I need to write a book or two, I guess I really should. now to find an agent..
____________________________
In the place of a Dark Lord you would have a Queen! Not dark but beautiful and terrible as the Morn! Treacherous as the Seas! Stronger than the foundations of the Earth! All shall love me and despair! -ElneClare

This Post is written in Elnese, If it was an actual Post, it would make sense.
#172 Sep 04 2016 at 9:37 PM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
20,917 posts
America has a problem with grammatical correctness.
#173 Sep 04 2016 at 9:41 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
13,230 posts
I thought you were a progressive, Elne.

I guess the marketing is working as intended.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#174 Sep 04 2016 at 10:09 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Clinton is the most electable progressive running Smiley: grin
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#175 Sep 05 2016 at 4:17 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,381 posts
ElneClare wrote:
you men [/sm]
GFY. Keep channeling your inner gbaji/varus.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#176 Sep 05 2016 at 5:53 AM Rating: Good
***
1,065 posts
Quote:
She has done more for advancing the rights of children the poor and disable then anyone currently in Congress.


Yeah, the right to be murdered by drone strike, for example. Roll on Hillary Clinton, hero of the people.
____________________________
Timelordwho wrote:
I'm not quite sure that scheming is an emotion.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 65 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (65)