- cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

A touch of contention - 9 People You Will Definitely Meet in Hell - an Indian Perspective
by Zenaan Harkness 20 Feb '16

20 Feb '16

Perhaps not after reading, but hey, try running around telling Westerners "Ghandi was a bloody idiot and deserves a place in hell". ---- http://russia-insider.com/en/history/10-people-you-will-definitely-meet-hel… 9 People You Will Definitely Meet in Hell - an Indian Perspective An irreverent guide to world history from an Oriental perspective Dick Cheney, Winston Churchill, and Mother Teresa make the cut Rakesh Krishnan Winston Churchill: "Indians are ... the beastliest people in the world, next to the Germans" - he slaughtered as many of both countries' defenseless civilians as he could Russia and India have been close allies for more than half a century. Yet most Russians know little about India. This is a country with its own world view, self-sustaining civilization and a history that is remarkably similar to Russia’s. Both countries have been subjected to savage invasions over the past several centuries. As we enter a new year, here’s an example of the Indian view of evil by an Indian who has been a friend of Russia for longer than he can remember. Don’t look for Russian villains here because Indians have a different perspective – often at odds with the Western one, which alas many Russians are still following. However, you are unlikely to find fault with this list of nasty people who have caused untold human misery. 9. Yahya Khan It took Adolf Hitler 12 years to round up and kill six million European Jews, but the Pakistanis, led by their President Yahya Khan, killed three million of their own Bengali citizens in less than a year. The fair-skinned Pakistanis of West Pakistan had such a racist, visceral hatred for their Muslim brethren in East Pakistan that Yahya is recorded as saying furiously: “Kill three million, and the rest will eat out of our hands.” The disruption of normal life in the region was cataclysmic: more than 30 million people – nearly half the population – fled the cities and went back to their villages, while ten million fled to India. More than two million of those killed are believed to have been Hindus. The rest were ordinary Bengali Muslims, students and academics. Next, the Pakistanis targeted women, raping at least 200,000. Among Yahya’s executioners in East Pakistan was General A.A.K. Niazi, who let loose his (fair skinned) Punjabi and Pathan soldiers on the defenseless women, saying: “I will transform the breed of this bastard race. Worse, after 93,000 Pakistan soldiers surrendered to the Indians, none of the Indian military were held accountable. The victorious generals not only prevented Bengali guerrillas from taking revenge on the Pakistani soldiers, but worse, they kept them in comfortable POW camps for more than a year. There is a special place in hell for Yahya. 8. Talat Pasha Not many people know the name of this genocidal maniac, but his deeds are well known. Talat Pasha was the Grand Vizier of the Ottoman Empire from 1917 to 1918. In 1915 he issued an order to wipe out the Armenians, forcing the entire population of Armenia – then under Turkish rule – into concentration camps. With their belongings, naked people were forced to trudge miles with no food and were killed if they couldn’t continue. The entire male population of Ankara was exterminated. Out of 2.5 million Armenians, 1 to 1.5 million were killed. In 1921, an Armenian assassination squad ended Talat Pasha’s miserable existence. 7. Dick Cheney Seventeen of the 19 hijackers of 9/11 were Saudi Arabians and yet the US invaded Iraq, a country that had nothing to do with Islamic terror. US Vice President Dick Cheney lied and fabricated evidence to get the US to go to war with Iraq. This led to the destruction of a secular country, its infrastructure and its army, but more tragically the war caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and the displacement of millions. Сheney also authorized physical and sexual abuse, torture, rape, sodomy and murder of Iraqi prisoners in the Abu Ghraib prison by US Army and CIA personnel. Worse, he used the war to make billions for his old company Halliburton. This suggests that he destroyed an entire country with a view to making money for himself and his cronies. Iraq was once a bulwark against Islamic fundamentalism, but America’s war is directly