November 26, 2017


News and Views


FBI SAYS IT WAS TOTALLY SWAMPED WITH INCIDENTS AND COULDN’T RESPOND. AP SAID IT COULD, SO WHY COULDN’T THE FBI? THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS SUBJECT, AND THERE IS SO MUCH BARELY CONNECTED DETAIL IN HERE THAT I CAN’T GET THE GIST. MAYBE THE NEW YORK TIMES OR SOMEBODY WILL TELL MORE, OR TELL IT BETTER. STILL, THIS IS THE STORY FOR TODAY.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ap-fbi-didnt-tell-u-s-targets-as-russian-hackers-hunted-emails/
AP November 26, 2017, 8:23 AM
AP: FBI didn't tell U.S. targets as Russian hackers hunted emails

WASHINGTON -- The FBI failed to notify scores of U.S. officials that Russian hackers were trying to break into their personal Gmail accounts despite having evidence for at least a year that the targets were in the Kremlin's crosshairs, The Associated Press has found.

Nearly 80 interviews with Americans targeted by Fancy Bear, a Russian government-aligned cyberespionage group, turned up only two cases in which the FBI had provided a heads-up. Even senior policymakers discovered they were targets only when the AP told them, a situation some described as bizarre and dispiriting.

"It's utterly confounding," said Philip Reiner, a former senior director at the National Security Council, who was notified by the AP that he was targeted in 2015. "You've got to tell your people. You've got to protect your people."

The FBI declined to answer most questions from AP about how it had responded to the spying campaign. The bureau provided a statement that said in part: "The FBI routinely notifies individuals and organizations of potential threat information."

Three people familiar with the matter -- including a current and a former government official -- said the FBI has known for more than a year the details of Fancy Bear's attempts to break into Gmail inboxes. A senior FBI official, who was not authorized to publicly discuss the hacking operation because of its sensitivity, declined to comment on timing but said that the bureau was overwhelmed by the sheer number of attempted hacks.

"It's a matter of triaging to the best of our ability the volume of the targets who are out there," he said.

The AP did its own triage, dedicating two months and a small team of reporters to go through a hit list of Fancy Bear targets provided by the cybersecurity firm Secureworks.

Previous AP investigations based on the list have shown how Fancy Bear worked in close alignment with the Kremlin's interests to steal tens of thousands of emails from the Democratic Party. The hacking campaign disrupted the 2016 U.S. election and cast a shadow over the presidency of Donald Trump, whom U.S. intelligence agencies say the hackers were trying to help. The Russian government has denied interfering in the American election.

The Secureworks list comprises 19,000 lines of targeting data. Going through it, the AP identified more than 500 U.S.-based people or groups and reached out to more than 190 of them, interviewing nearly 80 about their experiences.

Many were long-retired, but about one-quarter were still in government or held security clearances at the time they were targeted. Only two told the AP they learned of the hacking attempts on their personal Gmail accounts from the FBI. A few more were contacted by the FBI after their emails were published in the torrent of leaks that coursed through last year's electoral contest. But to this day, some leak victims have not heard from the bureau at all.

Charles Sowell, who previously worked as a senior administrator in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and was targeted by Fancy Bear two years ago, said there was no reason the FBI couldn't do the same work the AP did.

"It's absolutely not OK for them to use an excuse that there's too much data," Sowell said. "Would that hold water if there were a serial killer investigation, and people were calling in tips left and right, and they were holding up their hands and saying, 'It's too much'? That's ridiculous."

"It's curious"

The AP found few traces of the bureau's inquiry as it launched its own investigation two months ago.

In October, two AP journalists visited THCServers.com, a brightly lit, family-run internet company on the former grounds of a communist-era chicken farm outside the Romanian city of Craiova. That's where someone registered DCLeaks.com, the first of three websites to publish caches of emails belonging to Democrats and other U.S. officials in mid-2016.

DCLeaks was clearly linked to Fancy Bear. Previous AP reporting found that all but one of the site's victims had been targeted by the hacking group before their emails were dumped online.

