The Trump Presidency - how I stopped worrying and learned to love the Hair

LeVeL

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
12,580
In this case, the latter because it has actual digital protection in place, unlike the former.
 

LeVeL

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
12,580
Peaceful migrants are now rushing the border, trying to cross illegally, and throwing rocks at US federal agents. Mexican officials are allegedly deporting violent offenders. Protesters in Tijuana are coming out against the migrants. Meanwhile the left has their collective heads up their rectums screaming "das raciss".

On NPR this morning they were talking about Trump's plan to have migrants apply for asylum from outside of the US. They were crying about how hard it will be for Mexico to have to house and to feed all these people.... WHICH IS EXACTLY WHY TRUMP DOESN'T WANT THEM IN THE US!!! It really IS a challenge to house and to feed all these people and eventually our authorities let them out basically on the promise to come back once a decision on asylum is made, which, of course, they never do - they just wander off.

BUILD. THE. WALL.
 

Interrobang

Forum Addict
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
8,144
LeVeL;n3555086 said:
In this case, the latter because it has actual digital protection in place, unlike the former.
Who says you cannot have the same level of digital protection on a server at your house like the ISPs - with the added bonus of people not being able to physically acces the server? You may even decide not to make the security mistakes 'normal' email-ISP do and go use stuff like higher encryptions (using PGP is a pretty good start) or operating systems without build in backdoors ...

Now before you twist the words in my mouth - I am not saying every (or Hilarys) server at home is automatically better than a server at an public ISP. The one Hilary used was pretty bad from what is known (running windows *facepalm*). But at an ISP you don't have control on a lot of security aspects of concerning your data. Physical access to it is one aspect. And your Statement that having your own server is generally less secure than one at (for Example) GoDaddy or hostgator is false. You just gotta do it right.
Which is also why the US Government (as well as many other Governements across the World) uses it's OWN Servers that they have complete control over. And that's been the main Problem in Hilarys case - she had control over her emails (that she shouldn't have had) and not the government. She wouldn't have had the opportunity to delete the e-mails without that server at home ... so it's been pretty secure that server at home - against the US Governement, despite being set up so badly. Ivanka's emails maybe pretty available to the Us-Governement at GoDaddy (or whatever company she used) thx to the Patriot Act and such - so not much of a problem there - but it may also have been available to third parties.
 

Interrobang

Forum Addict
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
8,144
LeVeL;n3555087 said:
[...] BUILD. THE. WALL.
Promises kept! :lol:

Couldn't have been that urgent when the president couldn't do it with mayorities in house and senate ... makes me suspect that that's just the (metaphorical) carrot he's dangling infornt of his supporters and not really a priority for Republicans and Trump.
 

mpicco

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
5,315
Location
Portugal
Car(s)
R19
Oh look, there are those Trump tax cuts and tariffs at work, GM to lay off 14,000 employees, IKEA cutting 7,500, rumors are that Ford will announce some soon, too.

Oh look, it's snowing, global warming is still a communist hoax.

Oh look, Russia attacks sovereign nations and all some angry cheetoh tweets about is defense of his criminally underqualified daughter.
 

GRtak

Forum Addict
Joined
Sep 6, 2008
Messages
18,427
Location
Michigan USA
LeVeL;n3555087 said:
Peaceful migrants are now rushing the border, trying to cross illegally, and throwing rocks at US federal agents. Mexican officials are allegedly deporting violent offenders. Protesters in Tijuana are coming out against the migrants. Meanwhile the left has their collective heads up their rectums screaming "das raciss".

On NPR this morning they were talking about Trump's plan to have migrants apply for asylum from outside of the US. They were crying about how hard it will be for Mexico to have to house and to feed all these people.... WHICH IS EXACTLY WHY TRUMP DOESN'T WANT THEM IN THE US!!! It really IS a challenge to house and to feed all these people and eventually our authorities let them out basically on the promise to come back once a decision on asylum is made, which, of course, they never do - they just wander off.

BUILD. THE. WALL.


Hmm, what could make a group of desperate people more desperate? How about putting an artificial limit on how many can be processed for asylum each day? Say 40 - 100 people a day. Would the possibilty of having to wait months to even go through the first step of the process not push you over the edge?


https://www.npr.org/2018/11/27/670807343/fact-check-whats-happening-on-the-u-s-mexico-border


Why were the migrants protesting over the weekend?

Many of the migrants say they want to seek asylum in the U.S., which is not illegal — in fact, the right to seek asylum is protected by both U.S. and international law.

However, authorities at legal border crossings have been limiting the number of people who can request asylum. Only 40-100 people are allowed each day, Fredrick says.

