. . . I have an elaborate nightmare where Joe Lieberman gets the VP nod, McCain wins, then dies -- and we're looking at a President Lieberman. At which point I and a host of others bloggers who supported Ned Lamont wind up in Guantanamo Bay.
Jane, Jane, not everyone is a fascist like yourself ...
Now I may just be engaging in extraordinary delusion cynicism here. . . . I sure hope this is just my dark thoughts getting the best of me.
Because I do not look good in orange. I don't think it's going to be Lieberman--but you gotta admit, it would be entertaining seeing the Ned Lamont moonbats have a cow over it if it was.
If you think the ever-classy, well-spoken Ms. Hamster Hamsher is worked up, you should see some of the HuffPo commenters:
I think Joe Lieberman is running for Secretary Of State on the Republican ticket.
I Think Joe Lieberman is supporting John McCain because Israelis want to wipe Palestine off the map? The next place we will be sending our military to fight and die will be Israel.
Oh well, With the recently converted Obama and probably Hillary who said, "Obama will be a great friend to Israel." and now this, McCain saddled with Liberman, it's clear who has all their bases covered in the November election.
Free at last, free at last.
"sigh"
"and we're looking at a President Lieberman. At which point I and a host of others bloggers who supported Ned Lamont wind up in Guantanamo Bay. .."
Understandable paranoia, if you ask me. To date, there seems to be little that Lieberman will not do to attain and maintain power.
Since McCain and Lieberman are BOTH owned by the Lansky-Bronfman organized crime syndicate, there would be a LOT of mob money available to buy the election. You might try Googling McCain + Organized Crime and/or Lieberman + Organized crime. There is no secret to it; it's all out in the open for anyone who wants to investigate. MY question is, "Is it a good idea to turn the NATION over to the Mob? I really believe that they have enough influence already."
Once again, we see casual anti-Semitisim bubble up on a Left-leaning site, and there's no pushback.
Posted by: Mike ||
08/21/2008 07:48 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
And yet Jews overwhelmingly vote Dem. WTF?
I kinda like the idea of a VP who will be workin' hard 24/6. ;)
Posted by: Swamp Blondie in the Cornfields ||
08/21/2008 8:50 Comments ||
Top||
#2
#1 Did you read this? the idiot also thinks the Joos run Obama and Hillary. This isnt about Dems and Reps its about idiots. Who are to be found all over, if you want to comb through blog comments.
I think that isolating loons like this is positive reason to vote for Obama - I know how disappointed they will be when they dont have Bush and "neocons" to blame for longstanding planks of US for policy.
The Democratic National Committee has a website set up to attack potential McCain running mates as "The Next Cheney" (if only); if you want to see there are pages dedicated to Bobby Jindal, Mitt Romney, John Thune, Tom Ridge, Tim Pawlenty, Carly Fiorina, Charlie Crist, Fred Smith and Eric Cantor. Lest there be any doubt as to the origins of this site, there's a disclaimer at the bottom of each page: "Paid for by the Democratic National Committee 430 S. Capitol St. SE, Washington DC 20003."
If you go to the page on Congressman Cantor, you will see a grainy image of a grimacing, disembodied headshot of Cantor, and then the meat of the attacks, starting with the shocking revelation that a member of the House GOP leadership frequently votes with the GOP, and then moving on to various efforts to tie Cantor to Jack Abramoff based on having done some fundraisers with the prolific fundraiser.
Where this gets creepy, though, is the persistent focus on Cantor's faith. We should associate Cantor with Abramoff, the Democrats tell us, because "Both Abramoff and Cantor are Jewish". Then we get this item that is supposed to make us fear Cantor:
At Fundraiser, Jack Abramoff Named Sandwich After Eric Cantor -- Cantor Asked To Switch Sandwiches. "At a January 2003 fundraiser for Cantor, who had just become chief deputy whip, Abramoff unveiled the Eric Cantor sandwich, 'a tuna-based stacker,' which, lamentably, was 'not quite [the] power lunch befitting' the only Jewish Republican in the House. Hence a request by Cantor ... to switch his eponymous sandwich to roast beef on challah, 'a deli special that exudes Jewish power.'"
Oooh, that scary Jewish sandwich power! Head for the hills!
In fact, in a webpage that runs just 660 words, the word "Jewish" appears five times, which I suppose in some circles is a really devastating indictment of Cantor. You can see a screenshot of the page below the fold....
#5
The moonbats really have an issue with being rounded up, yet that fear never stops them from publicly pulling out their hair and gnashing their teeth and telling their enemies exactly who they are and what they've done.
