US Says Russia Hacked Energy Grid, Punishes 19 for Meddling (apnews.com) 229
Associated Press: Pushing back harder on Russia, the Trump administration accused Moscow on Thursday of a concerted hacking operation targeting the U.S. energy grid, aviation systems and other infrastructure, and also imposed sanctions on Russians for alleged interference in the 2016 election. It was the strongest action to date against Russia by the administration, which has long been accused of being too soft on the Kremlin, and the first punishments for election meddling since President Donald Trump took office. The sanctions list included the 13 Russians indicted last month by special counsel Robert Mueller, whose Russia investigation the president has repeatedly sought to discredit. U.S. national security officials said the FBI, Department of Homeland Security and intelligence agencies had determined that Russian intelligence and others were behind a broad range of cyberattacks beginning a year ago that have infiltrated the energy, nuclear, commercial, water, aviation and manufacturing sectors. Further reading: Russian Government Cyber Activity Targeting Energy and Other Critical Infrastructure Sectors (US-Cert); U.S. blames Russia for cyber attacks on energy grid, other sectors (Reuters); U.S. says Russian hackers targeted American energy grid (Politico); Trump administration finally announces Russia sanctions over election meddling (CNN); U.S. sanctions on Russia cite 2016 election interference -- but remain largely symbolic (USA Today); U.S. Sanctions Russians Charged by Mueller for Election Meddling (Bloomberg); and Trump Administration Sanctions Russians for Election Meddling and Cyberattacks (The New York Times).
Picking safe targets (Score:5, Interesting)
Seems like they've chosen to sanction people already identified and charged by Mueller, but not anyone close to Putin.
Re:Picking safe targets (Score:5, Interesting)
Seems like they've chosen to sanction people already identified and charged by Mueller, but not anyone close to Putin.
Correct, Mueller's 13 are among the 19 individuals sanctioned. Five organizations also were targeted in the sanctions.
But note that the administration is acting on an authority granted by Congress last summer, with a congressionally-mandated deadline to act by early February, a month and a half ago. Mueller's indictments occurred after that deadline passed.
And now Trump acts. To say he was reluctant is putting it mildly.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/15... [cnn.com]
Re:Picking safe targets (Score:5, Interesting)
The sanctions just enacted are a response to an event that the administration said did not happen.
Mixed messages.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Picking safe targets (Score:5, Informative)
If you believe the collusion conspiracy, those people are some of Putin's closest aides.
The Russians indicted by Mueller are allegedly the ones behind the fake social media posts, not anyone suspected of colluding with the Trump campaign. AFAIK no one believes Putin sent his "closest aides" to work with the Trump campaign but rather the opposite .
Re: (Score:2)
AFAIK no one believes Putin sent his "closest aides" to work with the Trump campaign but rather the opposite .
Sure, because nobody could guess who the “Happy 55th Birthday Dear Boss” sign was directed at. Couldn't possibly be Putin's buddy Yevgeny Prigozhin.
Again, that is from the Mueller indictment concerning the fake social media accounts, not anyone suspected of colluding with the Trump campaign.
Re: (Score:1)
Isn't that how sanctions work? It's kind of hard to sanction unidentified people and those against whom you have no evidence.
Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately with Putin you have a man who likes to hide behind his nuclear weapons sticking his tongue out breaking all the rules and niceties of international agreements and doing whatever the hell he wants knowing no-one will do anything too bad because he has nukes.
Obviously, I'm not going to say western countries are perfect, they're far from it; but Putin is dangerous because he doesn't play by the rules and he actively yearns for the good old days when Russia was subjugating many different nations and there was a cold war. Putin, to use a technical term is an immature jackass.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Putin is very mature compared to the orange haired buffoon; sad that even an ex-KGB gangster has more statesmanship than who we have.
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
USA is the one who broke the international agreements (Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2000s) and possibly even Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (by placing sea-based cruise missile launchers on European soil). USA invaded for no excusable reason Iraq, armed and supported jihadists in Syria, and bombed Libya resulting in civil war that lasts to this day. Much of the middle east is on fire because of the US actions, with hundreds of thousands dead, and millions displaced. But Putin turns out to be a
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
fuck you ivan
Hey, is "ivan" the new term for someone who supplies detailed, easily verifiable facts in a calm manner and by doing so upsets crazed, illiterate, blood-thirsty lunatics drunk on fact-free fantasies and delusions of their own infallibility and grandeur? From the above exchange it surely seems so...