Yet THC founder Catalin Florica said he was never approached by law enforcement.

"It's curious," Florica said. "You are the first ones that contact us."

THC merely registered the site, a simple process that typically takes only a few minutes. But the reaction was similar at the Kuala Lumpur offices of the Malaysian web company Shinjiru Technology, which hosted DCLeaks' stolen files for the duration of the electoral campaign.

The company's chief executive, Terence Choong, said he had never heard of DCLeaks until the AP contacted him.

"What is the issue with it?" he asked.

Questions over the FBI's handling of Fancy Bear's broad hacking sweep date to March 2016, when agents arrived unannounced at Hillary Clinton's headquarters in Brooklyn to warn her campaign about a surge of rogue, password-stealing emails.

The agents offered little more than generic security tips the campaign had already put into practice and refused to say who they thought was behind the attempted intrusions, according to a person who was there and spoke on condition of anonymity because the conversation was meant to be confidential.

Questions emerged again after it was revealed that the FBI never took custody of the Democratic National Committee's computer server after it was penetrated by Fancy Bear in April 2016. Former FBI Director James Comey testified this year that the FBI worked off a copy of the server, which he described as an "appropriate substitute."

"Makes me sad"

Retired Maj. James Phillips was one of the first people to have the contents of his inbox published by DCLeaks when the website made its June 2016 debut.

But the Army veteran said he didn't realize his personal emails were "flapping in the breeze" until a journalist phoned him two months later.

"The fact that a reporter told me about DCLeaks kind of makes me sad," he said. "I wish it had been a government source."

Phillips' story would be repeated again and again as the AP spoke to officials from the National Defense University in Washington to the North American Aerospace Defense Command in Colorado.

Among them: a former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, retired Lt. Gen. Patrick Hughes; a former head of Air Force Intelligence, retired Lt. Gen. David Deptula; a former defense undersecretary, Eric Edelman; and a former director of cybersecurity for the Air Force, retired Lt. Gen. Mark Schissler.

Retired Maj. Gen. Brian Keller, a former director of military support at the Geospatial Intelligence Agency, was not informed, even after DCLeaks posted his emails to the internet. In a telephone call with AP, Keller said he still wasn't clear on what had happened, who had hacked him or whether his data was still at risk.

"Should I be worried or alarmed or anything?" said Keller, who left the spy satellite agency in 2010 and now works in private industry.

Not all the interviewees felt the FBI had a responsibility to alert them.

"Perhaps optimistically, I have to conclude that a risk analysis was done and I was not considered a high enough risk to justify making contact," said a former Air Force chief of staff, retired Gen. Norton Schwartz, who was targeted by Fancy Bear in 2015.

Others argued that the FBI may have wanted to avoid tipping the hackers off or that there were too many people to notify.

"The expectation that the government is going to protect everyone and go back to everyone is false," said Nicholas Eftimiades, a retired senior technical officer at the Defense Intelligence Agency who teaches homeland security at Pennsylvania State University in Harrisburg and was himself among the targets.

But the government is supposed to try, said Michael Daniel, who served as President Barack Obama's White House cybersecurity coordinator.

Daniel wouldn't comment directly on why so many Fancy Bear targets weren't warned in this case, but he said the issue of how and when to notify people "frankly still needs more work."

"Cloak-and-dagger"

In the absence of any official warning, some of those contacted by AP brushed off the idea that they were taken in by a foreign power's intelligence service.

"I don't open anything I don't recognize," said Joseph Barnard, who headed the personnel recovery branch of the Air Force's Air Combat Command.

That may well be true of Barnard; Secureworks' data suggests he never clicked the malicious link sent to him in June 2015. But it isn't true of everyone.

An AP analysis of the data suggests that out of 312 U.S. military and government figures targeted by Fancy Bear, 131 clicked the links sent to them. That could mean that as many as 2 in 5 came perilously close to handing over their passwords.