#8
If these fools had ever bothered to read Gulag Archipelago they'd know what camps were really all about. And why.
Posted by: Steve White ||
08/21/2008 12:30 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Simplisticly, this is likely projection; we are hearing what they WANT to do at their core, but are afraid it will be done to them, because that's what they would do if they could. They think everyone else has the same desire.
Posted by: Whiskey Mike ||
08/21/2008 13:34 Comments ||
Top||
#10
And yet Jews overwhelmingly vote Dem. WTF?
No so overwhelmingly as they used to, Swamp Blondie. In fact, like so many other groups that have effectively assimilated into the mainstream (middle class blacks, middle class Hispanics, middle class Asians...) the percentage of Jews voting Republican has been growing in a steady upward curve, plotted against the post-Clinton elections. There are multiple reasons for this: few Jews are involved in the union movement these days, even the Zionists have mostly given up on the Socialist dream, Jewish religious conservatives (including the Orthodox, of course) vote for socially conservative candidates, the generation that credited FDR and thus the Democrats for fighting the Nazis has been dying of old age, and finally the more conservative Jews are having the most babies, who generally grow up to vote like their parents.
Shoot, look at me and our own liberalhawk, who has felt forced to vote for Republican candidates because the Democrats have not presented a pro-WOT candidate for the position.
Back when Senator Kerry was running for the job, I was invited to a campaign presentation Kerry's brother -- who had converted to Judaism -- made to the Cincinnati Jewish community. To be honest, I missed his speech because I got a bit lost and arrived late. But I did grab some punch and circulate, listening to the various community leaders worry aloud how to bring he fightening number of young Jewish voters who were expected to vote for President Bush back to the Democratic fold.
The last number I recall is some 25% of Jewish voters went Republican, which was probably 2006. In 2004 I wasn't up to paying attention to statistics. Were it not a real threat that Jewish voters might follow Lieberman, the crazies wouldn't be getting so upset.
#11
Shoot, look at me and our own liberalhawk, who has felt forced to vote for Republican candidates because the Democrats have not presented a pro-WOT candidate for the position
just to clarify, I voted write in for lieberman in 2004. I couldnt bring myself to vote for you know whom. I voted GOP for congress - I wont mention names, but if you knew the district I lived in at the time, youd understand why. I expect to vote dem for the house and senate this year, and for the WH, well I will be listening. Needless to say I think a Biden pick would be a very good thing.
25% number is a pretty good estimate, though. Note of course, you hardly have to be a socialist to be a Clintonite. In fact I dont think you CAN be a socialist to be a Clintonite. Of course Im using socialist like it really meant something, not just as a term of abuse for anyone to the left of the WSJ editorial page. Most suburban Jews like an internationalist (and pro-israel) for policy, a mdoerately secularist approach to social issues, and a moderate economic approach - free market capitalist, but not ideologically rigid and with enough attention to social welfare to help keep societal peace, something we value for good reason. Id say thats roughly 50%, who are basically happy with the DLC wing of the Dem party. 25% to the right - both the more religious and socially conservative, the portion of the more affluent who more openly vote their pocket books, and those whose orientation on for pol and israel is somewaht furhter right - IE pro-Bibi, anti-Euro, etc. Note these 3 groups DONT always go together, and their differences in many ways mirror those of the rest of the GOP. But yeah, theyre all pretty much GOP. On the left, youve got folks who really do still take a social justice agenda seriously, and beleive in positions beyond clintonism to implement it, more extreme left libertarian types, and for pol doves - including folks who are mainly embarassed by Israel more than support. That gives about 25% who support the left wing of the Dems, or even nader. And they too dont all agree in emphasis, like the rest of the left.
#12
and as for lieberman, I almost thinks thats a negative. at least for me, i dont know how many others feel this way. Since 2001 I feel TOO exposed as a Jew. Theres a nastyness going around, not only on the far left but on the buchananite, and even the "realist" right. And in many parts of the world (im not even talking the muslim world).
Just as at one time we needed to let other people step up for social justice, we also need to let e other people step up for democratization, for the transformation of the muslim world. We cant afford to always be on the stage.
#13
Thank you for adding to my post,liberalhawk. I have to disagree with you about Lieberman, though. I agree with you about the increase in overt antisemitism since 9/11; that fact affected our decision about which universities trailing daughter #1 applied to. But the world is not going to hate America, Israel or Jews more if Lieberman is next in line to be the most powerful man in the world, and I don't think considerations of the opinions of the haters would much alter President McCain's decisions. And it would certainly send an effective message to those contemplating acting against Israel. I don't much care if those don't think we might be acting fairly -- they have demonstrated to my satisfaction that they do not deserve fairness, only justice. (That would be justice by my definition, not theirs.)
