backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 144 comment(s) - last by Mojo the Monke.. on Oct 13 at 7:26 PM
Univ. of Tenn. student turns himself in

Federal officials indicted University of Tennessee student David Kernell today, on charges of violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act for allegedly breaking into Alaska Governor Sarah Palin’s private Yahoo email account.

Kernell, who is the son of Tenn. Representative Mike Kernell, turned himself in to the FBI late Tuesday afternoon. A local news report described Kernell entering a federal courthouse for his arraignment Wednesday morning in shackles, and then leaving an hour and a half later on supervised release – free without bond to continue his life as a student, but only under a number of conditions: he may use a computer only for email and schoolwork, and is forbidden from leaving the Eastern district of Tennessee without court’s written permission, among others.

According to reports, Kernell allegedly broke into two of Gov. Palin’s Yahoo email accounts mid-September, after successfully guessing answers to the “secret” questions presented by Yahoo’s password recovery system. Kernell allegedly posted details of the attack to internet imageboard 4chan.org, including screenshots of her account and, later, an explanation of the hack:

“…after the password recovery was reenabled, it took seriously 45 mins on wikipedia and google to find the info, Birthday? 15 seconds on wikipedia, zip code? well she had always been from wasilla, and it only has 2 zip codes (thanks online postal service!)

“the second was somewhat harder, the question was “where did you meet your spouse?” did some research, and apparently she had eloped with mister palin after college, if youll look on some of the screenshits (sic) that I took and other fellow anon have so graciously put on photobucket you will see the google search for ‘palin eloped’ or some such in one of the tabs…”

The explanation continues with a follow-up, posted under the name “rubico”:

“…I read though the emails… ALL OF THEM… before I posted, and what I concluded was anticlimactic, there was nothing there, nothing incriminating, nothing that would derail her campaign as I had hoped, all I saw was personal stuff, some clerical stuff from when she was governor…. And pictures of her family…

“…Earlier it was just some prank to me, I really wanted to get something incriminating which I was sure there would be, just like all of you anon out there that you think there was some missed opportunity of glory, well there WAS NOTHING, I read everything, every little blackberry confirmation… all the pictures, and there was nothing, and it finally set in, THIS internet was serious business, yes I was behind a proxy, only one, if this shit ever got to the FBI I was fucked, I panicked…”

Bloggers later connected the handle “rubico” to an email address belonging to a University of Tennessee student.

A data dump of Palin’s Yahoo email account later appeared on Wikileaks.

While Kernell’s indictment only mentions a single felony count under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, it appears that federal officials invoked the Stored Communications Act in order to elevate charges – which would ordinarily have been a misdemeanor – to felony status.

If found guilty, Kernell could face up to five years in prison, a $250,000 fine, and three years’ “supervised release”   – however Wired’s Threat Level notes that it is far more likely that he will receive probation, or six months’ confinement, if he has a clean record and was found to have inflicted minimal damages.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Prey for this kid
By Regs on 10/9/2008 9:34:09 AM , Rating: 2
He will need gods help now to find a job.

*wink wink*




RE: Prey for this kid
By FITCamaro on 10/9/2008 9:40:05 AM , Rating: 3
So that means Obama will hire him. I mean since he is the second coming after all....


RE: Prey for this kid
By Regs on 10/9/2008 9:59:03 AM , Rating: 2
I was not trying to imply anything....but, hah, I know what you mean.


RE: Prey for this kid
By FITCamaro on 10/9/2008 10:18:35 AM , Rating: 2
I know it was a joke....somewhat.


RE: Prey for this kid
By Screwballl on 10/9/2008 10:42:22 AM , Rating: 2
"That one" will likely hire him on as an information specialist for his campaign... why not, he hangs out with known terrorists (Ayers), pushes for known liberals in the debates, not to mention the earmarks he made sure got passed for his family, out of the taxpayers pockets:

quote:
According to Judicial Watch, the documents were obtained under the Illinois Freedom of Information Act. Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton notes the documents reveal that Obama really took care of his friends and family members with taxpayer money.

"Twenty-five thousand dollars to his wife's cousin, $100,000 to a garden project in Illinois that went nowhere and was wasted, $100,000 to the radical Catholic Priest Father Pfleger, $75,000 to an organization called FORUM, which is run by a group of people that, after they got the grant, gave him thousands of dollars in campaign contributions," Fitton recounts.

He adds that Judicial Watch also recently obtained records detailing the nature of Obama's controversial relationship with domestic terrorist William Ayers and convicted felon Tony Rezko.

From Judicial Watch http://www.judicialwatch.org/

or some more serious problems:

quote:
Two of the top ten priorities of an Obama Supreme Court would be to find that there is a constitutional right to taxpayer-funded abortions, and to order all 50 states to "bless" homosexual "marriage."