responsible for the emergence of Al-Qaeda and ISIS. The reason Cheney’s boss for eight years isn’t here is because George W. Bush was “an ignorant person who wanted to show his mother he could do things his father couldn’t”. Cheney was the Svengali who prodded the IQ challenged Bush to invade Iraq. He is likely to be singled out for special treatment in hell. 6. Pol Pot What’s unique about Pol Pot, the Prime Minister of Cambodia from 1976 to 1979, is that he wiped out 25 to 33 per cent of the population of his country – nearly three million. Pol Pot represents the ultimate communist fantasy – to destroy their ‘class enemies’. He wanted to uproot Cambodian civilization, turning it into an agrarian society and the people into workers and peasants. He is the only person in history who ordered an official genocide against his country. He banned Buddhism, money, schools, markets and personal possessions. Doctors, teachers, engineers and other skilled people were systematically eliminated. His communist government forced mass evacuations of cities, separating people from friends and families. The torture of class enemies happened on a massive scale, with millions, including the elderly, pregnant women and children beaten to death after being forced to work insanely long hours. People were expected to work until they dropped dead. Pol Pot was supported both by the Chinese and the Americans, because he was an enemy of the Vietnamese. Cambodia’s nightmare finally ended in December 1985 when the highly professional Vietnamese army invaded the country and destroyed Pol Pot’s headquarters. He fled to Thailand and after a few years moved to China, where he was treated for cancer. Pol Pot died in April 1998 of natural causes but is surely having a painful time in hell. 5. Timur Murderous tyrants fill history’s pages, but Timur of Samarkand was cruel towards both man and beast. Among his favorite pastimes was pushing elephants down steep cliffs. A former bandit, Timur conquered Persia and Mesopotamia, invaded Russia, Georgia, Syria, Turkey and India. In Baghdad he had 90,000 people beheaded so he could build towers with their skulls. In Turkey, where he promised no bloodshed in return for surrender, he had 3,000 prisoners buried alive and pointed out that he had kept to the letter of his oath. He also captured the Turkish Sultan and his wives, kept the Sultan in a cage in his parlor and had his naked wives serve visitors food and drinks. In 1397, Timur invaded India. The entire stretch of land from the Khyber Pass to the northern plains was subjected to massacres, rape, pillage and kidnapping. He easily defeated the Muslim sultanate ruling Delhi, but strong Hindu resistance made Timur even more vengeful than usual. During the ransacking of Delhi, almost all those not killed were distributed as slaves among Timur’s nobles. In his memoirs, he claims his 15,000 Turks each “secured from 50 to 100 prisoners....there was no man with less than 20” and that “women were obtained in such quantities as to exceed all count”. Timur declared his army had only killed Hindus and spared Muslim civilians. That’s rich, coming from someone who wiped out the city of Baghdad. Timur is most likely being repeatedly thrown off a steep cliff into hell’s lake of lava. 4. Aurangzeb There’s a reason why Canadian author Tarek Fatah danced in the wee hours in his bedroom when he received a phone call informing him that Delhi’s Aurangzeb Road had been renamed after APJ Abdul Kalam. Aurangzeb was singularly responsible for the continuing Hindu-Muslim divide in India. The Mughal emperor came to the throne by murdering his scholarly older brother and heir apparent Dara Shikoh. He also blinded Dara’s young children. Aurangzeb let elephants loose among the population and raided Hindu lands, destroying ancient temples. The number of stunningly beautiful temples he destroyed runs into the hundreds, if not thousands. Every Hindu in his kingdom had to pay the hated jaziya tax to be allowed to practice his religion. He claimed he was (unsuccessfully) “trying to destroy the ancient sovereignties of this country”. According to Fatah, “Aurangzeb today would be the equivalent of the Islamic State’s Al-Baghdadi, if not Osama Bin Laden or the Taliban Mullah Omar.” Fatah is of Pakistani origin but unlike most South Asian Muslims he realizes the great harm Aurangzeb caused India. “As emperor, Aurangzeb banned music, dancing and alcohol in the