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
fuck you ivan
Hey, is "ivan" the new term for someone who supplies detailed, easily verifiable facts in a calm manner and by doing so upsets crazed, illiterate, blood-thirsty lunatics drunk on fact-free fantasies and delusions of their own infallibility and grandeur? From the above exchange it surely seems so...
As someone born in USSR I consider from life experience Russia to be a poverty, corruption, apathy, alcoholism and ignorance stricken shit hole festering in a decaying corpse of Soviet Union. It is a miracle there is anyone left in RF with a gun pointed to their head to keep anything running. Enjoy your kickbacks until train at the end of the tunnel arrives.
Re: (Score:2)
Well since Ivan isted, I guess Dimitri and and Sergi have all the mod points.
Yeah yeah it wasn't Russia, that chap just tripped and fell on some nerve gas.
Re: (Score:2)
That's an American propaganda technique: whining like a bitch whenever someone points out your Biblical levels of hypocrisy. For every single corpse you can lay at Russia's feet, there's a mountain of dead bodies from American actions. So fuck off on your handwrining over motes, when you refuse to deal with the beam in your own eyes.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, the dumbfuck hypocrisy. How many countries has Putin invaded on the opposite side of the planet from him? How many thousands of people has he kidnapped and tortured? Has he allowed the Russian military to arrest anyone on Russian soil and throw them in prison indefinitely?
Fuck. Off.
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, you can still go fuck yourself. You're treating a conspiracy theory with no evidence behind it as being as indisputable as the American invasion of Iraq or penchant for bombing weddings, funerals and hospitals. You whine like a little bitch about $5,000 in Facebook ads when there's an American official on video [youtube.com] - in front of banners for western oil companies - bragging about spending $5,000,000,000 to subvert Ukraine's democracy.
Few things as annoying as bed wetting tough guy hypocrites.
Re: (Score:2)
Hypocrisy that doesn't exist? Now you're just engaging in willful dumbfuckery. The dozens of democracies overthrown by the United States alone makes you a liar of Biblical proportions.
Re: (Score:2)
And now let me fix those terms. You're not even a Katy Perry fan but a child-molesting Catholic priest is attacking her for promoting homosexuality. Perry's really not your thing, but you ask the priest how he can throw stones at "kissed a girl" when he's got a long track record of child molestation.
The priest responds by screaming "whataboutery" and claiming victory. You ask the priest if he could at least take his dick out of that 12 year old's ass while he's talki
Re: (Score:2)
----> the analogy
----> your head
The point is the mindblowing hypocrisy of Western Exceptionalists when throwing stones from within their glass houses, at other countries for "human rights". Which means it's all western propaganda.
Re: (Score:2)
C'mon this is as funny as fuck, the US governments has turned into a pack of idiots. So let me get this fucking straight, the US has band thirteen Russians from entering the US that they, want to fucking arrest, interesting, Inspector Clouseu much https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]. Your government has just turned you into a pack of ass clowns.
Yeah we all know the US is just trying to fuck with Russian Elections with the full support of US media and US government controlled Western media generally, but seri
Re: Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Russia has far more to do with arming jihadists in Syria. Seriously, while the U.S. has been no saint in the matter, Russia has been far worse. Supplying chemical weapons is just one example.
Iraq was a bad play, can't defend poorly planned and misguided attempts at war for the profit of Halliburton among many other defense contractors.
The middle east is on fire for a whole host of reasons, the U.S. has contributed, Iran has contributed, Russia and Israel have all contributed. There are still more actors i
Re: (Score:1)
Iraq was a bad play. Afghanistan was a bad play. Libya was a bad play ... all at the hands of US intervention
Syria witnessed the birth of isis using the weapon caches from Libya. That was most definitely because of US intervention. And we won’t even go on about the 500bn worth of weapons sent. Or the 80 Toyotas that the US state department admitted to losing!
Or Benghazi gate thing didn’t happen? Which one is it? Remember it was that carelessness that later became the mess in Syria. As for Assad
Re: (Score:2)
Weapons from Syria, like the parent poster said. Reading comprehension, it's not just for kids any more...
Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons (Score:4, Insightful)
"Russia has far more to do with arming jihadists in Syria. Seriously, while the U.S. has been no saint in the matter, Russia has been far worse. Supplying chemical weapons is just one example."