It's not clear how many gave up their credentials in the end or what the hackers may have acquired.

Some of those accounts hold emails that go back years, when even many of the retired officials still occupied sensitive posts.

Overwhelmingly, interviewees told AP they kept classified material out of their Gmail inboxes, but intelligence experts said Russian spies could use personal correspondence as a springboard for further hacking, recruitment or even blackmail.

"You start to have information you might be able to leverage against that person," said Sina Beaghley, a researcher at the RAND Corp. who served on the NSC until 2014.

In the few cases where the FBI did warn targets, they were sometimes left little wiser about what was going on or what to do.

Rob "Butch" Bracknell, a 20-year military veteran who works as a NATO lawyer in Norfolk, Virginia, said an FBI agent visited him about a year ago to examine his emails and warn him that a "foreign actor" was trying to break into his account.

"He was real cloak-and-dagger about it," Bracknell said. "He came here to my work, wrote in his little notebook and away he went."

Left to fend for themselves, some targets have been improvising their cybersecurity.

Retired Gen. Roger A. Brady, who was responsible for American nuclear weapons in Europe as part of his past role as commander of the U.S. Air Force there, turned to Apple support this year when he noticed something suspicious on his computer. Hughes, a former DIA head, said he had his hard drive replaced by the "Geek Squad" at a Best Buy in Florida after his machine began behaving strangely. Keller, the former senior spy satellite official, said it was his son who told him his emails had been posted to the web after getting a Google alert in June 2016.

A former U.S. ambassador to Russia, Michael McFaul, who like many others was repeatedly targeted by Fancy Bear but has yet to receive any warning from the FBI, said the lackluster response risked something worse than last year's parade of leaks.

"Our government needs to be taking greater responsibility to defend its citizens in both the physical and cyber worlds, now, before a cyberattack produces an even more catastrophic outcome than we have already experienced," McFaul said.

© 2017 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.


IT’S PAINFUL TO ME THAT AN 88 YEAR OLD SHOULD BE SO SHAMED, BUT BOTH HE AND FRANKEN ALSO HAVE PUT FORTH AN IMAGE OF BEING HONEST AND GOOD CANDIDATES. THE DISAPPOINTMENT TO ME AS A VOTER IS DISTURBING. I DO BECOME "PERSONALLY INVOLVED" WITH THESE PROFESSIONAL POLITICIANS WHO, I'M SURE, WOULDN'T GIVE ME A THOUGHT. THEY WERE BOTH GOOD DEMOCRATS, AND THAT'S A RARE COMMODITY THESE DAYS. I WONDER IF FRANKEN WILL BE ABLE TO HOLD HIS SEAT NOW. THERE IS SUCH A FLURRY OF THESE CASES THAT I WONDER IF SOME SORT OF AUTOMATIC OFFICIAL REPRIMAND SHOULD BE VOTED FOR BOTH OF THEM, AND IN CONYER’S CASE, HAVE HIM STEP DOWN. IT MAKES ME WONDER HOW MANY CASES ARE OUT THERE TO BE FOUND.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/11/26/lawmakers-call-for-swift-consequences-in-harassment-cases-but-are-divided-over-calls-for-resignation/
PowerPost
Conyers steps aside as ranking Democrat on Judiciary Committee amid ethics probe of sexual harassment claims
By Paul Kane November 26 at 1:15 PM

Photograph -- Rep. John Conyers Jr. in 2014. (Carlos Osorio/AP)

Rep. John Conyers Jr. (Mich.), the longest-serving member of Congress, stepped aside as the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee amid growing internal pressure as an ethics investigation of sexual harassment allegations against him begins.

Conyers, 88, said he would not resign from Congress and instead would fight the allegations in the hope of reclaiming his spot atop the committee, which oversees federal laws and other legal issues. “I very much look forward to vindicating myself and my family before the House Committee on Ethics,” he wrote Sunday in a letter to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

Conyers settled a sexual harassment complaint brought by a former staffer in 2015, leaving her on the payroll as a temporary employee and paying out just under $30,000.

Pelosi issued a statement immediately after Conyers’s announcement: “I particularly take any accusation of sexual harassment very seriously. Any credible accusation must be reviewed by the Ethics Committee expeditiously. We are at a watershed moment on this issue.”

The announcement came after days of internal pressure on Conyers, particularly from Pelosi, to step aside from the leadership post, according to a senior Democratic aide familiar with the process.

It followed a Sunday morning dominated by the sprawling issue of sexual harassment and assault on the political news shows. Initially, on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Pelosi declined to say whether Conyers would suffer any immediate penalty over the allegations.

“We are strengthened by due process. Just because someone is accused — and was it one accusation? Is it two? I think there has to be — John Conyers is an icon in our country,” Pelosi told NBC’s Chuck Todd, when asked whether Conyers should resign.

However, in a sign that she knew what was coming, Pelosi said she expected Conyers to do what’s necessary. “I believe he understands what is at stake here and he will do the right thing,” she said.

Members of Congress have said that the “due process” system is outdated and biased toward insulating the lawmaker from suffering penalties for misbehavior. “The whole system needs to have a comprehensive shift,” Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.) said on ABC’s “This Week.”

Speier and Rep. Barbara Comstock (R-Va.) are the lead sponsors of legislation slated for a vote this week that would streamline the sexual harassment complaint process, amid growing accusations and revelations about members of Congress that are similar to those involving powerful men from Hollywood, the media and Silicon Valley.

The legislation also would require mandatory training on harassment and discrimination for all lawmakers, staff and interns who work in Congress. “There needs to be one standard for members,” Comstock said on “This Week,” noting that Conyers benefited from making a settlement payment that was never revealed until a BuzzFeed report last week. “No more secret payments.”

[The industries with the worst sexual harassment problem]

Conyers has denied any wrongdoing and said his payout was meant to resolve the issue and did not constitute an admission of culpability.

His payout came from the regular allowance for lawmakers for staff salaries and other administrative costs. As The Washington Post reported this month, a separate account overseen by the Office of Compliance has paid out more than $15 million in settlements of sexual harassment and other cases of discrimination.

One Democrat, Rep. Kathleen Rice (N.Y.), has suggested that Conyers should just resign from Congress altogether, something that Comstock voiced agreement for Sunday, citing how swiftly some high-profile media titans have fallen.

“We have to have the same kind of standards,” she said.

Speier, however, said the House Ethics Committee should add staff to handle the Conyers case “very swiftly” to determine the severity of the allegations. “If they’re accurate, I do believe that Congressman Conyers should step down” from Congress, she said.

Pelosi also suggested that Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.), who is facing allegations of his own, was a different case partly because one of his alleged victims has publicly accepted his apology. Franken was recently accused of forcibly kissing an entertainer on a 2006 USO tour before he joined the Senate, and several other women since then have suggested that Franken groped them while posing for pictures.

“I don’t think that you can equate Senator Franken with Roy Moore. It’s two different things,” the Democratic leader said, suggesting that the allegations against Franken are not nearly as severe as those against the Republican Senate candidate in Alabama.


NO MANDATE FOR INPUTTING THE DATA HAS BEEN ASSIGNED TO A SPECIFIC POSITION OR PERSON, SO IT WASN’T DONE AT ALL. DISGUSTING!

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nics-failure-national-instant-criminal-background-check-system/
CBS NEWS November 24, 2017, 7:37 AM
Why federal database is failing to bar certain people from gun purchases

Potentially thousands of people who should not have guns are able to buy them because of an apparent failure of federal record-keeping. Attorney General Jeff Sessions ordered a review this week of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, known as NICS. The mandate follows this month's shooting massacre in Texas where the Air Force failed to submit the gunman's domestic abuse conviction to the federal database. But that's just one case that has fallen through the cracks.

The NICS system relies on state and local agencies as well as the military to accurately report criminal history and other information. But for years, they have failed to upload these critical records with no consequences for failing to follow federal law, reports CBS News' Paula Reid.