"People in the caravan who want to request asylum, they're looking at months to even be heard first by U.S. authorities, and then for that claim to be processed can take months or even years," Fredrick tells NPR.

Migrants were protesting that delay.

A spokesman for CBP told NPR's Joel Rose that San Ysidro is limited by its facilities, which can hold up to 300 people, and that the port of entry can process about 100 people per day under ideal conditions.

So Trump made a big show to send troops down there, and they only made preparations to keep as many of them out as possible. They could have erected tents for temporary housing. Trump has a narrow view of what should be allowed into the country, and they look like his wife and daughter.
 

TC

aka TomCat
Joined
Dec 11, 2005
Messages
11,439
Interrobang;n3555090 said:
Who says you cannot have the same level of digital protection on a server at your house like the ISPs - with the added bonus of people not being able to physically acces the server? You may even decide not to make the security mistakes 'normal' email-ISP do and go use stuff like higher encryptions (using PGP is a pretty good start) or operating systems without build in backdoors ...

Now before you twist the words in my mouth - I am not saying every (or Hilarys) server at home is automatically better than a server at an public ISP. The one Hilary used was pretty bad from what is known (running windows *facepalm*). But at an ISP you don't have control on a lot of security aspects of concerning your data. Physical access to it is one aspect. And your Statement that having your own server is generally less secure than one at (for Example) GoDaddy or hostgator is false. You just gotta do it right.
Which is also why the US Government (as well as many other Governements across the World) uses it's OWN Servers that they have complete control over. And that's been the main Problem in Hilarys case - she had control over her emails (that she shouldn't have had) and not the government. She wouldn't have had the opportunity to delete the e-mails without that server at home ... so it's been pretty secure that server at home - against the US Governement, despite being set up so badly. Ivanka's emails maybe pretty available to the Us-Governement at GoDaddy (or whatever company she used) thx to the Patriot Act and such - so not much of a problem there - but it may also have been available to third parties.
James Comey, the acting director of the FBI at the time, concluded that Hillary Clinton's server was less secure than Gmail and was probably hacked, maybe even by the Russians. Hillary also claimed to not use it for classified information, but the emails she didn't illegally destroy did contain classified information, which made it into the hands of her aid Huma Abedin, and Huma's apparently pedophile husband Anthony Weiner, neither of whom had clearance to view said classified information. The negligent mishandling of classified information is a felony.

But apparently this "extremely careless" handling of classified information didn't warrant an indictment, which leads many to wonder just how careless a person has to be before their behavior can reasonably be called "negligent".

This is why it's so disgracefully annoying when people act like the issue with Hillary was simply that she used a personal email account. The hyperpartisan attempts to obfuscate the real problem with what she did is pathetic, to say the least.
 

gaasc

Desperately looking for a title
DONOR
Joined
Apr 26, 2008
Messages
8,124
Location
Honduras
Car(s)
3 of them
LeVeL;n3555087 said:
Peaceful migrants are now rushing the border, trying to cross illegally, and throwing rocks at US federal agents. Mexican officials are allegedly deporting violent offenders. Protesters in Tijuana are coming out against the migrants. Meanwhile the left has their collective heads up their rectums screaming "das raciss".

Called it!
 

prizrak

Forum Addict
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
20,118
Location
No, sleep, till, BROOKLYN
Car(s)
11 Xterra Pro-4x, 12 'stang GT
Interrobang;n3555090 said:
Who says you cannot have the same level of digital protection on a server at your house like the ISPs - with the added bonus of people not being able to physically acces the server? You may even decide not to make the security mistakes 'normal' email-ISP do and go use stuff like higher encryptions (using PGP is a pretty good start) or operating systems without build in backdoors ...

Now before you twist the words in my mouth - I am not saying every (or Hilarys) server at home is automatically better than a server at an public ISP. The one Hilary used was pretty bad from what is known (running windows *facepalm*). But at an ISP you don't have control on a lot of security aspects of concerning your data. Physical access to it is one aspect. And your Statement that having your own server is generally less secure than one at (for Example) GoDaddy or hostgator is false. You just gotta do it right.
Which is also why the US Government (as well as many other Governements across the World) uses it's OWN Servers that they have complete control over. And that's been the main Problem in Hilarys case - she had control over her emails (that she shouldn't have had) and not the government. She wouldn't have had the opportunity to delete the e-mails without that server at home ... so it's been pretty secure that server at home - against the US Governement, despite being set up so badly. Ivanka's emails maybe pretty available to the Us-Governement at GoDaddy (or whatever company she used) thx to the Patriot Act and such - so not much of a problem there - but it may also have been available to third parties.
You are under informed on what the issue is. You could secure the server in your house, however it is harder seeing as how you have a public access point into your house (residential ISP), while government or private companies use leased lines with limited access. Aside from that there are certain standards contractors have to follow as well as audits that are simply not present in a machine sitting in your basement. Add to it the fact that Hilary was a government official and her emails would be considered public record, which once again have certain requirements for archiving and availability. That is not to say that government/corporate servers are inherently more secure but there are a lot more controls and assurances than a private server.
 