I think Russia is supporting Bashar and the jihadists are fighting Bashar, so I can't see how Russia could be supporting jihadists. And if by chemical weapons you mean the supposed sarin incident, again why would Bashar or Russians do something so counter productive, and useless as trying to kill a couple dozen people with gaz.
Totally agree with the rest of your comment.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Fixed your autocorrect fail. Just letting you know so you can check your device settings.
If foreign governments were literally arming, funding and training jihadists and terrorists to overthrow your nation, how hard would you fight to defend it?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
America was reluctant to get involved in Syria in general, because the factions that it wanted to back, the so called "moderate rebels", were basically nonexistent as actual fighting forces on the ground, which was revealed particularly embarrassingly a couple years ago. Not because the US wanted to stay out of the way of
Re: (Score:2)
Your ignorance of the subject [brookings.edu] is not my problem. [mintpressnews.com] Yes, the United States has been arming, training and funding both ISIS and Al Queda to overthrow Assad. From the beginning.
America was plotting to overthrow Syria before the Arab Spring was a thing. Again, remedial kn [washingtonpost.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Russia has far more to do with arming jihadists in Syria.
That's total BS. Russia has been fighting Islamic terror for two decades now. It is the Obama administration who supplied the TOW anti-tank missiles to the "Free Syrian Army", the entity that consisted pretty much of Al-Queda affiliated groups since a long time ago.
And the middle east is on fire primarily because of USA, sorry my necon "friend". The USA broke Iraq and started the civil war over there, the civil war that spilled into neighboring Syria.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I'll just leave this here:
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/7666/russia-breaks-arms-control-treaty-by-deploying-land-based-cruise-missiles [thedrive.com]
Re: Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons (Score:2)
Re:Putin hiding behind nuclear weapons (Score:4, Informative)
What a load of nonsense.
GWB withdrew the US from the ABM treaty, following the procedure specified in the treaty to do so. He didn't "break" it.
The key violation of the INF treaty is the Russian Iskander missile. The US does not have intermediate range ballistic missile. At all. That Russia keeps complaining that the treaty does not suit them because China is not part of it (while placing their missiles in Kaliningrad, clearly where the Chinese are going to attack) is neither here nor there.
The top 3 meddlers in Syria are Iran, Russia and Turkey, all directly involved. Followed by the Gulf states giving money to various factions. The west, including the US, has largely stood by.
The Libya campaign was executed in accordance with a UN resolution that neither Russia nor China opposed, even though they had a veto.
The only point you're making that's worthy of consideration is the US invasion of Iraq.
As for Russia, how about we begin with Russia signing a treaty with Ukraine by which it guaranteed the integrity of its territory, not only not to invade it, but actually to defend it, in exchange for Ukraine abandoning its nukes, and then taking over part of it. Putin made a very clear statement that Russia's word wasn't worth wiping your ass with.
Re: (Score:2)
-Iskander is a short-range missile.
-How can you call Russia, Iran, and Turkey top three meddlers if USA and its allies are occupying a quarter of territory of Syria right now.
- Russia and Iran are not the "meddlers" in Syria. Their presence is legitimized by the request of Syrian government, you know, the one that's holding the seat at UN.
-On the other hand, Turkey and USA are occupying the Syrian territory completely illegally because the Syrian government never requested or allowed the presence of their t
Re: (Score:2)
>by placing sea-based cruise missile launchers on European soil
Wut? Sea based is in the sea. Soil is on the land.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't need to explain that to an idiot.
Re: (Score:2)
Total bullshit !!
Russians have been covertly meddling for decades (Score:3, Informative)
USSR/Russia have been meddling with foreign politics for decades. The entire "peace" movement was financed by the evil empire [wikipedia.org], financing everything "anti-war" [google.co.uk] in the West (while themselves invading neighbors like Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Afghanistan).
Similarly, they also funded "Black liberation" [aim.org].
There is even good evidence of Senator Edward Kennedy [forbes.com] offering future cooperation in exchange for Soviet help in getting himself elected... Certainly more evidence of (attempted) collusion, than there ever was against Trump...
But none of it was important, until Trump won the elections — and it became crucially important for the swamp to, if not impeach, keep him occupied and thus less dangerous to the crocodiles.
Re: (Score:2)
oh, and the USA hasn't meddled with foreign powers, causing hundreds of thousands of deaths, maimings, starvation?
the stuff you link is mild in comparision
Re: (Score:2)
We probably have.