"Every time one of these mass murders happen, it just brings everything back emotionally for me," Jim Sitton said.

Sitton's 6-year-old daughter, Makayla, was killed on Thanksgiving eight years ago when a family member went on a shooting rampage after dinner. Three others were also killed. Investigators later discovered the shooter, Paul Michael Merhige, had been involuntarily committed to a mental institution three times. That should have kept him from passing a federal background check.

"It's ridiculous that someone can have all of that history – mental and legal – and still the state will give him a concealed carry and the feds will sell him as many guns as he wants," Sitton said.

Just days after the massacre this month at a Texas church, Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, said it was clear that the shooter, Devin Kelley, should have been barred from getting a weapon.

"We need to fix this broken background check system," Cornyn said.

Kelley was court martialed during his time in the Air Force and then discharged for abuse against his wife and step child.

The NICS background check system is comprised of three different databases. The main FBI one is the NICS Indices, but as of December 2016, there is just one person entered by the military as committing abuse against their spouse. About half of all states also report few or no abuse convictions and restraining orders. The FBI tells us the records may reside in the other two databases, however the FBI did not make those numbers available to CBS News.

"There is no question that if the data is not in the system, people are going to die and they do die," said Kim Gandy, who leads the National Network to End Domestic Violence. "It's a systemic problem and there are thousands, maybe tens of thousands, maybe even more prohibited abusers who are not in the system and who are out there buying guns and endangering lives."

But in 2016, almost 9,000 people were denied a firearm based off of a domestic assault conviction, and more than 120,000 people were denied overall.

"The NICS system works very well when the data is there… but when the data doesn't go into the system it can't work," Gandy said.

The FBI lists 11 categories that should keep offenders from buying weapons including committing any felony, being adjudicated for mental illness or having a drug conviction.

But in 2007, Virginia Tech student Cho Seung Hui killed 32 people after he legally purchased a weapon. The state of Virginia later admitted they should have put him in the system since he had been "adjudicated as a mental defective."

"The system is only as good as the records that are in it," said National Rifle Association Executive Vice President and CEO Wayne LaPierre.

The NRA has estimated seven million offenders are not in the system. The group supports better enforcement of the NICS system reporting requirements. The FBI told CBS News: "NICS relies upon its local, state, and federal partners to provide authorized data and information."

But the international organization of chief of police told us: "There is no national standard or funding to ensure all local agencies contribute to a national instant check data base. In addition to an unwillingness for states to mandate clear requirements for who is legally responsible for inputting convictions."

For Sitton, he said lives like his young daughter's will be lost if nothing is done.

"You are going to spend the money one way or another. You are either going to hire the manpower to enforce the laws on the books or you are going to buy body bags," Sitton said.

Sessions asked the FBI and ATF to issue a report detailing the number of times the agencies actually investigate and prosecute people for lying on their gun purchase applications. Lawmakers have been critical of previous administrations for failing to enforce these laws, which could deter some of these purchases.

© 2017 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.



MY QUESTION IS, WHAT DOES THE “POSSIBILITY” HAVE TO DO WITH THE FACTS? THIS HAD BETTER BE WELL-INVESTIGATED. IT SOUNDS AS THOUGH THE POLICE IN BALTIMORE ARE TRYING TO AVOID TALKING ABOUT THE VERY LIKELY INVOLVEMENT OF ONE OR MORE OF THEIR OFFICERS WHO ARE SUSPECTS.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-questions-in-death-of-baltimore-detective-killed-1-day-before-testimony/
By KRIS VAN CLEAVE CBS NEWS November 24, 2017, 6:37 PM
New questions in death of Baltimore detective, killed 1 day before testifying

BALTIMORE -- There are new questions about the murder of Baltimore Det. Sean Suiter, who was gunned down last week, one day before he was set to testify in a federal corruption case against fellow officers.