A judge's ruling today is a major victory for free speech and fair use on the Internet, and will help protect everyone who creates content for the Web. In Lenz v. Universal (aka the "dancing baby" case), Judge Jeremy Fogel held that content owners must consider fair use before sending takedown notices under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA").
Universal Music Corporation ("Universal") had sent a takedown notice targeting a 29-second home movie of a toddler dancing in a kitchen to a Prince song, "Let's Go Crazy," which is heard playing in the background.
Because her use of the song was obviously a fair use and, therefore, non-infringing, Lenz sued Universal for misrepresentation under the DMCA. Universal moved to dismiss the case, claiming, among other things, that it had no obligation to consider whether Lenz's use was fair before sending its notice...
Given the "shoot first and ask questions later" approach some content owners take to the DMCA notice process, improper takedowns of non-infringing fair uses are all too common. We're very pleased that Judge Fogel has put content owners on notice: ignore fair use at your peril.
Posted by: Jonathan ||
08/21/2008 14:59 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Good. The heavy handedness of the companies these days is definitely not making people feel bad about pirating crap. They need to be reminded that we are the customers and don't have to pay for their crap if we chose to vote with our wallets.
#3
Who said I didn't? Just a few days ago I sent a letter to the President of Russia in his (not mine) native language, I bet far better than your Condi's:
#12
Not a problem, TW. Who bothers to keep troll names correct anyway? It's a complete waste of energy; I just scroll past their nonsense and keep going.
I feel for the Georgians, though. There isn't a state that size on Earth that wouldn't love a chance to become the 51st state. There also isn't a state that size on Earth that wouldn't react with profound horror at the thought of becoming part of Russia.
That comment is particularly valid for the folks who know them best; the bordering states who just got rid of their Russkie pests. They know the Russ too, too well to ever want to see them again. Google "Monument to the Unknown Rapist" for a quick intro.
The hatred and contempt the Balts feel for the Russians is incredibly deep. Russia better hope those folks NEVER get nuclear weapons; if they do, the day Russia even hints of trouble Moscow will be a smoking, glowing pile of rubble and green glass. Payback is a (fill in the blank.) and the Russkies have a lot of it coming.
Berman, whose "liberalism and terror" (Berman is a liberal, well really almost a radical, AND a hawk - but to my mind less vitriolic and more insightful than Hitchens) was so compelling in the wake of 9-11, speaks out in the New Republic, tying together eastern european politics, Russian paranoia, danger in Lebanon, and the danger of returning to "realpolitik"
However, the European powers are not the only ones facing a hard time over taking a stance on the Caucasus. China is similarly placed. Chinese President Hu Jintao received Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin on August 9 in Beijing and hosted a dinner in his honor. Yet, Chinese accounts of the meeting left out any reference to the Caucasus. (The Georgian assault on South Ossetia began on August 7-8). Hu told Putin, "China and Russia are forging ahead with the partnership of strategic cooperation toward their established goals, and the development of both countries is faced with opportunities and challenges at the same time."
Hu stressed three aspects of Sino-Russian strategic cooperation: promoting multi-polarity and democratization in international relations; enhanced Sino-Russian political cooperation both bilaterally and within the multilateral framework; and economic cooperation in a spirit of "mutual benefits and a win-win outcome". Putin, on the other hand, drew Hu's attention to "Russia's friendly policy toward China" and signaled Moscow's keenness to "elevate the practical cooperation with China to a new height".
Something was amiss. It seems Putin briefed Hu about Moscow's concerns in the Caucasus and Hu listened. At any rate, on the very next day, when a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman made his first comments, he merely expressed China's "grave concern over the escalation of tension and armed conflicts" and called on the "relevant parties to keep restraint and to cease fire immediately".
In effect, the spokesman kept equidistance. He concluded by saying that China sincerely hoped "relevant parties" would resolve disputes peacefully through dialogue "so as to safeguard regional peace and stability". He was in no mood to judge the "disputes" as such. Meanwhile, on August 11, a group of Georgians held demonstrations in front of the Russian Embassy in Beijing, though the "crowd was persuaded to disperse and leave, and no extreme actions took place".
On August 13, a Chinese spokesman repeated that the "disputes be resolved peacefully through dialogue so as to achieve regional peace and stability". This has become the Chinese mantra regarding the Caucasus crisis. The Chinese spokesman repeated it on August 14, while he "welcomed" Moscow's announcement on halting military operations. Again, Chinese media accounts have been extensive but balanced.