Nope, we have not caused any of this. Notably, you aren't even attempting to cite examples.
My point in this thread was not to accuse Russia, but to expose the hypocrisy of anti-Trumpers.
Re: (Score:2)
Nope, we have not caused any of this. Notably, you aren't even attempting to cite examples.
Libya, Syria, Honduras and Yemen are just the latest examples I can recollect for the past five years or so.
OT: Blaming US for deaths in shitholes (Score:1)
Please, explain, how the US is responsible for hundreds of thousands of dead and maimed in these countries. You'll need to show, how none of the carnage would've happened, were it not for the US.
Re: (Score:2)
You need to show why the carnage caused by US interventions would have happened anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
"The burden of proof is on the one making the accusation"
Sure and they can start with simple data like the number of bombs falling from the sky, and the number civilians dying, which both went way way up after the US invasion and occupation of both Afghanistan and Iraq.
Re: (Score:2)
"Yes, they can."
I agree, it isn't hard to find solid references, just look up the two data points I mentioned. Go to a library and ask for help if you need to.
"am unlikely to respond to your future posts."
No problem.
Re: (Score:2)
The burden of proof is on the one making the accusation.
Except where, as here, res ipsa loquitur applies: The regional instability is an obvious after effect of Western intervention, specifically the removal of Saddam Hussein and the Bathists from power in Iraq and the dismantling of the repressive apparatus of the Iraqi state. It failed to eventuate under Hussein's oppressive and murderous regime, which had managed to keep longstanding ethnic and religious conflicts and forces at bay for decades (which
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Add Iraq to the list of countries, and you've got hundreds of thousands.
Re: (Score:2)
you're confused, we destabilized the region first.
We could start talking about Saddam was our buddy and we supplied him with billions of dollars for dual use tech to make WMD and gas people. And it went downhill from there.
the USA has the blood of hundreds of thousands on its hands, attacking those who did not attack us for power and profit.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You missed the Korea, Vietnam and two Iraq wars.
You missed the disaster in South America.
You have no clue about the horrible things your country did.
Re: (Score:2)
It is thanks to America, that millions of South Koreans enjoy the prosperity and the human rights of Capitalism. That the millions of North Koreans and Vietnamese do not have these, is despite rather than because of anything we've done.
No, I didn't. The "horrible dictator" of Chile (US-sponsored) left his country the number one economy in the South America. While Russian-sponsored Chavez and Catro have ruined theirs.
Re: (Score:2)
It is thanks to America, that millions of South Koreans enjoy the prosperity and the human rights of Capitalism.
Do you really think that? Then you are an idiot.
Look at Vietnam e.g. it is united and has capitalism, and capitalism is probably the worst economy system we have.
You missed the disaster in South America.
No, I didn't. The "horrible dictator" of Chile (US-sponsored) left his country the number one economy in the South America.
After killing a million. Killing the rightful elected government. And "number on economy" my ass. I don't really
Re: (Score:2)
It's thanks to America, that millions of North Koreans live in poverty, the ones that survived that is.
Re: (Score:2)
Nur zur Info, mi ist ein ukrainischer Neurechter, der nach Amiland gezogen ist, ist also nur ein Moechtegernami. Und ein Depp ist er sowieso.
Re: (Score:2)
Gut zu Wissen :D
Ich kenne leider ein paar von der Sorte, die jetzt in Deutschland leben, und z.B. absolute Türkenhasser sind ... unglaublich.
Re: (Score:2)
mi ist vor Allem ein Russenhasser. Aber sowas von.
Have you even heard of the CIA before? (Score:1)
>> causing hundreds of thousands of deaths, maimings, starvation?
> Nope, we have not caused any of this. Notably, you aren't even attempting to cite examples.
Have you never even heard of us deposing the democratically elected ruler of Iran?
Are you even remotely aware of what the CIA has done in South America?
Here's the Washington Post [washingtonpost.com] calling that out. Here's them listing 72 times we did that [washingtonpost.com]. And this is just the Washington Post, one of the papers most critical of Trump. Here are 7 governme [foreignpolicy.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Meddled in foreign powers is a fairly broad accusation, and devoid of any analysis of positive vs negative
Meddling is meddling. You can try to justify it by claiming that it was for a noble purpose, but that's ignoring the fact that it's still meddling
Wasn't starvation happening under Sadam as well, how is it we get the blame for that?
When you got involved. Until then, the starvation was Saddam's fault. Once you stepped in, it became yours. Or do you only want to claim responsibility when you succeed?
Not everyone in Iraq was sorry to see Sadam go
That doesn't mean it wasn't meddling, nor that you stop being responsible for the deaths you caused directly, indirectly or as a result of removing the government and infrastructure that lead to ye
Re:Russians have been covertly meddling for decade (Score:4, Informative)
US has meddled in the elections and politics of other countries for decades, including 1996 Russian presidential elections [globalresearch.ca], the Georgian politics during and after the Rose Revolution of 2003, Ukrainian politics and elections of 2003 and during and after the 2013-14 constitutional crisis. Not to mention the open aggression against the governments of Iraq (2003), Libya (2011), and Syria (2011 through now).
Re: (Score:1)
Sure. It is perfectly natural for a happy, prosperous country to advocate its own way of life.
"Open" is quite the opposite of "covert", is not it? And covert meddling is the subject of this thread.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I checked how his name is spelled in Cyrillic. "Yeltsin" is how it reads, not "Eltsin". (The "i" in both cases should be pronounced like "ee" in English.)
If you were a halfway competent Russian troll, you'd know that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The Bay of Pigs invasion was done mostly by Cuban exiles, funded, armed, trained, and organized by the US. It's a mess, but it's at least partly civil war and not a US invasion.
Re: (Score:2)
But none of it was important, until Trump won the elections
Why do you say that? Obama "was deeply concerned... he wanted the entire intelligence community all over this." https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com]
Obama’s approach often seemed reducible to a single imperative: Don’t make things worse. As brazen as the Russian attacks on the election seemed, Obama and his top advisers feared that things could get far worse. They were concerned that any pre-election response could provoke an escalation from Putin.
...the principals and their deputies had by late September all but ruled out any pre-election retaliation against Moscow. They feared that any action would be seen as political and that Putin, motivated by a seething resentment of Clinton, was prepared to go beyond fake news and email dumps... "Our primary interest in August, September and October was to prevent them from doing the max they could do," said a senior administration official. “We made the judgment that we had ample time after the election, regardless of outcome, for punitive measures."
So there it is: this was considered crucially important before the election, but Obama's administration made the careful deliberate decision to delay action until after the election so as not to make it partisan and to avoid worse harm.
Re: (Score:2)
Russia could have interfered in the elections in a way that the Democrats would approve of. Just put a million Russians on boats and send them to California. California would have been happy to let them vote. Then, the Russians get back on the boats and go home.
Re: (Score:2)
That would have approximately no effect. A temporary move like that, even if California let them vote, would not increase California's representation in Congress or its electoral votes.
Re: (Score:2)
But might be enough to swing the electoral vote a different way.
Anyways, it was a joke.
Re: (Score:1)
Are you claiming, the earlier efforts were not coordinated? That citizens of USSR could afford to spend millions of dollars on their own, without government providing the funds and coordinating the expenditures?
They've been doing that. Do you honestly think, USSR gave a rat's ass about the rights of Blacks in the USA? Of course, not. They sponsored "Black liberation" to spread ha
Re: (Score:2)
You're missing the point. Everybody does propaganda. That's not a problem. Giving money to groups in other countries is also common. Interfering with elections directly is the problem.
Could you give me an actual pointer to a claim that Ted Kennedy got help from Russia/the USSR? Your cite is useless in tracking that down.
Considering how blacks were treated before the Civil Rights movement, you're going to have a hard sell to convince me that black liberation actually increased hate and division in
More proof the Republicans want to start another.. (Score:1)
cold war. Rmoney showed their hand in his debate with Obama when he called Russia our biggest threat. He accidentally revealed their plan.
Stupid question - WHY?? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
>With Russia supposedly no longer our enemy,
This was not, and is not the case. Republican sentiment was very anti-Russian prior to Trump. Russia doesn't have real elections anymore, Putin openly murders people in other countries, and on and on. If we condone these kind of things, we're just as bad.
oligarchs for everyone! (Score:2)
Re: Stupid question - WHY?? (Score:2)
And how did him not being president prevent him from fighting, exactly?
Re: (Score:2)
Better question (Score:3, Insightful)
Does this imply that the energy grid is on a network that could be accessed via the Internet? If that's the case, why, and why is it necessary?
If society wants everything connected online and there's going to be prices to pay. I guess the prospect of mass surveillance and control over the population is too big of a payoff for them. What a fucked up world we live in.
Re:Better question or net access over power (Score:1)
Most electrical grids carry signals, some provide internet service over the power lines too.
If it's got a signal and energy and it changes, it can transmit information.
Did you think there were magic gremlins adjusting systems?
Re: (Score:2)
No union workers, no union to deal with. No wages to increase. No union negotiations.
Thats money back into profits and as shareholder value by using the internet as a network using fewer staff to watch over a lot of different sites 24/7.
A few engineers can watch over sites and send in contractors when a computer system finds a problem.
The bad part was the networking and automation was not done with site secure, en
Re: Better question (Score:2)
Years ago, at a social event in San Francisco, I met someone gentlemen who were working to secure the critical power infrastructure from cyber attack. I don't recall the name of their company, not that it matters - they were contractors for Uncle Sam.
They seemed competent. One had even read Amory Lovins' excellent and very relevant book "Brittle Power". Of course it was a social event, we didn't discuss work in great detail.
So it seems to me that fedgov does care, at least a little bit, about securing the
Re: (Score:2)
I just worked on a project at a power plant. All the plant operation systems are air gapped from the Internet. That being said, the "business network" used all over the plant for non-plant operations is connected to the internet and it's not hard to see how the two networks could be bridged, accidentally or via "nearline" methods with USB sticks, connecting a plant system to the internet temporarily for updates and so on.
I think for the separation to be truly effective you almost need spy agency level pr
Re: (Score:2)
Why? Because it was easy, and nobody paid attention to security. Look up SCADA [wikipedia.org]. There were never any serious plans to make it secure, as far as I can tell. This didn't really matter as long as SCADA communications were off the Internet, but a lot of them are.
It wasn't any desire for surveillance, it was a desire to get stuff up and running before the engineer was fired, with no thought to security.
Maybe now . . (Score:2)
Maybe now Russia will release the video of Trump with that teenage hooker we've heard about . . .
Yet more neocon russian bogeyman waffle .. (Score:2)
Re:Misplaced priorities (Score:4, Insightful)
It's a pretty lousy country where you only have one person who can do one thing at a time.
Re:Misplaced priorities (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Strictly speaking it is not hacking at all, but cracking.
Re: (Score:3)
Strictly speaking it is not hacking at all, but cracking.
Indeed. I wondered why the government was punishing people for diligently solving problems.
Whataboutism at it's best (Score:5, Insightful)
And for your second "point", if someone robs your house, that's illegal and they should be arrested. It doesn't matter if you had the latest security system, or no security system. Blaming the victim is what criminals do to excuse their own horrible behavior.
using Big Words when you don't know WTF they mean (Score:2)
His post not only isn't "whatabboutery", it's nothing close to it.
Re: (Score:1)
you can actually place cables underground, mitigating most weather-related risk.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
You can also have your utility bills skyrocket because putting cables underground isn't fucking cheap.
Re: (Score:2)
Not necessarily, given even a little bit of planning.
A house we just sold in a nearby suburb (Central Ohio, northwest side) that we had been renting out is in an area where services (electric power, gas, cable, communication) are all underground. The house is not a McMansion, more of a step up from a "starter home" and it's not in a fancy rich neighborhood. Reasonable property taxes too. (The point about reasonable property taxes not directly relevant, but supports the argument that underground service is n
Re: (Score:1)
Make Russia Great For Once
Too hard. Since Putin can't make Russia great, but he'll settle for fucking up the rest of the world, just so Russia doesn't seem so bad in comparison.
Truth is stranger than fiction; you can't make this shit up. I'll point to https://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=593812851 but I know the Conservitards and Nazis won't be bothered to read or, or if they do, they deny it.
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Yeah, except Robert Meuller was with the FBI and did none of those things.
Re: (Score:2)
What is this stupidity? Removing Putin would be like removing any other first-world leader - instant world-ending war.
I'm so tired of these fools who can't seem to get it through their head that Russia is a global military superpower. That Russia is NOT a cowardly bully. Cowardly bullies act out because of their own insecurities and lack of agency.
Putin has no insecurities. He has successfully moved his country forward. Crime rates, wages, standards of living are all significantly better than when he fir
Re: Putin's gotta go (Score:2)