"Ten Commandments would be removed all over the place. 'Under God' would be removed from the Pledge of Allegiance. The death penalty would be banned," says Levey. "There'd probably be constitutional rights to all sorts of new things like human cloning and physician-assisted suicide. Racial preferences would proliferate."

from "Committee for Justice" http://www.committeeforjustice.org/


RE: Prey for this kid
By ZmaxDP on 10/9/2008 11:42:46 AM , Rating: 4
Seriously, enough with the Ayers thing. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to dislike Obama's policies without bringing up some tenuous link to someone who was ONCE a terrorist but is now just an extremely liberal professor at a university. I'd remind you that there are quite a few republican legislators and businessmen in Chicago that are on the same boards with Ayers as Obama was. Are they now a bunch of terrorists too? Give me a break. Bringing this up as if it were a reason to not vote for him just makes you look foolish. It is almost as stupid as the whole Muslim rumor.

As for the pork research, whoopty doo. So did every other stinking politician in the house and senate. I don't mind people bringing up these facts to call him out on his claims of being above those influences, but to imply that this is somehow different from a vast majority of his contemporaries is just misleading.

As for the Judicial Watch information, I'll make only a brief comment about the extreme bias on that site. In regards to the issues you bring up, unless Obama manages to find a loophole that allows the executive branch to unseat a member of the supreme court, none of these things will happen. There is a young republican majority on the supreme court that will likely last through Obama's presidency. You're making it sound like were Obama to be elected these things would happen. We have these things called checks and balances, and you're really just fear-mongering at this point.

Now, if people would pull their heads out of their rectums and stop voting party politics straight tickets and actually vote for the best people for the job you wouldn't end up with a part majority across multiple branches of the government. If that happened, the checks and balances work even better. Then again, I'm a strong believer that a government that doesn't get anything done is doing a good job. They only screw things up when they manage to pass a bill...


RE: Prey for this kid
By sinful on 10/9/2008 11:44:21 AM , Rating: 3
Not only will Obama do all that, he'll impregnate your wife while you aren't looking!

Seriously, if you're going to repeat that tripe, why let things like "facts" and "honesty" and "integrity" get in your way?


Security?
By Spivonious on 10/9/2008 10:16:23 AM , Rating: 3
Does Yahoo seriously just make you answer some questions to get into the account? That's not very high security. And why was Palin using her Yahoo account for government business? Doesn't she have some government email address?




RE: Security?
By kelmon on 10/9/2008 10:30:20 AM , Rating: 2
Indeed she does and this is just a sneaky (but apparently dumb) way of conducting unmonitored communications. I have limited sympathy. Put another way, I have sympathy for those people whose contact details were exposed by this and no sympathy for her.

With any luck this saga will help dissuade people from voting for the mad bitch.


RE: Security?
By Screwballl on 10/9/2008 11:11:59 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
With any luck this saga will help dissuade people from voting for the mad bitch.


Don't worry, I won't vote for the mad bitch Obama...

these emails show that Palin has nothing to hide... yet Obama has been a part of all sorts of bad an illegal activities: contracting with known terrorists, placing earmarks in state bills in IL to go towards family, using advisers that helped cook up the Clinton administration's plan that ended up screwing our economy we see today...

I guess some people don't like honest straight forward people like Palin so they have to follow the corrupt Obama/Biden. Anything out there about Palin is either a straight out lie or opinion. Not hard and real facts like what faces Obama.


RE: Security?
By Spivonious on 10/9/2008 11:25:29 AM , Rating: 1
I'd just like to point out that while the Weather Underground guy was setting bombs, Obama was 8 years-old. I'm voting for McCain, but just wanted to clear that up.


RE: Security?
By FITCamaro on 10/9/08, Rating: 0
RE: Security?
By kelmon on 10/9/2008 12:14:55 PM , Rating: 2
So, no meetings with Nelson Mandela then? The whole story just sounds ludicrous to the outsider. Forgive and move on.


RE: Security?
By tallcool1 on 10/9/2008 11:39:10 AM , Rating: 2
I think he was referring to Hillary...

Or he is just furious that no real dirt was found. Kind of unheard for a political figure these days...


RE: Security?
By kelmon on 10/9/08, Rating: -1
RE: Security?
By Regs on 10/9/2008 3:20:15 PM , Rating: 2
This is proof that people decide who they're going to vote for 5 minutes after their introduction.


Posting Pics
By bobcpg on 10/9/2008 9:34:46 AM , Rating: 2
I find it very surprising that sites reporting on this matter are posting pics of her emails and contact lists. I would assume this could/should lead to some trouble? Or maybe I'm missing something.