Mughal Empire. In Sindh and Punjab where many Muslims attended Hindu Brahmin preaches, he ordered the demolition of all schools and temples where these took place, making it punishable for Muslims to dress like non-Muslims.” Under the influence of Hinduism and the strong, sustained Hindu resistance, Islam lost its edge in India. By the late 1600s, a unique culture had formed in northern India, with Islam ready to shed its terrorist behavior towards other religions. Dara, who translated ancient Hindu texts into Persian, was symbolic of this remarkable transformation of Islam. However, Aurangzeb not only set the clock back on this reconciliation but alienated all his Hindu allies. This led to fierce wars of resistance that weakened the country and allowed the British to slowly conquer India. The partition of India (although British-midwifed) can be attributed to the deep divide created by this terrorist emperor. His legacy lives on in the hearts of many Indian Muslims who regard him as no less than a saint. Hell is the right place for such a scumbag. (NOTE: Aurangzeb Road was the second most expensive street in New Delhi. You are surely wondering who would name such a beautiful street after such an evil person. The answer is, the British. New Delhi was built by colonial Britain and several streets were named after brutal Muslim rulers and barbaric representatives of the queen of England. This is just one example of the West’s love for fundamentalist Islam.) 3. Mohandas Gandhi Mohandas Gandhi’s pacifism caused great harm to India and Hindus. Muslims refused to listen to him and attacked Hindus who had been effectively disarmed by Gandhi’s appeals for peace. This encouraged Muslims to attack Hindus even more because they knew Hindus weren’t going to retaliate. Had Hindus been allowed to attack Muslims, or at least be prepared to defend themselves with weapons, the cycle of Muslim violence could have been nipped in the bud. By going on hunger fasts in order to prevent Hindus from retaliating, Gandhi was the chief villain of Partition. Hundreds of thousands of Hindus were killed and thousands of women raped because of Gandhi’s imposed pacifism. He advocated a senseless surrender to murder. According to Indologist and Belgian orientalist Koenraad Elst, “The fundamental problem with Gandhi’s pacifism, not in the initial stages but when he had become the world-famous leader of India’s freedom movement (1920-47), was his increasing extremism. All sense of proportion had vanished when he advocated non-violence not as a technique of moral pressure by a weaker on a stronger party, but as a form of masochistic surrender.” Gandhi’s advice to the victims of communal violence was “breathtaking for its callousness in the face of human suffering”. During his prayer meeting on 1 May 1947, he prepared the Hindus and Sikhs for the anticipated massacres of their kind in the upcoming state of Pakistan with these words: “I would tell the Hindus to face death cheerfully if the Muslims are out to kill them. I would be a real sinner if after being stabbed I wished in my last moment that my son should seek revenge. I must die without rancor. You may turn round and ask whether all Hindus and all Sikhs should die. Yes, I would say. Such martyrdom will not be in vain.” Worse, believing he was some kind of mahatma (great soul), he tried to prove his self-control by often sleeping and bathing naked with other women. These women included his grandniece, Manu, and the wife of his grandnephew, who were both 18 when they started sleeping in the same bed as Gandhi, who was 77 years old at the time. Graeme Donald writes in Lies, Damned Lies and History: A Catalogue of Historical Errors and Misunderstandings: “All had to sleep naked and, just to make doubly sure of his resolve, Gandhi would take them to bed in pairs. Some as young as 12, several girls later acknowledged that they did often ‘render service’ to Gandhi but refused to elaborate.” Donald adds that the girls were selected for their “pertness” to “stiffen his resolve” for celibacy. “Very much a case of ‘damn, failed again, must try harder tomorrow night.” Such a paedophile belongs in hell. 2. Mother Teresa Mother Teresa took money stolen from pensioners by financial fraud artist Charles Keating. She accepted donations from the murderous Haitian dictator Jean-Claude Duvalier. She was also a friend of Enver Hoxha, the communist dictator of Albania. Worse, Teresa’s 600 missions in 123 countries have been described as "homes for the dying" by visiting doctors. The doctors observed a significant lack of hygiene, even unfit conditions, as well as a shortage of actual care, inadequate food and no painkillers. Teresa claimed that “There is something beautiful in seeing the poor accept their lot, to suffer it like Christ's passion. The world gains much from their suffering.’' Her nuns were not provided with medical training, the use of mosquito repellents, or information about malaria and vaccinations, because Teresa believed "God" would look after the nuns. One of her nuns got into trouble with the order for helping a man with dysentery who was dying. Teresa quoted Peter 2:18-23, which orders slaves to obey their masters even if they are abusive and difficult, and urged her nuns to obey superiors without question. But she was a hypocrite: seeking out the best medical care for herself. Despite the fact that medical tourists from the West travel to India for treatment, Teresa reckoned India wasn't good enough for her. She was admitted to California's Scripps Clinic and Research Foundation. Teresa was stingy even during national emergencies. During Indian floods she offered prayers and medallions of the Virgin Mary but no monetary aid. Teresa's fundraising sermons persuaded people that Calcutta is a city of lepers and beggars. Her nuns lied to the global media that the city had 450,000 lepers, knowing that this would make rich westerners despatch their dollars. All abandoned children who are taken into Teresa's missions are brought up as Christians. In India Teresa was (and her mission continues to be) actively engaged in proselytizing, which is not only illegal but has a negative impact on India's complex social hierarchy. For her lies, stolen cash and allowing little children suffer painful deaths, she is a favorite member of hell. 1. Winston Churchill This scumbag takes the pole position in this list. Like No.10 Yahya Khan, Prime Minister Winston Churchill managed to outdo Hitler and his Nazi cohorts. The Germans may have taken 12 years to murder 6 million Jews, but their Teutonic cousins, the British, managed to kill almost 4 million Indians in just over a year, with Churchill cheering from the sidelines. Australian biochemist Dr Gideon Polya has called the Bengal Famine a “manmade holocaust” because Churchill’s policies were directly responsible for the disaster. He knowingly and enthusiastically caused the famine in 1942-43 by transferring vast quantities of food grain from India to Britain. To Churchill, the starvation of Indians was less serious than that of Greeks. When the British administrators urged him to release food stocks for India, Churchill responded with a telegram asking why Gandhi hadn’t died yet. Churchill’s hostility toward Indians has long been documented. At a War Cabinet meeting, he blamed the Indians for the famine, saying they breed like rabbits, and are a beastly people with a beastly religion. On another occasion, he insisted they were “the beastliest people in the world next to the Germans”. According to author Madhusree Mukerjee, “Churchill’s attitude toward India was quite extreme, and he hated Indians, mainly because he knew India couldn’t be held for very long.” The fact is the British Prime Minister possessed an extraordinary range of prejudices. During World War II, in a memorandum to the War Cabinet about policy towards Italy, he wrote: “All the industrial centers should be attacked in intense fashion, every effort being made to terrorize the population.” He also pushed for the firebombing of German population centers such as Dresden, Leipzig and Chemnitz which killed 200,000 civilians in 1945. It was the only way the British could show they were in the war. In 1944, Churchill came up with a cataclysmic plan to convert Germany into a “country primarily agricultural and pastoral in its character”. The Morgenthau Plan if implemented would have starved 10 million Germans to death in the first year alone. US President Franklin Roosevelt admitted Churchill was “bought off” by the American offer of $6.5 billion in Lend Lease. No human being deserves to be in hell more than Winston. (Disclaimer: As an atheist I don’t believe in heaven or hell in the religious sense. But the universe is ruled by the laws of physics and mathematics, which imply that all actions have consequences.) Copyright © 2016 Russia Insider

1 0

FBI tries to make Apple to facilitate timely brute-force
by Henry Rivera 19 Feb '16

19 Feb '16

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/17/apple-ordered-to-hack-iphone…

2 1

Inside John Kerry's Photo Op With Hollywood Leaders: Anti-ISIS Pow-Wow Yields Few Plans, Ideas
by Georgi Guninski 19 Feb '16

19 Feb '16

http://www.thewrap.com/inside-john-kerrys-meeting-with-hollywood-leaders-te… === Secretary of State gathered a roomful of moguls to ask for help on terrorism, but it’s not clear what Hollywood is prepared to offer === Looks like the beginning of the New Order -- AFAICT the worst from socialism and capitalism. Anyone already watched "war on terror porn"?

6 7

Possible crypto backdoor in RFC-2631 Diffie-Hellman Key Agreement Method
by Georgi Guninski 18 Feb '16

18 Feb '16

Possible crypto backdoor in RFC-2631 Diffie-Hellman Key Agreement Method I am n00b at crypto so this might not make any sense. In DH, if one can select group parameters (g,q,p) he can break both parties private very fast time IMHO. The RFC: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2631 The main problem appears: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2631#section-2.2.2 2.2.2. Group Parameter Validation The ASN.1 for DH keys in [PKIX] includes elements j and validation- Parms which MAY be used by recipients of a key to verify that the group parameters were correctly generated. Two checks are possible: 1. Verify that p=qj + 1. This demonstrates that the parameters meet the X9.42 parameter criteria. 2. Verify that when the p,q generation procedure of [FIPS-186] Appendix 2 is followed with seed 'seed', that p is found when 'counter' = pgenCounter. The main problem appears MAY. As I read it, implementation MAY NOT verify it. Sketch of the attack: Chose $q$ product of small primes $p_i$. Solve the discrete logarithm modulo $p_i$ for the public keys. Apply the Chinese remainder theorem to get the privates keys. (This is well known method for DL and for this reason the group order must be prime [160 bits ;)]). Would be interested how implementations implement this MAY. Let me know if there is better list for this. -- georgi

4 44

Re: [tor-talk] Cicada 3301: 2016
by grarpamp 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

On 2/11/16, Green Dream <greendream848(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> I'm surprised anyone thinks this could possibly be anything besides a > viral >> marketing campaign. AR games are all the rage these days. > > > That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Cicada_3301 is going on 5 years. > Seeing as no entity has stepped forward, there is no marketing benefit. For > that matter there's no tangible benefit for the sponsor at all, aside from > possibly attracting talent. Agreed. If they were selling auto insurance, they'd look pathetic, especially to those working it. It's bragging rights / talent search / comrade at arms. Whether from Big Govt, Big Corp, or cpunks. Those who solved one or more know the answer... :)

2 1

Suggestion: Don't reply onlist to known spies and national security employees
by Georgi Guninski 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

Basically I am suggesting "don't feed the trolls", but this would be an insult to trolls (IMHO troll is not always bad). So I suggest: Don't reply onlist to known spies and national security employees. This might hurt their plans and/or salaries.

4 5

FOIPA Adventures
by Ryan Carboni 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

Since there seems to be a competition to make embarrassing FOIA requests to the government: "I request the audio of the last Challenger shuttle mission. The privacy interests since the New York Times v. NASA suit has diminished, particularly after it was widely reported that they were still alive and trapped within the shuttle. There remains a public interest in knowing exactly when the astronauts died." "I request records prepared for the 01-27-16 press conference regarding Malheur Wildwife Refuge. Greg Bretzing, SAC of the FBI Portland Field Office, made a statement that the occupiers were outsiders, while wearing a wind breaker. I infer that the statement was made based on advice from the Behavioral Analysis Unit. The fact that the BAU assists in Media Strategies has been publicly acknowledged in books by former FBI agents and on federal government websites. The law enforcement exemption can only be applied in limited circumstances with specificity, such as a specific investigation. There is also a public interest in knowing how the government is crafting messages for public consumption." "I request statistics from 2001 to 2015 estimating the number of individuals who have lost their security clearance because it was discovered through a polygraph that they are not comfortable with their work (including, but not limited to, a moral, ethical, or emotional comfort). I believe that the DNI centrally compiles this or has authority over this data." I find it disturbing that Ginsberg's opinion that "vocal inflections" (screaming) have a privacy interest.