LeVeL

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
12,580
GRtak;n3555111 said:
Hmm, what could make a group of desperate people more desperate?
Here's another question about people that claim that they're running away from violent and poverty-stricken countries: why are they having those countries' flags as they rush our border and attack our federal agents with cold weapons?
 

prizrak

Forum Addict
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
20,118
Location
No, sleep, till, BROOKLYN
Car(s)
11 Xterra Pro-4x, 12 'stang GT
GRtak;n3555111 said:
Hmm, what could make a group of desperate people more desperate? How about putting an artificial limit on how many can be processed for asylum each day? Say 40 - 100 people a day. Would the possibilty of having to wait months to even go through the first step of the process not push you over the edge?


https://www.npr.org/2018/11/27/670807343/fact-check-whats-happening-on-the-u-s-mexico-border





So Trump made a big show to send troops down there, and they only made preparations to keep as many of them out as possible. They could have erected tents for temporary housing. Trump has a narrow view of what should be allowed into the country, and they look like his wife and daughter.
Do you believe that US is obligated to take in any and all refugees?
 

GRtak

Forum Addict
Joined
Sep 6, 2008
Messages
18,427
Location
Michigan USA
No, but when they show up at the border, the law should be followed and they get to go through the process.
 

GRtak

Forum Addict
Joined
Sep 6, 2008
Messages
18,427
Location
Michigan USA
LeVeL;n3555119 said:
Here's another question about people that claim that they're running away from violent and poverty-stricken countries: why are they having those countries' flags as they rush our border and attack our federal agents with cold weapons?

I have no clue. Maybe they love the country, but hate what it has become.

Look at why "they attacked" our border though. The Mexican police were trying to block them from getting to the border, that is the trigger for the violence.
 

LeVeL

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
12,580
GRtak;n3555142 said:
I have no clue. Maybe they love the country, but hate what it has become.

Look at why "they attacked" our border though. The Mexican police were trying to block them from getting to the border, that is the trigger for the violence.
So while the Honduran-flag waiving asylum seekers were trying to come to the US, Mexican police stopped them so they decided to take up weapons against US agents, not Mexican police? That makes no sense :lol:

Btw, in your mind is Mexico required to allow thousands of foreigners to enter the country illegally if their goal is to take a few months to travel across the entirety of Mexico and reach the US, which has promised not to let them in, meaning that they will be forced to remain in Mexico?
 

prizrak

Forum Addict
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
20,118
Location
No, sleep, till, BROOKLYN
Car(s)
11 Xterra Pro-4x, 12 'stang GT
GRtak;n3555141 said:
No, but when they show up at the border, the law should be followed and they get to go through the process.
Does the law specify how many asylum seekers must be seen on a daily basis? If not I don't see how the law is being broken here.
 

GRtak

Forum Addict
Joined
Sep 6, 2008
Messages
18,427
Location
Michigan USA
I don't know.


LeVeL;n3555144 said:
So while the Honduran-flag waiving asylum seekers were trying to come to the US, Mexican police stopped them so they decided to take up weapons against US agents, not Mexican police? That makes no sense :lol:

Btw, in your mind is Mexico required to allow thousands of foreigners to enter the country illegally if their goal is to take a few months to travel across the entirety of Mexico and reach the US, which has promised not to let them in, meaning that they will be forced to remain in Mexico?

They were fighting to get by the Mexican officers that were attempting to block them. Something our President asked for by the way, and then were fired upon by our border guards. I am not sure when they threw the rocks, there only appears to be one camera that captured anything(why?).

Why do you have such a problem with flag waving? Do you freak out anytime a flag other than the US flag is waved in, or near this country?

I have no idea what Mexico's laws are.
 

LeVeL

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
12,580
GRtak;n3555153 said:
They were fighting to get by the Mexican officers that were attempting to block them. Something our President asked for by the way, and then were fired upon by our border guards. I am not sure when they threw the rocks, there only appears to be one camera that captured anything(why?).
Except that's not what happened - not sure if you actually don't pay attention or if you're just bending over backwards to come up with these ridiculous excuses.
 
Top