RE: Posting Pics
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 10/9/2008 9:38:29 AM , Rating: 2
They've been publicly available for quite some time:

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/VP_contender_Sarah_Palin...


RE: Posting Pics
By FITCamaro on 10/9/2008 9:40:55 AM , Rating: 1
That doesn't make it right. Honestly I don't see how they're allowed to keep the photos up.


RE: Posting Pics
By bobcpg on 10/9/2008 10:48:01 AM , Rating: 2
How does being posted on Wikileaks make them publicly available legally?


Patriot act backwards
By chalupa on 10/9/2008 3:54:10 PM , Rating: 3
Seems like it's ok for goverment to spy on its own citizens but not the other way around. I hope it teaches them a lesson...
on second thought who am I kidding.




Ha
By Chernobyl68 on 10/9/2008 1:22:32 PM , Rating: 2
reminds me of the research Matthew Broderick's character did in the movie War Games to come up with "JOSHUA"




By bubba551 on 10/9/2008 2:41:34 PM , Rating: 2
Has it really been 36 years?




TIFIFY
By deeznuts on 10/9/2008 4:49:40 PM , Rating: 2
<q>Kernell, who is the son of Tenn. Representative Mike Kernell (D) </q>

Fixed. :D




So what they are saying
By rudy on 10/10/2008 1:55:43 AM , Rating: 2
Is since he can use email he is still free to hack more yahoo accounts.

I do have to admit those secret questions are the most idiotic security or lack there of feature anyone ever came up with.




title
By werepossum on 10/10/08, Rating: 0
Give him a medal!
By reader1 on 10/9/08, Rating: -1
RE: Give him a medal!
By kelmon on 10/9/2008 10:40:57 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah, about that revolutionary war. We're still looking for our back taxes...


RE: Give him a medal!
By rcc on 10/9/2008 11:07:53 AM , Rating: 3
lol, we've paid them in one form or another, many times since then.


RE: Give him a medal!
By rtrski on 10/9/2008 10:45:26 AM , Rating: 5
So, you'd support someone breaking into any other candidate's accounts and revealing their private mail as well? For example, Obama's? Especially if that someone had the specific intent of digging for some sort of dirt, as this 'hacker' did by his own admission?

If not, then you, sir, are a hypocritical little troll. If so, at least you're taking a stand for transparency, albeit a bit of a shaky IMO. I wouldn't want my private emails, full of inane inside commentary to my friends which could easily be used out of context to paint me as something I'm not, revealed. And no, I don't think I do anything illegal I have to 'hide' either. I just think we're all entitled to some privacy and off-camera moments on occasion.


RE: Give him a medal!
By reader1 on 10/9/08, Rating: -1
RE: Give him a medal!
By kelmon on 10/9/2008 11:09:40 AM , Rating: 2
This is easier to answer if you break it down into 2 questions:

1. Would you support someone breaking into a candidates PRIVATE email account? No, absolutely not.

2. Would you support someone breaking into a candidates non-government email account that is being used to conduct OFFICIAL business? Absolutely, yes.

The problem with this is that she was using a private email account to perform government business and that suggests she is trying to hide something otherwise why not use the official account? However, I will confess that this would be more acceptable if it had been performed by the police or FBI.

Yes, this is ethically iffy.


RE: Give him a medal!
By rtrski on 10/9/2008 11:22:02 AM , Rating: 4
Not ethically iffy at all. You fall into the situational ethics trap.

If a candidate is found to be using a 'hidden' email account to carry on 'official' business, then there is a legitimate reason to compel the candidate thru legal means to disclose the contents in keeping with FIA. And punish said candidate if the data gets (ahem) "lost" before it's revealed.

One 'wrong' - apparent deliberate use of an alternate email address to 'hide' official business - does not justify another - breaking into said account.

And in this case, the wrong revealed that it was just probably laziness and sloppiness to use the account, since there was no smoking gun email found. Surely it would've been broadcast all over the "series of tubes" by now if it had. So you can't even try to use the "ends justify the means" excuse.

Thank you for demonstrating the average American's knowledge of ethics in the post-Clinton age.


RE: Give him a medal!
By kelmon on 10/9/2008 11:41:35 AM , Rating: 3
Understood but I was simply answering your question that this would be supported no matter who the candidate is.

With respect, I am not American and therefore am unaware of the specific laws of your country. I do, however, find the use of a private email address for public business very fishy and do not believe there is an excuse for using one (my company would have a fit if I used a private email account to perform company business, for example). As noted, I would prefer to see such issues investigated officially rather than by Internet vigilantes but it was worth investigating.


RE: Give him a medal!
By rtrski on 10/9/2008 12:00:04 PM , Rating: 1
I stand corrected on the American comment. I was unfortunately blinded by my own anger at the decay of ethics I see around me. Thanks for clarifying that it is occurring everywhere, or at least in America + wherever you reside.