What stands out, on the whole, is that Beijing has refrained from taking a position supportive of Russia. If anything, the only commentary offered so far in the People's Daily on August 12 called for a cessation of hostilities in the spirit of the Summer Olympic Games and disapproved of the Russian intervention, which, it said, "rapidly escalated the tension and raised international concerns and public anxiety".
It underscored, "Some analysts even showed the concern that military antagonism could evolve into a new version of the Cold War." There was some advice to the Kremlin: "War is not the way to settle conflicts. The only way to effectively resolve disputes is to disregard old grievances, cease hostilities and negotiate for peace. Only in the backdrop of peace and in the framework of constructive negotiation can a win-win deal be reached."
Significantly, Beijing does not figure in the list of capitals that the Russian Foreign Ministry has been in touch with during the past 10 days.
Reciprocity would have meant a Chinese endorsement of the Russian stance. Indeed, that was how Moscow reacted when trouble broke out in Lhasa in Tibet and China found itself at the receiving end of Western opinion, especially in the US's estimation. Evidently, China estimates it deserved whole-hearted Russian support, and any comparison between Tibet and the Caucasus is untenable. True, there are no analogies in international affairs. But the fact remains that Beijing also affirms that the Sino-Russian relationship today is at an all-time high. A long-standing border demarcation has just been completed.
Besides, there are calculations to be made. What is in it for China? Beijing will be extremely careful on issues concerning national sovereignty, separatism or anything that smacks of the right of self-determination. That's for sure. And in the Caucasian cauldron, all these dangerous elements are brewing. China will face a nasty predicament if Moscow endorses the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia - an eventuality that by no means can be ruled out if Rice succeeds in her mission in Brussels on Tuesday.
As Beijing would see it, Moscow has already entered a dangerous "no-go" zone by conducting military operations inside Georgian territory, by putting conditionalities on the withdrawal of its forces from Georgian soil and by loudly speculating on the (lack of) realism in laboring to preserve Georgia's territorial integrity.
In the Chinese perspective, independence of South Ossetia or Abkhazia is unacceptable, as separatism is evil and self-determination is a dangerous principle. Period.
Historically, in the highly complex matrix of US-Russia-China equations, it only worked to China's advantage if US-Russia relations frayed. A chill in ties with Russia almost reflexively prompts Washington to cultivate China. Some signs of it are already there. Russian WHINE here...
As a Russian commentator put it, "An analysis of America's global missile defense system shows that Washington is deploying its elements primarily in Eastern Europe rather than Japan, or other Asian countries or Australia. This is probably because Washington does not want to irritate China, which could respond by stepping up the development of its own missile program and increasing the number of intercontinental ballistic missiles on combat duty." Energy stuff
But China also has to weigh the fallouts on Russia's future energy policies, which are of direct consequence to Beijing. As of now, Russia views Europe as the preferred market for its energy exports. This is despite Moscow paying lip service to Asian markets.
In real terms, Europe is competing with China for Russian energy supplies. This competition may begin to border on rivalry.
China no doubt watches anxiously whether Nabucco undergoes a metamorphosis and becomes a Russian-European project. If that happens, Moscow would have even less interest in robustly developing China as an alternate market for its energy exports. The North Stream, South Stream and Nabucco - that will be far too much on the Russian plate.
As an energy guzzler, China will be a huge beneficiary if another Berlin Wall were to appear in Russia's relations with Europe at this juncture.
#1
Iff NUKE-ARMED RUSSIA does indeed demographic turn MAJORITY MUSLIM BY 2050 as many Perts believe, that is to CHINA's NATIONAL-REGIONAL SECURITY INTEREST AS PER UIGHUR, etc. UNREST- Ditto for the rest of NON-MUSLIM/ISLAMIST ASIA.
#3
COUNTERTERRRORISM BLOG > AUSTRALIA FACES A "ASIAN NUCLEAR THREAT". A major US withdrawal = redux in the Asia-Pacific Region may induce JAPAN to go Nukular, which in turn will induce CHINA, etc. TO ALSO GO NUKULAR TO COUNTER JAPAN, MAINLAND + PERIPHERAL NUKE ARMS RACE which in turn WILL THREATEN THE AUSSIES. CONSEQUENCES OF NUCLEAR ISLAMISM ON ASIA-PACIFIC SPECIFIC GEOPOLS STILL UNCLEAR.
#4
With precedent set and accepted by Russia, China will need to invade Siberia to protect its oppressed Chinese citizens there.
And with Kazakh oil export lines to the west now all in the control of the Russians again, perhaps China will get good terms on building an export line to the east?
