Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 89

Thread: Sarah Palin fail's at Teh Interwebz, email account hacked

  1. #46
    Elite Member ana-mish-ana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    3,200

    Default

    I have a feeling that this will blow back in their faces- I agree that the so called hacking shouldnt be an issue but for fucks sake she used gov on a public email addy.
    It will also highlight the whole Troopergate issue as well and if someone guessed using her highschool password to get in - just shows how stupid she is.

  2. #47
    Elite Member louiswinthorpe111's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Middle America
    Posts
    11,989

    Default

    I have a yahoo account that I use for my junk emails or when I don't want someone to have my real email address. DUH!

  3. #48
    Elite Member lurkur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    5,351

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SVZ View Post
    it wasn't even hacked



    they just guessed the password reset code which was her high school

    LOL, I know! I was about to type "hacked" in my last post, but couldn't do it because it didn't happen!

    I also saw some article saying "Left wing group Anonymous hacks Palin's e-mail." Parents just don't understand...

  4. #49
    Elite Member Fluffy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,600

    Question What does Sarah Palin have to hide in her Yahoo e-mails?

    Thought this mentioned some interesting points.

    Thursday Sept. 18, 2008 05:07 EDT
    What does Sarah Palin have to hide in her Yahoo e-mails?

    Some adolescent criminal (in mentality if not age) yesterday hacked into a Yahoo account used by Sarah Palin for both personal and business email, and various sites -- including Gawker -- posted some of the emails online. While the bottom layers of the right-wing noise machine (the kind that make you run for the shower after reading them) are moronically describing the hacker(s) as "liberals" and "left-wing," nobody actually has any idea of their identity, let alone their political leanings (if any). The available evidence strongly suggests the hacker is loosely part of an assorted band of Internet pranksters ranging from the juvenile to the psychopathic. Conventional political agendas ("Vote Obama!") don't exactly appear to be their interest. Either way, whoever did this committed a serious crime -- it's rather revolting to see screen shots of someone's inbox splattered across the Internet -- and the hacker should be apprehended and prosecuted.

    Still, it's really a wondrous, and repugnant, sight to behold the Bush-following lynch mobs on the Right melodramatically defend the Virtues of Privacy and the Rule of Law. These, of course, are the same authoritarians who have cheered on every last expansion of the Lawless Surveillance State of the last eight years -- put their fists in the air with glee as the Federal Government seized the power to listen to innocent Americans' telephone calls; read our emails; obtain our banking, credit card, and library records; and create vast data bases of every call we make and receive and every prescription we fill and every instance of travel and other vast categories of information that remain largely unknown -- all without warrants or oversight of any kind and often in clear violation of the law.

    The same political faction which today is prancing around in full-throated fits of melodramatic hysteria and Victim mode (their absolute favorite state of being) over the sanctity of Sarah Palin's privacy are the same ones who scoffed with indifference as it was revealed during the Bush era that the FBI systematically abused its Patriot Act powers to gather and store private information on thousands of innocent Americans; that Homeland Security officials illegally infiltrated and monitored peaceful, law-abiding left-wing groups devoted to peace activism, civil liberties and other political agendas disliked by the state; and that the telephone calls of journalists and lawyers have been illegally and repeatedly monitored.

    And the same Surveillance State Worshipper leading today's screeching -- Michelle Malkin -- spent the last several years deriding those who objected to the President's illegal spying program as "privacy crusaders" and "constitutional absolutists" and "civil liberties absolutists".

    Shouldn't these same people be standing up today and insisting that if Sarah Palin has done nothing wrong, then she should have nothing to hide? If Sarah Palin isn't committing crimes or consorting with The Terrorists, then why would she care if we can monitor her emails? And if private companies such as Yahoo can access her emails -- as they can -- then she doesn't really have any "privacy" anyway, so what's the big deal if others read through her communications, too? Isn't that the authoritarian idiocy that has been spewed since The Day That 9/11 Changed Everything -- beginning with the Constitution -- to justify vesting secret and unchecked surveillance powers in our Great and Good Leaders?