And regardless of your attempted dodge, you clearly said you supported BREAKING into the account, which implies abnormal access regardless of your understanding (or lack thereof) of applicable US laws.

Use of a private email account for official activity is indeed wrong. As is any improper method for accessing said account, with either the intent to prove or disprove said alleged activity and take advantage of the political implications thereof.

And of course the original poster to whom I responded has remained silent since pulling out the (political) N-word, thus proving his or her trolldom and hypocrisy.


RE: Give him a medal!
By kelmon on 10/9/2008 12:06:09 PM , Rating: 2
True. I should clarify that I support the breaking into the account if officials are turning a "blind eye" to the issue. Examination of that account needed to be performed. My preference is for it to be done by the authorities but if they won't then I support someone who will because it is in the public interest to know why a private email account is being used. I wonder if an official investigation was being performed...


RE: Give him a medal!
By walk2k on 10/9/2008 1:18:55 PM , Rating: 2
What if "Deep Throat" had never leaked evidence to reporters? You might remember, it led to exposing a vast web of corruption called "Watergate"?

Not suggesting "Emailgate" is on the same level as Watergate but it did expose corruption and unethical practices by a then-state governor and current vice-presidential candidate.


RE: Give him a medal!
By rtrski on 10/9/2008 3:27:51 PM , Rating: 2
Pretty shoddy argument. Deep Throat gave information that was already in his possession based on direct involvement with the investigations, which he perhaps should have protected under his own obligations, but he chose to reveal of his own free will. His identity was protected by the journalists with whom he was communicating. He was a whistleblower if you will, regardless of his motives, and was taking the risk of either conviction (if he was caught, and he was revealing details he was legally bound to protect), or exoneration (not that they existed in such forms yet, but under whistleblower type arguments that he was knowingly breaking one oath to reveal already-known illegalities).

A 3rd party illegally accessing the same information in order to share it --either on his own behalf or at the bidding of others-- is not in the same position whatsoever. Especially when there was no foreknowledge of wrongdoing, only "suspicion". If another employee with whom Palin had exchanged emails via that account, decided to share his copies, he'd be in the Deep Throat role.

Using your Watergate analogy, the hacker getting access to the email account to use it for political purposes shares more in common with the thieves who broke into the DNC headquarters at the WG hotel than with "Deep Throat". Regardless of what was -- or wasn't -- found, he's the criminal.

Sheesh, critical thinking is completely lacking these days isn't it? What this hacker did is more tantamount to the police searching your house based on suspicion because they just don't like something about you, not having first convinced a judge they have sufficient cause for a warrant. Or more accurately, for your neighborhood watch cop-wannabe to break into your house to search for your drug stash, so they could turn it in, just because they didn't like your politics or your clothes. I'm sure you'd be all up in arms about that.


RE: Give him a medal!
By tallcool1 on 10/9/2008 11:34:47 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
I really wanted to get something incriminating which I was sure there would be, just like all of you anon out there that you think there was some missed opportunity of glory, well there WAS NOTHING
Just goes to show that she is legit and he was a very dissappointed criminal who happens to be the son of a democrate.


RE: Give him a medal!
By kelmon on 10/9/2008 12:01:38 PM , Rating: 2
True. It's hard to say whether she is legit since that is still being investigated but there was indeed nothing incriminating and this email account appears to have been a case of bad judgement. It must be tough being a politician since being investigated means you are tainted even if you have done nothing wrong. That said, being exonerated by one investigation does not mean that there is nothing else. I don't envy the job that they do.

All this said, I do think the woman is bonkers and it scares the heck out of me that she could be president of the USA. I think you'd find it hard to find someone outside of the US that thinks differently.


RE: Give him a medal!
By FITCamaro on 10/9/2008 12:16:44 PM , Rating: 2
Luckily for a lot of us, we don't care what the rest of the world thinks when it comes to electing our commander in chief.


RE: Give him a medal!
By Gzus666 on 10/9/2008 12:39:50 PM , Rating: 2
Palin is running for commander and chief? Wow, who would have thought. Honestly, I have no idea why you support Republicans, and take a blind eye to what they do. Meanwhile, the Democrats are no better, just different in the horrid things they do to this country. I honestly have no idea why you aren't a Libertarian. http://www.lp.org/issues

I'd say take a look, as they seem to follow your desires perfectly, while leaving religion, and other crazy fanaticism aside. Granted I hate political parties and think they should be abolished, but they are the closest in their posted beliefs to what makes sense, and is constitutional.

Side note, what is with everyone wanting a Joe Blow moron president? They always say they want a regular guy. Personally I would prefer the smartest person they can find to do the job. But, that fits with our wonderful schooling budget of about 7 times less than Medicare.