The FBI is trying to enhance what is believed to be Suiter's final radio call to look for any clues about the suspect who managed to wrestle away Suiter's gun and shoot the 18-year veteran officer in the head at close range.

Baltimore remembers Detective Sean Suiter, cop killed in shooting
"We don't know exactly what he said, but he was clearly in distress," said Baltimore Police Commissioner Kevin Davis.

Suiter, a father of five, was killed the day before he was set to testify in a federal corruption case against eight Baltimore police officers.

van-cleave-sean-suiter-2017-11-24.jpg
Baltimore Det. Sean Suiter. CBS NEWS

"People have asked me, how can it be possible that Det. Suiter was shot and killed on the eve of his grand jury testimony and for that murder not to have anything to do with the grand jury testimony, and people will say, is that possible? And the answer is, of course it's possible," Davis said.

Police don't have much on the suspect, but police say Suiter noticed a man acting suspiciously and went to check it out. Investigators do have unreleased video showing his partner taking cover at the sound of gunfire and calling for help.

Suiter's murder prompted a city-wide manhunt and the lockdown of the neighborhood where it occurred.


A small memorial now sits at the scene, where some are offering prayers.

"He deserved that prayer," said one person at the memorial. "The family deserved that prayer. Our city of Baltimore deserved that prayer."

The reward for information leading to an arrest sits at more $200,000. Suiter's funeral is scheduled for Wednesday.

© 2017 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.



THE PSYCHOLOGY OF CONSPIRACY THEORISTS AND THEIR FOLLOWERS HAS ALWAYS STRUCK ME AS SOMEWHERE BETWEEN MYSTIFYING AND ANNOYING. THIS PSYCHOLOGIST HITS ON WHAT PROBABLY ARE THE REASONS, IN THE CASES WHEN THE PERSON IS ACTUALLY SANE, HAS A HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA, AND IS OF NORMAL INTELLIGENCE. SHE GIVES SEVERAL FACTORS CAUSING IT, AND CAUTIONS AGAINST THE “LUNATIC FRINGE” VIEWPOINT.

WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE POPULATION ACTUALLY BELIEVES CONSPIRACY THEORIES? WHY AREN’T SOME PEOPLE IN THE USA MORE ANALYTICAL IN THEIR THINKING? THE LACK OF PERSONAL SELF-CONFIDENCE MAY BE THE MAIN CAUSE OF THE MOST MYSTIFYING THING OF ALL TO ME – WHY SO MANY INDIVIDUALS DON’T REASON THEIR WAY THROUGH TO PROVING LOGICALLY WHAT THE STATUS OF AN IDEA IS -- TRUE, PROBABLE, UNLIKELY, IMPOSSIBLE UNDER THE RULES OF MODERN SCIENCE, IMPOSSIBLE BY THE SENSORY PROOFS OF REALITY THAT WE HAVE TO USE. I PERSONALLY VIEW THE USE OF SOME PERSONAL RESEARCH AS BEING ESSENTIAL TO COMING TO THE TRUTH.

FINALLY, THE APPARENT ANSWER MAY BE, TO THE INDIVIDUAL, AN EMOTIONALLY UNACCEPTABLE BELIEF THAT WILL, THEREFORE, BE DISCARDED AS FALSE. RELIGION OR LOCAL SOCIETAL PROHIBITIONS ON WHAT WE ARE “ALLOWED” TO DO, SAY, THINK, OR BELIEVE ARE FREQUENTLY THE REASONS WHY PEOPLE WOULD FAIL TO REALIZE THAT CERTAIN STORIES ARE IMPOSSIBLE AND OUTRIGHT LIES. BELIEVE IT OR NOT, THIS EXAMPLE IS A TRUE STORY -- AFTER THE AMERICANS COMPLETED THE HISTORICAL MISSION OF WALKING ON THE MOON, I WAS IN A NEIGHBORHOOD STORE. I ASKED THE STOREKEEPER WHAT SHE THOUGHT ABOUT THE NEWS, AND SHE SAID THAT SHE THOUGHT IT WASN’T TRUE BECAUSE “I DON’T BELIEVE GOD WILL ALLOW MAN TO GO TO THE MOON.” WITHIN THE NEXT FEW YEARS A MOVIE WAS ACTUALLY MADE DEPICTING A FALSE MOON LANDING AND THE COMPLEXITY OF THE FAKED EVIDENCE. THAT WOMAN WASN’T THE ONLY ONE WHO HAD REACTED IN FEAR TO A THREAT TO HER RELIGIOUS BELIEFS, AND COME UP TO SUCH A CONCLUSION IN RESPONSE. WHEN THE RIGHT TO EXAMINE THE EVIDENCE AND THINK FOR ONESELF IS TAKEN AWAY AS AN OPTION, THE RESULT WILL BE A GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE IN ESSENCE A LOWERED IQ.

WHEN DONALD TRUMP SAID, AT A RALLY, “I LOVE THE UNDEREDUCATED,” IT GAVE ME A COLD CHILL. PEOPLE IN POWER DO SOMETIMES OVERTLY WANT THEIR CITIZENS TO BE MENTALLY UNABLE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IS TRUE AND WHAT IS FICTION. WHAT BETTER FOR A POLITICIAN WHOSE POLICIES ARE BUILT ON LIES? IT HAS BEEN PROVEN THAT RUSSIA AND OTHER DARK FORCES BEHIND BREITBART, ET AL, REGULARLY USE LIES TO MANIPULATE THE PUBLIC MIND.

THERE’S ONE THING THAT WE, SADLY, DO A PRETTY POOR JOB OF TEACHING, AND THAT IS COURAGEOUS, THOROUGH AND RATIONAL THOUGHT. IN FACT, PARENTS IN THEIR HOMES, CLASS-STRUCTURE DIFFERENCES AND EDUCATIONAL PHILOSOPHIES MITIGATE AGAINST AN INDIVIDUAL’S GROWING UP EMOTIONALLY ABLE TO THINK TO HIS HIGHEST INTELLIGENCE LEVELS. I AM SPEAKING OF THE OLD PARENTAL PUTDOWNS – “CHILDREN SHOULD BE SEEN AND NOT HEARD,” OR “YOU’RE GETTIN’ ABOVE YOUR RAISIN.’” WE ARE, ALL IN ALL, SOMETIMES TAUGHT THAT WE DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT TO DO ANYTHING OTHER THAN ACCEPT AND FOLLOW ORDERS. THEN WHEN WE COME TO A SITUATION IN WHICH WE ABSOLUTELY MUST THINK CLEARLY AND FULLY, WE ARE TOO TIMID TO DO IT, WITHOUT FOLLOWING SOMEONE ELSE’S LEAD.

THIS ARTICLE, AND ESPECIALLY THE WORDS AND DEMEANOR OF THE PSYCHIATRIST ON THE VIDEO, ARE VERY CONVINCING TO ME. LACK OF PERSONAL SELF-CONFIDENCE, LACK OF EDUCATION, A FAITH-BASED OUTLOOK ON THE WORLD, AND A HIGHER LEVEL OF GENERAL FEARFULNESS THAN IS NORMAL OR HEALTHY ALL CAUSE SOME TO DISBELIEVE SOURCES WHICH TO ME ARE RELIABLE; THEN THEY WILLINGLY INSERT SOME STORY THAT IS BIZARRE AS THEIR CHOSEN “TRUTH.” THIS MAKES THEM SUBJECT TO THE MOST CYNICALLY MALICIOUS MANIPULATORS – SUCH AS BREITBART NEWS. DR. KLEINMAN ALSO MENTIONS THAT THE BELIEVERS IN WHAT SEEM TO ME TO BE “TALL TALES,” TEND TO BE MORE ANTI-AUTHORITARIAN THAN MOST, CAUSING THEM TO HATE OR QUESTION AUTHORITY, ESPECIALLY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