    And then, even better, there is the righteous outrage over the fact that this hacker engaged in what they call [spat with whispered contempt] . . . . "illegal surveillance." Why, whoever broke into Palin's Yahoo account broke the law, and we all know that that can't be tolerated! Bill O'Reilly last night called for the FBI to arrest not only those who did the hacking, but also those who own and manage Gawker ("a despicable, slimy, scummy website"), simply for posting the emails. This is what O'Reilly said:
    It's a felony -- a federal crime -- also a crime in Alaska -- to hack into people's private correspondence . . . We have no privacy left in this country anymore. The website knows the law, and says "you know -- I'm going to do it anyway. I dare you to come get me."
    Indeed. What kind of grotesque monster would invade people's private communications even though they know it's illegal to do that? It's almost like this despicable criminal-hacker did something like this -- from Scott Horton's Harpers interview yesterday with The Washington Post's Barton Gellman:
    For the next three months, Addington and Cheney tried to suppress a growing legal insurgency. Andy Card acknowledged to me that Bush was out of the loop. By early March, Jack Goldsmith ruled that parts of the [NSA warrantless eavesdropping] program were unlawful. Ashcroft and Comey backed him. . . .The next day, Thursday March 11, Bush renewed the program anyway. He signed new language–again written by Addington -- declaring that he, the president, was the ultimate authority on what was legal.
    Notably, the people whose communications George Bush was illegally intercepting for years (with the virtually unanimous support of the authoritarian Right) were private citizens who -- unlike Sarah Palin -- had done nothing to cede their privacy, and who had not been found by any court of law to have done anything wrong or even to be suspected of wrongdoing. As despicable as I personally find the Palin hacking to be, it pales in comparison to the Bush crimes, because when someone runs for President or Vice President, they voluntarily cede vast amounts of their personal privacy, which is why they're required to disclose things like their medical records, tax returns, assocational history, and other financial documents -- all information that private Americans, at least in theory in the pre-Bush era, had the right to keep private. Those subjected to Bush's illegal surveillance programs have done nothing to cede their privacy -- other than live in a country which has decided to abolish most privacy protections.

    Last night, O'Reilly angrily lamented that "we have no privacy left in this country anymore." That's the very same Bill O'Reilly who went on television last October to gravely warn that John Edwards was a "Far Leftist" and detailed all the dark things that would happen in America if Edwards were elected President:
    Would you support President John Edwards? Remember, no coerced interrogation, civilian lawyers in courts for captured overseas terrorists, no branding the Iranian guards terrorists, and no phone surveillance without a specific warrant.
    And then there's the McCain campaign, protesting this "shocking invasion of the Governor's privacy and a violation of law" even though the GOP nominee has supported every last expansion of surveillance power and stood by the President's every last violation of our surveillance laws. I wonder if the laws which the Palin hacker violated are similar to the federal statute that makes it a felony -- punishable by up to 5 years in prison and a $10,000 fine for each offense -- to eavesdrop on the communications of Americans without warrants, or the multiple statutes (.pdf) which expressly outlaw the telecoms from allowing government spying on their customers without warrants from a court? Maybe the hacker who invaded Sarah Palin's emails can hire lobbyists to pour money into the campaign coffers of Jay Rockefeller and Steny Hoyer so that they'll meet with Dick Cheney -- again -- and sit together and write a law to retroactively immunize him for the hacking. After all, this country has very significant problems that we need to fix. We need to look forward, not get bogged down in nasty partisan wars of the past. Besides, wasn't the hacker well-intentioned, acting as a good patriotic citizen, concerned about credible and obviously newsworthy reports from McClatchy that Sarah Palin -- just like the GOP administration she wants to succeed -- has been illegally using her personal email accounts to conduct business in order to evade subpoenas? What's a little lawbreaking among friends when the criminals can justify it afterwards with some good purpose?