RE: Give him a medal!
By Reclaimer77 on 10/9/2008 1:01:15 PM , Rating: 1
Don't confuse Republican with Conservative.

Democrats on the other hand, are all Liberal.

The only problem with the Republican party are all the morons " reaching across isles " and pretty much being traitors to the cause. If we wanted isle reaching, we would VOTE for Democrats.


RE: Give him a medal!
By Gzus666 on 10/9/2008 3:50:46 PM , Rating: 2
And if you had your own thought process, you would vote for someone that is actually the best for the job. But that is clearly not the case. Internal government battles are so great for the country, woohoo!

That is quite a long reach if they are going all the way across an "isle". By the way, "isle" is like Gilligan's Isle, you would be thinking of aisle. Just a little joke, but I'm sure you will blow it out of proportion.


RE: Give him a medal!
By FITCamaro on 10/9/08, Rating: 0
RE: Give him a medal!
By Gzus666 on 10/9/2008 2:17:56 PM , Rating: 4
I don't agree with Ron Paul 100% either, but he at least sticks to the constitution, small government, and saying no to pretty much any government spending bill. He says no to raises for them as well. On top of that, he is an actual doctor, ha.

Palin is just too religious for my taste. Heavily religious people tend to make religiously biased decisions that only benefit their religious views, not the people they are supposed to be working for. If someone wants to have a religion, more power to them, it is a free country and I support their right to do so accordingly. But really, do you want that crap to leak into your country's policies, and the way we do business? The only reason we support Israel is because of that crap, they do absolutely nothing for us. We send them tons of cash for no reason.

On top of that, Palin is really not the brightest bulb. She attended like 4 community colleges, and got into one with a scholarship from a beauty pageant. I'm sorry, but I just want the best of the best running the country, not an ex sports reporter turned political zealot. She isn't qualified for the job. When did sub-par become good enough? Granted John McCain isn't that bad of a guy, but he is just following the herd for his party. If you look at his stances before this, he was actually reasonable in his decisions. Now he is just pandering.

These are just general complaints, and not directed at you, but you brought it up, so I figured I would speak.


RE: Give him a medal!
By FITCamaro on 10/9/08, Rating: 0
RE: Give him a medal!
By Reclaimer77 on 10/9/2008 3:05:15 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
And Palin does have experience leading an executive body from having been mayor and governor. In my mind that makes her far more qualified


Not just in your mind. A solid majority of Presidents in modern times were governors and mayors first. I think there is a reason for that...


RE: Give him a medal!
By therealnickdanger on 10/9/2008 9:44:45 PM , Rating: 2
The reason being that Senators of nearly ALL types are simply out of touch on nearly every level. I'm not sure when Obama decided that his 143 days in the Senate earned him a shot at leader of the free world... but whatever. I've worked for the government longer than him... I bet MY record is more distinguished. I have actually set policy for my State...


RE: Give him a medal!
By Gzus666 on 10/9/2008 3:18:23 PM , Rating: 2
Well, technically you can implement morals without religion. They aren't required, as people had morals, and still do without religion. Morals can be easily broke down into violating person freedoms this country was founded on. Anything that breaks the freedom of another person, can be thought of as "immoral". This would work quite well, as it doesn't impose your will on other people. What you do that doesn't affect others freedom is of no concern to anyone else.

Morals are nothing more than common sense most of the time. Biblical texts should not be used as a moral compass, since I feel they have proven to be quite immoral by their own choosing while preaching it at the same time. Crusades (they ate children, literally), witch burnings, child molesting, backing of tyrants (kings and dictators alike), slavery, etc. The Bible clearly states owning slaves, beating women and children and killing them is perfectly acceptable. I think most normal people, religious or not, would find this a little strange, hypocritical even.

Depends what you consider "founded on".If you mean when the people got here, sure, I guess you have a point. If you mean the people who setup all the building blocks and documents for the creation of this country, then you would be dead wrong. Most of them were either atheist, deist and most were quite anti-religious. Take a look at some quotes from most of the founders, and you will see what I mean.

quote:
But my annoyance doesn't give me the right to tell a country that is by vast majority Christian that they can't say prayers or have the word "god" in the pledge or on money.


Technically it does, it is a law in the Constitution, separation of church and state is clearly a founding principal of this country. I would venture if they don't like that, they should go somewhere else.

http://www.leinsdorf.com/Presidents.htm

I don't know if the world agrees Reagan was one of the greatest presidents. I would put many a great man above him for sure.

quote:
And Palin does have experience leading an executive body from having been mayor and governor. In my mind that makes her far more qualified than Obama who had a whopping 183 days in the Senate and a few years in a state legislature + some years training ACORN members(to commit voter fraud) before running for president.


I will be quite blunt here, I think you are biased severely, and blindly follow that party. I would venture to say you don't even realize it, but you do. I don't like either of them really, but I would say Senate experience is better than governing a little town.

For some reason you keep doing that comparison thing people love to do, better than Obama? Who the hell cares? That is like saying a punch in the face is better than a punch in the dick, either way it sucks.

We need someone to just follow the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, and I would be ecstatic. Seems like such a simple request. They keep giving this "We love America" bull, yet they keep voting for these horrible governing officials that do nothing but ruin this place and go against the founding principals. If you ask me, the man who follows the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is the most patriotic of them all.


RE: Give him a medal!
By EglsFly on 10/10/2008 1:24:28 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I don't like either of them really, but I would say Senate experience is better than governing a little town.
You got this a little mixed up. She was not governor of a town, she was mayor of a town, and governor of a state.

There is a reason a lot of the former presidents where governors. Being governor of a state provides more executive experience than being a senator does. Now if Obama had been a senator that has accomplished some real work over say a 10-20 year period (mccain, biden), then that might be worth some weight.

Obama accomplished neither (mayor, governor, or even any real amount of time as a senator), although voting PRESENT a bunch of times as a senator makes you qualified to run the most powerful country in the world?

I say compare apples to apples here, Obama and Palin both have limited experience. Obama has been a senator for what, about 2 1/2 years? About the same time that Palin has been a Governor of a state. Hardly "experienced" in my book. So personally those who support Obama and complain that Palin has little experience or vice versa, need to look in the mirror at their own candidate.

At least on the Republican ticket, the more qualified individual is the one running for president.


RE: Give him a medal!
By Reclaimer77 on 10/9/08, Rating: 0
RE: Give him a medal!
By Gzus666 on 10/9/2008 3:41:37 PM , Rating: 2
Boy, you are fun. Anyway, I made the point because FIT said he wanted to see her president next time. I think you need to read the parent statements there psycho.

I'm sure you can't wait to see it, I'm sure you love Israel, and will die to support it, cause they are so great to this country. The supposed reason for our alliance with them is for similar interests in the middle east. Meanwhile we sold weapons to all of them, and only stopped when Israel found out, cause they were rather angry (I'm sure we still do it, and I can't blame us). But, I'm sure they are a great ally for us, as they have done so much to help us with everything. Taking our money with a smile, taking our weapons and technology with a smile, and giving nothing in return. I would prefer an alliance with China and Russia, at least they don't ask for handouts.

I didn't say I wanted Obama, nor are we talking about him. I find them all pretty ridiculous. Bush is not so much an idiot, as he is just a yes man jerk off. Al Gore is a complete jackass. At least Obama went to Columbia and Harvard, well respected schools. Palin bounced from sad community college to sad community college. I have yet to see that he went to school on a program because "he was black" as you put it. I venture you are a racist, and like to cover it up. Granted I don't like those programs, but I hardly think every person that isn't white got help and would be nothing without it.

I do love the freak out post though, it is cute. Nothing like picking and choosing pieces of something to try to do nothing more than bash someone. I would venture to say you are a very insecure person, and rather quiet in person who explodes on comment and discussion boards because of fears in real life. I will add this to appease you. LOL!!!ROFLWTFBBQ!!!! I'm sure that goes over wonderfully on Youtube, but please relax, it is just a post. I'm sure Palin can defend herself, she isn't that stupid. But still hardly the caliber I would like to see near government.


RE: Give him a medal!
By FITCamaro on 10/9/2008 4:11:46 PM , Rating: 1
We support Israel because if we didn't, they would be wiped out. The US did not create Israel. The UN did after WW2. The US has supported them because no one else will. Are we supposed to let an entire people be wiped off the planet?


RE: Give him a medal!
By Gzus666 on 10/9/2008 4:17:04 PM , Rating: 3
Yes, and I could swear you are for less world intervention. In fact, I believe one of your other posts states you don't care what the rest of the world does. I have no issue with leaving the rest of the world to it's own, and only do business as needed. If they were a useful ally, so be it, but they clearly do not help us a bit. America isn't the parents or world police for everyone. We are here to succeed as a country, not help the world.


RE: Give him a medal!
By FITCamaro on 10/9/2008 4:30:07 PM , Rating: 2
I said I don't mind Ron Paul because the things I don't agree on him with affect other countries. What I don't agree on him with is that we should be almost completely isolationist.

Would I love it if we had to do nothing for the rest of the world? Yes. Is it reality? No. People hate us for doing things. People hate us for not doing things.


