Group calling themselves The Shadow Brokers just leaked NSA hacking tools

a reply to: liveandlearn


Let Us be truthful, I think the kids call it 'be real' I wouldn't give 2 squirts if it was the IBM® computer "Watson" that got those w/evil intent AND a position of authority where that evil intent would do its most harm, OUT, NOW..

I'd opine McCain didn't even need the usual double dose of Viagra™/Cialis™ to get "Pinnie' working??

Also don't forget to factor in: The grammar 'may' be skewed on purpose so as to 'hide the cadence' of the author(s). If a person types enough on the computer, a 'cadence' (like Your voice) can be figured out. Now if these guys HAVE worked they'd have submitted enough reports/memos where their cadence/voice could be detected, at least grouped w/similar, and then cull from there...

I tried to read part of the first page. I don't believe that English is the primary language of the writers. Why a group from outside the US would write a manifesto which is basically chastising the President is beyond me. Maybe they are just bad at proof reading and maybe something will come of it.

oops...i see everyone else has already pointed this out. I have a bad habit of reading the OP and then responding and then reading the rest of the post...and I agree with some of the others....either attempting to pretend to be American or maybe Americans pretending to be someone pretending to be American...oh lordie...this is getting complicated now.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Totally agreed. Is there anyone who can understand what is being said in these sentences? I feel like a 13 year old wrote this. I can't understand anything in this post because I did not write it. Or maybe someone who can better understand what is being said, can you summarize it or make it more clear?

a reply to: GiulXainx

Since I wrote the OP I will have to reread and give more info. Give me a few, I have to leave the house a few minutes.

a reply to: CharlesT

Russia would just hire some computer hackers off the street and pay them for being the "Shadow Brokers", when the Shadow Brokers could be a one man show.

a reply to: GiulXainx

They believe Trump is abandoning his base, the movement

List several thing but it appears loss of Bannon's position and Syria strikes tipped them over the edge

They are not for either party and emphasize they and the people are his base and support

The also aren't happy with a rules change for Gorsuch to win. (Don't think they dislike Gorsuch, just the manipulation of rules to get him in. maybe Stay the Constitution.

from the site

Don’t care what is written in the NYT, Washington Post, or any newspaper, so just ignore it.

- Don’t care if you swapped wives with Mr Putin, double down on it, “Putin is not just my firend he is my BFF”. -

Don’t care if the election was hacked or rigged, celebrate it “so what if I did, what are you going to do about it”. -

Don’t care if your popular or nice, get er done, Obama’s fail, thinking he could create compromise. No compromise. -

Don’t want foreign wars, Do want domestic wars, “drain the swamp”, “destroy the nanny state” -

Don’t care about your faith, you sound like a smuck when you try to say god things

- DO support the ideologies and policies of Steve Bannon, Anti-Globalism, Anti-Socialism, Nationalism, Isolationism

Rant on globalism of late. Don't bring the world to America, Take America ( the culture and ideologies) to the world

For peoples still being confused about TheShadowBrokers and Russia. If theshadowbrokers being Russian don’t you think we’d be in all those U.S. government reports on Russian hacking? TheShadowBrokers isn’t not fans of Russia or Putin but “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” We recognize Americans’ having more in common with Russians than Chinese or Globalist or Socialist. Russia and Putin are nationalist and enemies of the Globalist,

Then goes on about Ukraine

They are willing to unmask people they believe are against the constitution as John McCain

The release seems to be a warning.

As to the Russia issue, see my earlier post on Julian Assange's post...he seems to think it is too big an effort to be pro Russia or it may be a Russia double double. See the post.

Don't think we can take the language at face value or the Russia plugs.

BTW, seem Assange already has this info but had not gone thru it yet but says he will give a pristine account.

Hope that helps but I think you could probably have gleaned the same thing.

The manifesto could also be computer generated. Making it completely unique to the algorithm and the writer won't ever be identified.

That is probably most likely considering they were able to get these tools in the first place. They knew where to look. They also know how the game is played.

a reply to: liveandlearn

First of all, I think it is wise to point out two things.

First of all, to those who are looking at this document, and thinking "Was this thing written by Jar Jar sodding Binks?", you are not alone. That was my first thought too. However, I persevered. What I believe, having read the entire thing, is that the individual or collective who are responsible for the construction of this document, added the strange cadence and the improper grammatical structure, to defeat forensic analysis of their common use of language.

It is possible for anonymous authors to be identified by particulars of their craft. The way sentences run, the choice of words itself, errors or imperfections in the way grammar is used, punctuation deployed... these things can give an agency or investigator with the correct skill set, a very good idea of who may have written a document, and with the systems available to groups like the NSA, this ability is pretty much certainly present, given their enormous access to data (despite its being unconstitutional and all).

Therefore, it makes a certain degree of sense for the authors of a document like this, to edit their output in such a manner as to utterly confuse the reader, because if the incredibly adaptable human mind is so jarred as to find reading a document... less than pleasant, the ability of automated systems to detect similarities in syntax, grammatical choices, and other ideosyncratic elements of the composition will certainly be quite thoroughly reduced, keeping the chances of the author being identified as low as possible. If the ShadowBrokers are a real thing, and it is as claimed in the document, that members of the organisation are former employees of the Deep State, it will be absolutely imperative that they share no identifying information in documents such as this, in order that their anonymous status is maintained...

Second...

With the above being said, I have some serious doubts as to the legitimacy of this statement. It seems to me that former members of the Deep States infrastructure, would have a better idea of what is really going on, the real threats to the country they swore to serve, and would be dead against any kind of isolationist nationalism, precisely because that stuff is basically the road map to fascism, and serves no other purpose historically. Therefore, if the ShadowBrokers are a real thing, they are either not, as claimed, drawn from sworn members of the security and other services in the US, or they are politically dense despite their experience. I suggest this, because their attitude and some of the things they wrote, do not come together in my mind as positions which could be adopted by persons who would EVER consider joining up with any government service, whether covert or overt. They DO however echo some aspects of far right propagandism, which is always to be shot down, stabbed in the neck, pissed on and THEN set on fire.

It is an interesting document, and ordinarily I would have greater faith in its authenticity, coming as it has through the channels of Wikileaks, and with Snowden having looked it over and found no reason to call shenanigans, but something does not sit right. For one thing, it has some fascistic elements to it, and leaving things in Trumps "capable" hands, is precisely how one might best arrive at that unfortunate state of affairs. Seems counter to the stated interest of the author to actually act against a government which is far more likely to bring about the sort of regressionist bull that is recommended in the document.

a reply to: liveandlearn

It looks like yet another attempt to undermine Americas' faith in liberal democracy. After having seduced the alt-right into supporting Trump, now they are sowing disaffection among them.