WWHD

[Jim in CT]

Hilary has nothing to worry about, she sent her husband to meet secretly with the attorney general, whose FBI is investigating Hilary. That's not the least bit suspicious!

http://www.abc15.com/news/region-pho...ely-in-phoenix

[buckman]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Hilary has nothing to worry about, she sent her husband to meet secretly with the attorney general, whose FBI is investigating Hilary. That's not the least bit suspicious!

http://www.abc15.com/news/region-pho...ely-in-phoenix

I believe Hillary has to be President or the #^&#^&#^&#^& is going to hit the fan when the truth about her finally comes out. The arrogance and obvious psychosis reminds me of a villan in a James Bond movie . I can't for the life of me figure out why an intelligent person like Spence continues to defend her . But then again I can't figure out why the media defends her .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by buckman

I believe Hillary has to be President or the #^&#^&#^&#^& is going to hit the fan when the truth about her finally comes out. The arrogance and obvious psychosis reminds me of a villan in a James Bond movie . I can't for the life of me figure out why an intelligent person like Spence continues to defend her . But then again I can't figure out why the media defends her .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

My father is by far, he most decent man I ever knew. His integrity can only be measured in megaton quantities. He has long been a Deacon in the Catholic Church. And he will never, ever vote for someone who isn't a Democrat. To him, if your name is Kennedy or Clinton, you walk on water. It's very hard to explain.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by buckman

I believe Hillary has to be President or the #^&#^&#^&#^& is going to hit the fan when the truth about her finally comes out. The arrogance and obvious psychosis reminds me of a villan in a James Bond movie . I can't for the life of me figure out why an intelligent person like Spence continues to defend her . But then again I can't figure out why the media defends her .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I remember in 2008, when Bill Clinton didn't know the cameras were on, he said to Ted Kennedy, something like "a few years ago, that guy (Obama) would be serving us coffee". And today, his approval rating among blacks is about 100%. Nobody holds them accountable for anything they do.

[JohnR]

Now, now - lets not confuse Spence's desire to Baghdad Bob the Hillary Campaign for being a paid shill for them. Clearly he does it for free. And please no overly derisive comments.

Originally Posted by wdmso

your source of information says a lot... about yours and others Hillary obsession ... but the Donald calls for the return of waterboarding against Islamic State militants, saying: "I like it a lot." but all is

Ms. Smith (not her real name) is a freelance writer and programmer with a special and somewhat personal interest in IT privacy and security issues. She focuses on the unique challenges of maintaining privacy and security, both for individuals and enterprises. She has worked as a journalist and has also penned many technical papers and guides covering various technologies. Smith is herself a self-described privacy and security freak.

NetworkWorld? A Bad source? It is an IT networking magazine around for 30 years - probably have a few hundred copies lying around between home and work, more in the landfill.

For an IT guy it is the equivalent to a magazine called PAINT for Painters, FOOD for a chef, and WORKERS SOLIDARITY for Bernie. A tool of the trade.

For the technical response it is scary because disabling the filters is different and significantly beyond merely whitelisting HRC's personal email server. There was also a fairly significant difference in Trend SMEX 8 and SMEX 10 (11 is the current version). Also, some of these systems use lookup services from other vendors and are admant about not letting things through from coming from "Known Spammers" or bad domains. So if her server or one of the client computers had been infected and was spamming viruses / malware and was being explicitly blocked, her email might not get through even if on a whitelist - requiring the State IT department to disable the ScanMail for Exchange system - basicaly the anti-virus / anti-malware scanning system for the state departments email.

If I did that I and compromised a client system would be fired. If my client told me to do that I woulld have them sign an AGA release (Against Geek Advice). If I did that at a .GOV I might go to jail.

Sounds to me like the IT guys had been beaten up by poli-weenies above them in the chain of command.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Now, now - lets not confuse Spence's desire to Baghdad Bob the Hillary Campaign for being a paid shill for them. Clearly he does it for free. And please no overly derisive comments.



NetworkWorld? A Bad source? It is an IT networking magazine around for 30 years - probably have a few hundred copies lying around between home and work, more in the landfill.

For an IT guy it is the equivalent to a magazine called PAINT for Painters, FOOD for a chef, and WORKERS SOLIDARITY for Bernie. A tool of the trade.

For the technical response it is scary because disabling the filters is different and significantly beyond merely whitelisting HRC's personal email server. There was also a fairly significant difference in Trend SMEX 8 and SMEX 10 (11 is the current version). Also, some of these systems use lookup services from other vendors and are admant about not letting things through from coming from "Known Spammers" or bad domains. So if her server or one of the client computers had been infected and was spamming viruses / malware and was being explicitly blocked, her email might not get through even if on a whitelist - requiring the State IT department to disable the ScanMail for Exchange system - basicaly the anti-virus / anti-malware scanning system for the state departments email.

If I did that I and compromised a client system would be fired. If my client told me to do that I woulld have them sign an AGA release (Against Geek Advice). If I did that at a .GOV I might go to jail.

Sounds to me like the IT guys had been beaten up by poli-weenies above them in the chain of command.

My point was . if your not willing to attach your name to a story .. how is anyone to verify you know what you claim to know or even know what your talking about... thats all

Sounds to me like the IT guys had been beaten up by poli-weenies above them in the chain of command YOUR SPOT ON THERE

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by wdmso

My point was . if your not willing to attach your name to a story .. how is anyone to verify you know what you claim to know or even know what your talking about... thats all

So that invalidates a well written (from an IT standpoint) article?

Originally Posted by wdmso

Sounds to me like the IT guys had been beaten up by poli-weenies above them in the chain of command

Originally Posted by wdmso

YOUR SPOT ON THERE

Haha

The IT guys were freaking out about this - I don't know it for fact but every IT guy I know (that is not a Hillbot) would hate this

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by JohnR

So that invalidates a well written (from an IT standpoint) article?

Does not invalidate.. nor Validates the article .. no name no skin in the game
[COLOR=Red]

Haha

The IT guys were freaking out about this - I don't know it for fact but every IT guy I know (that is not a Hillbot) would hate this

..

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

The arrogance and obvious psychosis reminds me of a villan in a James Bond movie .

And this is the problem. If you think she's an evil villain you'll just see everything she does under that lens. This is what got us into Iraq.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

And this is the problem. If you think she's an evil villain you'll just see everything she does under that lens. This is what got us into Iraq.

You have it backwards. She created the evil villain not I .
She voted for going to Iraq so actually she helped get us there .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

And this is the problem. If you think she's an evil villain you'll just see everything she does under that lens. This is what got us into Iraq.

If memory serves, she was a huge proponent of invading Iraq. Your criticism of the hawks seems, well, quite selective, does it not?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

If memory serves, she was a huge proponent of invading Iraq. Your criticism of the hawks seems, well, quite selective, does it not?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Your memory fails you. Perhaps you never understood it to begin with?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Your memory fails you. Perhaps you never understood it to begin with?

Again, an insult with no facts, shocker. You're saying I'm wrong that supported the invasion?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Again, an insult with no facts, shocker. You're saying I'm wrong that supported the invasion?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Don't you remember? She voted for it before she didn't vote for it.

Again - reading Gates: Duty (interesting book BTW) in a meeting with Obama and Hillary, they both admited to their stances on Iraq in the initial invasion and for Hillary, the Surge, as being political votes to keep happiness in their party, above the best interests of the country.

Personally - too many politicians from both sides play that game, putting our kids at risk for political gain. Just because politicians have been doing it for thousands of years does not make it right.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Again, an insult with no facts, shocker. You're saying I'm wrong that supported the invasion?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'm saying you're wrong that she was a "huge proponent of invading Iraq."

She certainly voted to authorize the use of force, but that bill was conditional on a failure of inspections and sanctions which were working to the disappointment of the Administration. Clinton also said clearly that she didn't feel that the US invading without a proper coalition was justified.

If anything her vote was to make an invasion more difficult.

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by wdmso

WTH does Israel have to do with Hillary's email server?

they are on the short list of potential Countries who got the supposed hacked emails

True: Russia, China, Iran, and Israel are all reported to have accessed her illegal server. Of those four, Israel is the only one that would consider us friendly, no matter how poor relations had gotten over the past 8 years*. I would also guess that they were both grinning ear to ear (friendly nation states do spy on friendly nation states) alternating with a lot of WTFs.

Suspected of having some access and for having told US Intelligence groups: Germany, UK, and a few other countries. I would assume Israeli contacts would say the same thing off the record to US intelligence folks over a beer.

Other reports (harder to verify) have it that the entire contents of her server - more than what the the FBI and State have - are available for sale on the darkweb.





* Currently reading Bob Gates: DUTY