RE: Give him a medal!
By Gzus666 on 10/9/2008 4:52:40 PM , Rating: 3
I would much prefer to be hated as a country for doing nothing, as opposed to intervening. Intervene only when it is in our best interest. World Wars being an example. In reality, this isn't a popularity contest, it is survival. You don't go to any contest to be second best, you go to be the best. You don't help other people in the contest with you either, you play to win. This country could stand to gain from sticking to it's old way of not intervening unless absolutely needed.

Lets be honest though, they hate us because we happen to have the highest standard of living, and generally can trounce the world. Everyone strives to be number one, and they always hate who is at the top. Granted our policies in the last few decades haven't helped for sure.


RE: Give him a medal!
By FITCamaro on 10/9/2008 5:29:47 PM , Rating: 1
I do agree with you a lot. I just would rather try to prevent another World War rather than sit around and wait for one before we get involved.


RE: Give him a medal!
By Gzus666 on 10/9/2008 5:35:19 PM , Rating: 2
I see where you are going with it, and I'm sure it is with good intentions, but I just don't think the way we do it really helps one way or another. Middle east didn't really hate us till we supported Israel, and got in their business.

At this point, with the middle east, it is either leave them completely alone, or bomb them back to the stone age. The in between we are trying to do just won't work. You can't fight an idea. Terrorism is an idea, can be done by anyone and no matter who you kill, you don't stop it if someone still wants to go after you. Only fix is to leave them completely alone, or remove them from existence to be sure. Unfortunately a lot of collateral damage that way, but it wouldn't be the first time we wiped out some people in our way, just the way things are when trying to survive and stay number one.


RE: Give him a medal!
By Reclaimer77 on 10/9/2008 6:25:25 PM , Rating: 2
Wasn't the Nazi party and Communism just an idea as well ?

Isoloationism isn't a strategy.


RE: Give him a medal!
By Reclaimer77 on 10/9/2008 6:36:36 PM , Rating: 1
So I'm a racist, psycho, insecure, explosive yet quiet, has real life fears ( who doesn't by the way ? ), I apparently " love " Israel as well.

Man, all this from one forum post ? You have a gift. Tell me, are you a certified shrink or just have psychic powers ?

You know what, I think I rather be all those things above than be a judgemental bitter prick as yourself.


RE: Give him a medal!
By Gzus666 on 10/10/2008 9:42:26 AM , Rating: 2
I believe you are the bitter one my friend. Maybe you can tell more non-white people with a degree that they only have it cause of their race.


RE: Give him a medal!
By MamiyaOtaru on 10/9/2008 8:54:50 PM , Rating: 2
I don't have a problem with religious people in office (I'm pretty religious myself) but I have a problem with religious people letting their religious beliefs influence their political policy. What one person's religion espouses could be very different from mine. Huckabee was dead last in the running for my vote in the primaries because of that. Palin wouldn't have been my first choice either.


RE: Give him a medal!
By Gzus666 on 10/10/2008 9:50:10 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I don't have a problem with religious people in office (I'm pretty religious myself) but I have a problem with religious people letting their religious beliefs influence their political policy. What one person's religion espouses could be very different from mine. Huckabee was dead last in the running for my vote in the primaries because of that. Palin wouldn't have been my first choice either.


Then you my friend are a rarity. You don't even have a chance to get elected in this country anymore without being rabidly religious, and pushing your beliefs on others.

I am fine with someone having religion, but it is clearly against this country's constitution to mix the two interests. It also scares the crap out of me when they say god talks to them. I find it funny/unnerving when Christians say it, it is considered normal, when someone else says it, they are crazy.


RE: Give him a medal!
By FITCamaro on 10/9/2008 10:47:54 AM , Rating: 2
So do you get paid to say this crap or do you truly believe it? If it is the latter, you are free to go live somewhere else. And encouraged.


RE: Give him a medal!
By Reclaimer77 on 10/9/2008 1:15:32 PM , Rating: 2
She can come over to my house and burn anything she wants...


RE: Give him a medal!
By bubba551 on 10/10/2008 8:41:35 AM , Rating: 2
Funny. In 1972 when republican operatives broke into a poorly secured hotel room hoping to find campaign documents, it was a huge scandel that tainted the party. This is just the 21st century of that break-in, but without congressional investigations.


Hardly a hacker...
By MrBlastman on 10/9/08, Rating: -1
RE: Hardly a hacker...
By FITCamaro on 10/9/08, Rating: 0
RE: Hardly a hacker...
By Dark Legion on 10/9/2008 11:08:35 AM , Rating: 2
Haha, people really love your username don't they...


RE: Hardly a hacker...
By FITCamaro on 10/9/2008 12:12:36 PM , Rating: 2
Trolls only exist if you believe in them.


RE: Hardly a hacker...
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 10/9/2008 10:02:51 AM , Rating: 3
Worse, he did't guess a password. He used the damn "Forgot my Password" button and simply put in the information it asked for (all of which I might add is publicly available on the 'net thanks to a quick google search). Script Kiddie would be giving him too much credit. More like bonehead.