    All these privacy fetishists and (to use Joe Klein's term) "civil liberties extremists" screeching today over Sarah Palin's "privacy" need to get some sense of proportion. If Sarah Palin has nothing to hide, if she's not a Terrorist, why would she mind anyone going through her emails? And just because these things -- those things that some overly-earnest people call "statutes" or "laws" or whatever the new trendy Leftist term for them is today -- say that you can't invade people's private communications without committing a crime, does anyone other than shrill Leftists really take that seriously, really think that someone who does what the law says you can't do should get in trouble or -- more absurdly still -- be arrested? Isn't it time -- just like David Broder and so many other of our Elite Guardians have directed -- that we stop criminalizing our politics?

    -- Glenn Greenwald
    What does Sarah Palin have to hide in her Yahoo e-mails? - Glenn Greenwald - Salon.com

  5. #50
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    hahahaha i totally forgot about that.

    Exactly right. They're all for invading people's private lives.. except when it happens to THEM.

    Republican double standard.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  6. #51
    Elite Member bychance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    5,294

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sluce View Post
    Ok - so Sarah can't even keep her own email account safe but we are supposed to believe she can keep our country safe?
    Stop being sexist, she's a pitbull. Democrats are afraid of a girl, sspphhh.

  7. #52
    Super Moderator twitchy2.0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Milliways
    Posts
    55,289
    "If you are not outraged, then you are not paying attention," Heather Heyer's facebook quote.

  8. #53
    Elite Member kingcap72's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    10 miles from Pootie Tang
    Posts
    21,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by twitchy2.0 View Post
    That was funny.

  9. #54
    Super Moderator twitchy2.0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Milliways
    Posts
    55,289

    Default

    I liked the second page where you get to see the trash and the Joe Biden letter wondering why his e-mails aren't getting returned!
    "If you are not outraged, then you are not paying attention," Heather Heyer's facebook quote.

  10. #55
    Elite Member bychance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    5,294

    Default

    It's funny, but I don't think they realized that his mom isn't alive...

  11. #56
    Elite Member Fluffy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,600

    Default

    I liked this comment:
    There doesn't seem to be much of a 'crime' here

    largely because the account wasn't "hacked" per se; the "Anonymous" user was able to gain access to her email account simply because... get this...
    Palin's password-reset question was "What is your ZIP code?"
    That's all.
    Palin may be able to file a civil suit, if she ever finds out the guy's identity. He used a proxy, though, and without a clear crime it's unlikely that law-enforcement officials will make much of an effort to pry beyond that.
    Though now that I think about it, the corrupt Republican machinery will probably be able to pull some strings for their loopy puppet-girl.
    Letters: What does Sarah Palin have to hide in her Yahoo e-mails? - Salon

  12. #57
    Elite Member lurkur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    5,351

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by twitchy2.0 View Post
    I liked the second page where you get to see the trash and the Joe Biden letter wondering why his e-mails aren't getting returned!
    Biden is also "online" in the 1st screen, and then Obama signs off in the other shots

    Quote Originally Posted by bychance
    It's funny, but I don't think they realized that his mom isn't alive...
    Yeah, wonder if that was on purpose?

  13. #58
    Super Moderator twitchy2.0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Milliways
    Posts
    55,289

    Default

    Mother-in-law?
    "If you are not outraged, then you are not paying attention," Heather Heyer's facebook quote.

  14. #59
    Elite Member Belinda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    going to hell in a handbasket
    Posts
    3,180

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by twitchy2.0 View Post

    I like the one from Dick Cheney

  15. #60
    Elite Member tkdgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    5,469

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ang View Post
    omfg! the stupidity of that is almost overwhelming.

    But they did post her password on a public board. This person is toast.

    A government big enough to give you everything you want,
    is strong enough to take everything you have. ~Thomas Jefferson

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Sarah Palin got me a date!
    By sluce in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: September 14th, 2008, 10:50 PM
  2. Sarah Palin as mayor
    By twitchy2.0 in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: September 9th, 2008, 10:18 AM
  3. New campaign ad for Sarah Palin
    By kingcap72 in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: September 4th, 2008, 11:09 PM
  4. Why the Bristol Palin/Sarah Palin pregnancy controversy is relevant
    By rebelpleb in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: September 2nd, 2008, 05:30 PM
  5. Sarah Palin: It's worse than you think
    By Sasha in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: August 31st, 2008, 05:07 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •