Here's What It Looks Like When Two Hacker FBI Informants Try To Inform On Each Other
These two ignorant tools, both working for the FBI, tried to get the other one to commit a terrorist act.
Is this what we pay taxes for?
The log is likely less useful to the FBI than Thordarson thinks: It’s no surprise that WikiLeaks has published hacked files, or even that it publishes files hacked specifically by LulzSec, such as the millions of emails stolen from the private intelligence firm Stratfor by activist Jeremy Hammond, who pleaded guilty to computer fraud and abuse last month.
More interesting, or at least more humorous, is the fact that the chat log represents a conversation between two FBI informants, both of whom seem to be trying to lure the other into providing evidence they can turn over to their law enforcement handlers–or even into a meeting that could lead to the other’s arrest. Sabu, also known as Hector Xavier Monsegur, had agreed to work as an FBI mole within LulzSec months before his conversation with Thordarson. Thordarson, for his part, tells me he thought he was helping to deliver a “notorious hacker” to the FBI, and didn’t know he was speaking to a fellow stool pigeon. Monsegur doesn’t show any signs of knowing either.
The World Trade Center was suggested as a target to the Blind Sheikh before the 1993 bombing by a paid FBI informant.
This was a common occurence during the sixties and seventies. Groups like the SLA probably had more police workers than non police workers.
The infamous AB101 riot in San Francisco was almost certainly caused by police provocateurs under the direction of Governor Wilson.
It was blamed on the gays.
Once the FBI finally started fighting the KKK, they were sometimes overly effective in recruiting informants. Sometimes they had two informants in the same car going out on some Klan business. I don't have the book handy, but there's a history of the FBI which offers some details of LBJ talking Hoover into the fight and then how the fight against the Klan proceeded.
Why does the average person still think that the facts about the CIA/LBJ involvement in murdering Kennedy are "theories"?
When you have dozens of contemporaneous witnesses and hundreds of documents that prove it, why does the MSM never explore it?
Why does the Libertarian Idiot Troll only post links to Forbes and Zerohedge? That might explain the "alternate universe" tone of his rantings.
You forgot economicpolicyjournal.com and lewrockwell.com
And mises.org. And yes, he lives in a bubble of his own creation, with one of the worst cases of confirmation bias I've ever seen.
Not LBJ R6, the military.
The CIA, not the military rank and file. I'm sure there were a few high-ranking military officials that facilitated and/or ignored what happened to Kennedy in Dallas.
I also read Slate, Salon, HuffPo, Guardian, Financial Times, NYTimes, WaPo, and Economist.
I'm aware of the seductive lure of "confirmation bias" and I'm always surprised when those sites run articles that get it 90% right and then fail to "stick the landing".
How someone can catalog the failures of government program X, Y, & Z and then call for MORE government intervention to fix X, Y & Z always makes me chuckle and then puke.
[quote]I also read Slate, Salon, HuffPo, Guardian, Financial Times, NYTimes, WaPo, and Economist.
Obviously not, since you haven't learned anything and get even basic facts wrong.
[quote]I'm aware of the seductive lure of "confirmation bias"
ROFL.... Oh, I doubt that, given your track record here.
R13, you epitomize "confirmation bias".
Speaking of "confirmation bias", tell us what the word "fascism" means.
[quote]you epitomize "confirmation bias".
Dear heart, "I know you are but what am I?" stopped being effective after kindergarten.
R13/16 and R15-
Please tell us the last time you read an article on Lewrockwell.Com or AntiWar.com or economicpolicyjournal.com and what you thought of the article.
If you've never visited those sites, then the CONFIRMATION BIAS ball is in your court.
I read Salon, WarStJournal, WaPo, NYTimes, Slate, etc. to see what "The Other Side" is thinking, and so that I can intelligently critique their government cocksucking.
I think I win. I posted a simplified primer on QEinfinity and the webcuntress has already deleted it.
When simple facts scare someone so much they have to delete the thread then you know you've won.
I was hoping the webcuntress deleted the thread.
Instead it's just a glitch in the site.
I don't want to upset her, I just want to have a real discussion about how dangerous the US Government is becoming.
[quote]Please tell us the last time you read an article on Lewrockwell.Com or AntiWar.com or economicpolicyjournal.com and what you thought of the article.
Yesterday, on lewrockwell.com. I laughed. And then I read articles on that site going back the past five years, most of which made very specific and very confident predictions about what would happen next in the economy, and all of which were embarrassingly wrong. And I laughed again.
[quote]If you've never visited those sites, then the CONFIRMATION BIAS ball is in your court.
So because I don't visit three sites, out of the millions that are available, I'm guilty of "confirmation bias?" I don't think you understand the term.
[quote]I read Salon, WarStJournal, WaPo, NYTimes, Slate, etc. to see what "The Other Side" is thinking, and so that I can intelligently critique their government cocksucking.
We're still waiting for that "intelligent critique" and have been waiting for several years. Were you planning to do that anytime soon?
[quote]I think I win.
Nope, as usual, you lost.
[quote]I posted a simplified primer on QEinfinity and the webcuntress has already deleted it.
Thank you for providing this excellent example of confirmation bias. You jumped to an unwarranted conclusion based solely on your own prejudices.
[quote]I just want to have a real discussion about how dangerous the US Government is becoming.
No you don't. As usual, you want to pontificate unchallenged with posts that are devoid of any actual evidence, logic, reason, or facts. Sorry, but you don't get to do that, particularly with "primers" that get the basic facts wrong and ignore decades of historical data.
Which article, specifically, did you read on LRC and what is your critique?
How about today's latest silliness at the link? It doesn't require a critique since no actual data or evidence was presented, much like your own posts here. I'm surprised you haven't already reposted it here.
Since math and logic aren't your strong points, here is a child level breakdown-
Here is a simple look at why the government is destroying the USA.
Imagine you have 3 credit cards. One requires payment each month at 2.5% interest, another only has to be paid each year at 5%, and one every 10 years at 10%.
You get in bind and can't pay the 2.5% monthly charge, so you use the 5% card to pay the balance. You are certain that your new raise at work will help you pay them off, and so you keep buying new clothes, eating out, buying a bigger house.
You keep doing this until you max out the 5% card, and start using the 10 year card to pay both cards. Then instead of a raise you get demoted and have a major cut in pay. Now your payments are more than your salary, so you use the 10 year card to pay off the 2 cards, praying that you will get promotions soon.
It's getting close to the time that you will have to pay the 10 year card, and you are so deep in debt, with no raise...so you start counterfeiting money to pay your bills.
I'm glad you picked those specific articles. They show how out of touch you are with reality.
Have you looked at the state of the county lately?
Do you realize that in 2001 the number of people on food stamps was just 18.7M and today- after bailouts and subsidies and financial chicanery- the number is 47.8M? Just look at the link.
A near triple increase in poverty in 12 years, and yet you think our government is functional and competent?
This is from a government study, not some independent agency, so I assume the numbers are actually higher.
We bail out Wall Street and give billions to foreign countries...but our own citizens are starving.
The government has given TRILLIONS to foreign and domestic banks, printed willy-nilly by the Federal Reserve, to save the top .01% while the bottom 95% starve.
You are too stupid to see that the dick you suck is attached to the bastard that beats the shit out of you. I pity people like you.
The US is in terrible shape.
And Libertarians are brain-damaged idiots.
Why can't both facts be true?
[quote]Since math and logic aren't your strong points...
Oh, the irony....
[quote]Here is a simple look at why the government is destroying the USA.
Moron, that fatally flawed "analysis" wasn't even remotely convincing the first time you posted it. I know you're just oh so proud of yourself but spamming the forum is what gets your threads locked or deleted.
[quote]so you start counterfeiting money to pay your bills.
There is only one problem with that "analysis:" it has zilch to do with anything that's happening in the real world, which is why you can't actually point to anything in the real world that matches!
[quote]I'm glad you picked those specific articles. They show how out of touch you are with reality.
ROFL.... No comment.
[quote]Have you looked at the state of the county lately?
Yup. Out here in the real world, we're experiencing a slow economic recovery. What's it like in your world?
[quote]Do you realize that in 2001 the number of people on food stamps was just 18.7M and today- after bailouts and subsidies and financial chicanery- the number is 47.8M?
Yup. That's what happens when you have an economic meltdown. Have you looked at the projections for future food stamp usage? Yeah, I didn't think so.
[quote]A near triple increase in poverty in 12 years, and yet you think our government is functional and competent?
Nice non sequitur. What on earth does that have to do with that idiotic linked article in R23 and the many other even more idiotic linked articles in R24?
[quote]You are too stupid to see that the dick you suck is attached to the bastard that beats the shit out of you. I pity people like you.
What's hilarious about this response is that you don't even try to defend the article quoted in R23 or the many other articles written by that author. Instead, you engage in silly games, non sequiturs, and personal attacks. Q.E.D.
I just re-read your posts.
Did you have a point?
What am I supposed to take away from those information-free posts?
Our government and the Federal Reserve are destroying the country. Anyone who examines the facts will see that.
Workforce participation rates are lower than 1977- a time when most women were still "stay at home moms" - and if UnEmployment was still computed the way it was in 1970- well, we would be over 25% UnEmployment---great depression levels.
Anyone who googles ShadowStats can see the real employment levels.
Please seek help, R29- your delusions are putting you at risk.
[quote]I just re-read your posts.
Oh, I'm just so flattered.
[quote]Did you have a point?
Why yes, dear, I did. Should I have used smaller words so that you could, perhaps, comprehend it?
[quote]What am I supposed to take away from those information-free posts?
Well, mostly that I'm amused by your paranoid delusions and your total disconnection from reality.
[quote]Our government and the Federal Reserve are destroying the country.
Thank you for proving my point, dear. Q.E.D.
[quote]Please seek help, [R29]- your delusions are putting you at risk.
LOL.... Right back at you, cupcake.
I love your posts.
I just figured it out - they are some kind of performance art(?) based on the old "I know you are but what am I" children's schoolyard taunts.
Now that I know you are kidding, and really just do it to prove my points...well, bravo. You had me going.
I'm glad you get it, and understand the serious dangers posed by the Federal Reserve and exponential government debt, but please let the rest of the posters know you're just kidding. It would really help.