RE: Hardly a hacker...
By MrBlastman on 10/9/2008 10:09:14 AM , Rating: 2
*The gavel slams*

I concur with the Jury's conclusion. You, little Palin email hijacker, will now serve with the title of bonehead!

Works for me, he really has very little credit to bear other than being, well, resourceful. I'm very curious about the punishment he will receive.


RE: Hardly a hacker...
By iheartzoloft on 10/9/2008 10:25:44 AM , Rating: 4
This is becoming common place, kids are labeled "hacker" if they know more about a computer than the person writing the article. Kindergarteners know as much about a computer as the average parent these days in some cases. As stated this guy is being labeled way above his paygrade here. He guessed a silly password reset question, and his 1337 skillz get him "hacker"... hardly.


RE: Hardly a hacker...
By Dark Legion on 10/9/2008 11:04:28 AM , Rating: 2
Are you implying that this script kiddie knows more about computers than a journalist whose job it is to write about technology, mainly computers, every day of his life?


RE: Hardly a hacker...
By iheartzoloft on 10/9/2008 1:01:02 PM , Rating: 2
If you look at the post it was a reply and agreement with Master Kenobi's previous statment. "Hacker" is commonly misapplied as its meaning is also commonly misunderstood when presented by some media related sources. At no point in my post was any credit given to Mr.Kernell, in fact the opposite was implied. Remember what happens when you ass+u+me.


RE: Hardly a hacker...
By mindless1 on 10/11/2008 7:54:58 AM , Rating: 2
Let's be clear about something.

Hacker - one who hacks
Driver - one who drives
Skater- one who skates

You could be terrible at skating, having no particular skill at all beyond a donkey and still be a skater.


RE: Hardly a hacker...
By B3an on 10/9/2008 11:51:54 AM , Rating: 1
He's hardly a bonehead. If anyones a bonehead it's Palin for having such a ridiculously easy to 'hack' email account.


RE: Hardly a hacker...
By therealnickdanger on 10/9/2008 12:33:50 PM , Rating: 2
I was almost fired from my job for "hacking" my work computer. All I did was deactivate some services via the registry because the bloatware was slowing my ability to do my job as effectively as possible. After clearing that up, I was allowed to retain my admin rights on a new, faster PC of my choosing. Some time later, nearly every computer on this portion of the State network was infected with the MSBlast worm... except mine. Perhaps if everyone else had upgraded to Win2K SP3 when I advised them... but no one listens to hackers.


RE: Hardly a hacker...
By iheartzoloft on 10/9/2008 1:05:55 PM , Rating: 1
Changing a few registry keys and installing a patch qualifies you as a "hacker"?????


RE: Hardly a hacker...
By therealnickdanger on 10/9/2008 2:13:14 PM , Rating: 2
To the then disgustingly untrained IT personnel, yes it did. That was a few years ago, the IT staff has gotten a lot better since then.

I guess my point is that the overwhelming majority of people consider "hacking" to be any method of obtaining access or information on a computer without proper permission. The word "hacking" will always carry a negative cannotation.


RE: Hardly a hacker...
By TomCorelis (blog) on 10/9/2008 1:22:21 PM , Rating: 2
There's a reason I put "hacking" in quotes. :-)


Appropriate?
By FITCamaro on 10/9/08, Rating: -1
RE: Appropriate?
By BruceLeet on 10/9/2008 9:59:48 AM , Rating: 1
Palin sucks


RE: Appropriate?
By FITCamaro on 10/9/08, Rating: -1
RE: Appropriate?
By MrBlastman on 10/9/2008 10:36:15 AM , Rating: 4
You wish... ;)


RE: Appropriate?
By kelmon on 10/9/2008 10:44:47 AM , Rating: 1
I dunno. I'd be very worried about letting a Pit Bull, even if it is wearing lipstick, anywhere near Captain Winkie...


RE: Appropriate?
By MrBlastman on 10/9/2008 10:45:46 AM , Rating: 3
What if it were a really old one... with dentures? (removed of course)


RE: Appropriate?
By kelmon on 10/9/2008 11:00:16 AM , Rating: 2
You are a sick individual and need help. Here's my card.


RE: Appropriate?
By MrBlastman on 10/9/2008 11:02:39 AM , Rating: 2
But... but... with strategic application of penut butter I'm sure you'll be in for an exotic experience...


RE: Appropriate?
By kelmon on 10/9/2008 11:25:38 AM , Rating: 2
If you turn the Pit Bull around 180-degrees you won't need the peanut but...

...no, it's no good, I'm going to be sick. Suffice to say that this thread is on its way down the gutter.