1 0

Ideals in crypto: Apple must help Feds unlock San Bernardino killer's iPhone – judge
by Georgi Guninski 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/02/17/apple_help_fbi_san_bernardino/ ==== Apple must assist the FBI in unlocking the passcode-protected encrypted iPhone belonging to one of the San Bernardino shooters in California. ... It’s technically possible for Apple to hack a device’s PIN, wipe, and other functions. Question is can they be legally forced to hack," said iOS security expert Jonathan Ździarski. ==== Remember the NSA key on windoze? ;)

4 5

De-dollarization possibly about to snowball
by Zenaan Harkness 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

The article below presents thoughts that seem overly simplistic to me, being not based much in facts such as the recent awareness that Iran is now selling its oil in Euros: http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/iran-dumps-petrodollar-wants-euros-al… (Oh dear, sorry Saddam Hussein, you just weren't a big enough fish, and you were put in place by the CIA, so you should have been a little cleverer, or waited 20 years, to sell your oil in Euros.) and Rupees: http://russia-insider.com/en/its-happening-iran-india-dump-petrodollar-sett… and the consequent rise (last two/three weeks) in the price of gold by about $150 an ounce - here in Australia, gold normally changes price inversely to our currency's price wrt USDollar - but last Thursday, our dollar went UP one cent, and gold ALSO went up (instead of down), in the order of $100. This is rare. Yes, when the game shifts, there is a run away from fiat currency into precious metals, in particular gold. We've seen this historically too (great depression). Just because there's not enough gold don't mean a bee's dick of nothing - that just means that the final fall back currency (gold and silver) have a run on them and the price skyrockets. Let's see if the gold price march continues this week and next - if so, it's likely to skyrocket IMHO ... Of course we already know that Russia is settling with China in Yuan/Renminbi, although I don't recall the price of gold going up when that happened - probably because the USA has had so much pressure on Russia (Ukraine, sanctions, Syria, media disinfo), but now with India, and now Iran, and the whole Saudi/shale-oil (and against rest of the world) price war, well perhaps it's starting to get real enough that the hedge funds are starting to say "oh shit!" Viva la change! ---- http://russia-insider.com/en/no-virginia-trading-oil-other-currencies-wont-… " No, Virginia, Trading Oil in Other Currencies Won't Kill the Dollar America doesn’t care what color electrons you use Jacob Dreizin Subscribe to Jacob Dreizin 5 hours ago | 801 Comments Donate! This is the only way to really "kill the dollar." Don't try this at home There are good reasons for doing certain cross-border trade in your own currency, or that of your trade partner. Consider that all digital dollar transactions across borders, anywhere on this planet, have to go through one or more U.S. banks. And if Uncle Sam doesn't like you, well, he can just cut you off from that. No more foreign trade for you! It happened to Iran in 2012, forcing the country to survive on a bizarre gas-for-gold scheme with Turkey, complete with a "gold express" on passenger flights from Dubai to Tehran. Russia was also threatened with something roughly along these lines in 2014. Thus, the main benefit of using non-dollar currencies in your foreign trade: You're not as vulnerable to the whims of Uncle Sam. And for countries on the outs with the Uncle, that's very important. But that's it. Folks who claim that “de-dollarization” in the oil trade—or any other trade—will “kill the dollar” (or something like that), don't ever explain how. Sure, it sounds good, but what is the mechanism of action? Answer: There is none. Because, today, demand for the dollar isn’t based simply on the convenience of using it to settle accounts across borders. Or more precisely, that’s part of it, but by no means the root of it. The dollar is convenient because every country and major bank has some. In other words, demand for the dollar is based on its status as the global reserve currency. And its status as the global reserve currency is due to the massive, highly-liquid market for U.S. Treasury bonds. And the massive, highly-liquid market for U.S. Treasury bonds owes its existence to: (1) The USA's unique position of running perpetual, large, unrestrained budget deficits, while (2) maintaining its ability to pay off the debt issued to cover those deficits by issuing more debt perpetually, while (3) the world needs somewhere to stuff its trillions in cash (to include trillions of dollars earned by running large, perpetual trade surpluses with the USA.) Because, after all, a foreign central bank holding cash dollars wouldn't be able to pay itself a return, and as for potential large depositors, your national deposit insurance scheme only guarantees accounts up to some trivial amount. Whereas the USA can print dollars and thus, guarantees all of its bonds. Does this sound like a confidence scheme? Hell yeah! But what are you going to do about it? That is, if (hypothetically) everyone suddenly lost confidence in the USA's ability to pay its debts without inordinately debasing its currency... ...Where else could they put their money? You can't dump those trillions and trillions in your local non-U.S. bank. No one would guarantee it! Beyond some token amount, no state can guarantee deposits in a currency that it can't print itself. Nor is anyone yet prepared to guarantee the hypothetical equivalent of those dollars in local currency terms. Not to mention, the nature of double-entry accounting means banks would have to immediately loan that money out or put it on deposit with their Central Bank—which creates its own set of problems. So all those folks who chant “there will be a run from the dollar” should think about what they're saying. Moreover, they should ask themselves: A "run" into what, exactly? What would the nations and banks of the world convert their dollar reserves into? It can't be “rubles” or “yuan”, because that available volume of rubles or yuan (not debt instruments, but actual bank money to play around with) doesn't exist. The authorities would have to print mountains more rubles or yuan on the spot, crashing their value (and thus, paradoxically, supporting the dollar.) But more to the point in our debt-money system, that volume of ruble or yuan sovereign debt does not exist. Hence, saying “there will be a run from the dollar into (blank)”, ignores the fact that there's not enough (blank.) Not by a long shot. Not even if the dollar crashed 50 percent overnight against every other currency. But even if there was enough, your money-changer or bond dealer would have to take those dollars you're handing him, and put them somewhere! After all, he won't just throw them away. He has to eat, too. So where would they go? Into U.S. bonds! Thus reinforcing the dollar's status as the global reserve currency! So as you can see, a cataclysmic “run on the dollar” is impossible under the current system. Uncle Sam has this one locked down tight. As I explained here, it would take a total collapse of global finance to even begin to get the ball rolling away from dollar hegemony. And as I also explained here, the pain of such a collapse would be borne primarily by emerging markets like Russia, China, etc. And that's the last thing those countries want. So as long as the dollar remains the world's reserve currency, “de-dollarization” of the oil trade means nothing to the dollar. It's certainly a good idea for the countries involved. But America could care less. "

4 9

Re: [cryptome] Re: U.S. Hacked Into Iranâ€™s Critical Civilian Infrastr ucture For Massive Cyberattack
by Michael Best 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '16

If being "gov-friendly" is by itself enough to cast suspicion of bias, then the same should be assumed of all "gov-unfriendly" outlets. That's why it's important to look at the data. The source shouldn't be ignored, but analysis shouldn't begin and end with that. See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_the_well On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 8:22 AM, John Young <jya(a)pipeline.com> wrote: > Maybe, maybe more cyberwar milking pretense. > > Gibney is a gov-friendly outlet. So is James Ball. > > > At 08:04 AM 2/16/2016, you wrote: > >> < >> http://www.buzzfeed.com/jamesball/us-hacked-into-irans-critical-civilian-in… >> > >> http://www.buzzfeed.com/jamesball/us-hacked-into-irans-critical-civilian-in… >> > > > >

3 2