I THINK THAT PROBABLY COMES INTO PLAY IN THIS WIDESPREAD FEAR OF “THE GOVERNMENT,” THAT HAS EMERGED INTO THE OPEN, AND WHICH THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN HAS SUCCESSFULLY WHIPPED UP INTO A FROTH THIS YEAR. THAT FEAR IS SOMETHING THAT WE ALL FEEL TO SOME DEGREE WHEN MALFEASANCE BY GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS OCCURS (SEVERAL TIMES A YEAR AT LEAST), AND WHEN WE ARE INDEED DOING SOMETHING WHICH COULD POSSIBLY GET US INTO TROUBLE – WE COULD HAVE CHEATED ON OUR INCOME TAX, FOR INSTANCE. AND THERE’S NO QUESTION THAT THE SAME COMPUTERS WHICH TABULATE OUR SOCIAL SECURITY PAYMENT CAN BE INFILTRATED BY BAD GUYS TO DO US GRAVE HARM. PERSONALLY, AT SOME POINT I SIMPLY LOOK AT THE SITUATION, SEE WHAT SEEMS TO BE TRUE, AND THEN EITHER “TRUST” OR TAKE A LOOK AROUND THE INTERNET AT WHO OUT IN CYBERLAND IS FIGHTING THE BAD GUYS. AS IT APPEARS TO ME TODAY, THE INTERNET LIARS ARE BEING INVESTIGATED BY “THE FEDS,” AND ARE BETTER CONTROLLED BY THEM THAN BY ME. SO, AGAIN, I WILLFULLY “TRUST.” WITH ROBERT MUELLER AT THE HELM OF THIS SHIP, THAT ISN’T TOO DIFFICULT FOR ME TO DO. UNLESS I’M VERY MUCH MISTAKEN, HE IS HONEST, SMART, A TRUE PATRIOT OF THE ENLIGHTENED SORT, AND TOUGH. I’M GRATEFUL THAT HE IS ON THE CASE.

https://mic.com/articles/186119/the-science-behind-why-people-doubt-terrorist-attacks-happened#.0sUCGCFOT
The science behind why people doubt terrorist attacks happened
Alexis Kleinman
Published Nov. 17, 2017
by Alexis Kleinman

After every terrorist attack or mass shooting, YouTube is immediately filled with videos claiming to prove the violent act was a hoax perpetrated by the media or the government.

From Sandy Hook to 9/11 to the October attack in New York City, conspiracy theorists have an explanation for everything. The videos calling out supposed hoaxes are so prevalent that YouTube reportedly changed its algorithm to better promote legitimate news.

But why are people making these videos? What makes these conspiracy theories so popular? We spoke to psychiatrist and psychoanalyst Dr. Gail Saltz about conspiracy theorists and the rising obsession with “fake news.”

“I think that the whole conspiracy idea of ‘fake news’ is just the latest iteration of conspiracy theory,” Saltz said. “Who are these people? They’re mostly anti-authoritarian people. ... They’re often insecure people. They often have lower self-esteem, and they are often made afraid by the things that make all of us afraid, but their way of dealing with that ... is to try to come up with something that makes scary things make sense.”

Video -- Interview with Dr. Gail Saltz Alexis Kleinman/Mic

The internet has made conspiracy theories more contagious. “It’s made it that you can reach other people who are like-minded, even if the like-mindedness is, ‘How do we explain this irrational, noncontrollable world in a way that feels comfortable and controllable to us?’” Saltz said.

People who believe in conspiracy theories aren’t necessarily mentally ill, though. “Many people who do not have any psychiatric illness at all fit this,” Saltz said. “So you want to be careful about saying, ‘Wow, that’s crazy,’ and being very pejorative about it.”

Not all conspiracy theories are completely without merit. There’s occasionally a small grain of truth to the things people are most paranoid about.

“We have had conspiracies in history,” Saltz said. “And that makes it much more believable, potentially to anybody.”
Alexis Kleinman
Alexis is the editor of The Future Is Now.