A long post from the 'Global Labor and Politics' blog, detailing how Barack Obama and Bill Ayers were connected at the hip in the Annenberg Challenge for the Chicago schools. Twoother posts detail the writer's attempts to get documents (partially successful). Yummy inside baseball that will very likely seep into the MSM, particularly if Stanley Kurtz at the NRO keeps pushing.
This post has a marvelous section how how Bill Ayers conceived the 'local school councils' to "mpose control over teachers and their independent unions by an authoritarian regime", ala Chavez and the Bolivarian revolution, from whence Ayers got his inspiration.
Posted by: Steve White ||
08/21/2008 12:19 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
The University of Illinois on Tuesday refused to release records relating to Barack Obama's service to a nonprofit group linked to former 1960s radical activist William Ayers.
The university's Chicago campus said the donor of the records that document the work of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge has not yet turned over ownership rights to the material. The university is "aggressively pursuing" an agreement with the donor, and as soon as an agreement is finalized, the collection will be made accessible to the public, the university said in a one-paragraph statement.
Around the twelfth of never ...
There was no indication when an agreement will be worked out. The university did not identify the donor who it said was concerned that the release not invade personal privacy.
The Obama campaign said the senator does not have control over these records or the ability to release them, adding that it has made many documents related to Obama's life available to the public and that "we are pleased the university is pursuing an agreement that would make these records publicly available."
On Monday, the National Review magazine posted an online article saying that the institution had initially declared that the records were open to inspection, but that the university subsequently reversed its position.
On Tuesday, the university said that there had been a misunderstanding about the status of the collection.
Right about the time Da Mayor's people called the Chancellor at UIC to read him the riot act ...
Ayers is an education professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago who in his youth co-founded the Weatherman organization, later known as the Weather Underground Organization, which espoused violence as a necessity for political change.
In the 1990s, Ayers was instrumental in starting the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which was awarded nearly $50 million by a foundation to help reform Chicago schools.
Obama was the first chairman of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge and Republicans have been highlighting his ties to Ayers through the group.
Since the Annenberg Challenge failed miserably both times it tried to 'reform' the Chicago public schools ...
The Republican National Committee posted the National Review article on the RNC's Web site.
In an interview, university spokesman Bill Burton said that the institution only recently was made aware that it did not have ownership, a requirement for making the collection public.
The owner notified the university about the absence of a signed ownership agreement last week. "The donor's only concerns regarding the collection are due to personnel information that could include names, confidential salary information and even Social Security numbers," said the university spokesman.
And you just can't imagine how long it takes to redact that information. Why it won't be til .. 2016 or so ...
Burton, who has no connection to the Obama campaign spokesman with the same name, said he was not authorized to identify the owner.
Obama was board chairman of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge for three years starting in 1995 and he remained on the board until the project closed in 2001. The $49.2 million was the largest private gift ever made to Chicago schools. The money went to 250 schools in one of the nation's largest school districts.
Where it did precisely nothing ...
During a primary debate in Philadelphia last October, Obama criticized rival Hillary Rodham Clinton over the release of presidential papers from the National Archives. Clinton said at the time that neither she nor husband Bill Clinton could do anything to speed the process of review at the Archives before papers from the Clinton era could become public.
Obama compared her record of public disclosure of records to that of the Bush administration, saying the country had "just gone through one of the most secretive administrations in our history."
In March, edited versions of the former first lady's appointment calendars were publicly released.
#1
It's the Chicago way. When its Governor Jack Ryan (R) running for the US Senate the Donks are able to get sealed divorce records made public, but when the winner of that little dirty political assassination work is running for Prez, all of the sudden those records are removed from public access. One set of rules for me, a different set of rules for thee.
#3
Yup, and any day now John Kerry will release all of his military records.
Posted by: Jim K ||
08/21/2008 13:56 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Yeah, not releasing those medical records really helped Kerry clinch the 2004 election. Why not try the same thing with Obama unless the info is particularly damning.
#7
Kass has it exactly right. Da Mayor won't allow those documents to be released.
Obama has a problem with thinking people who are independent, middle of the road types: what exactly has he done in each of the major jobs he's had?
Community organizer -- can anyone show me a school, park, senior citizens' home, etc that he made possible? The Annenberg Challenge was a complete flop and waste of money (except for the friends of Bill Ayers who did well).
Law professor -- good teacher but didn't write a single scholarly article
State senator -- didn't sponsor a single important piece of legislation
U.S. senator -- ditto; never convened his subcommittee, didn't reach across the aisle.
Reformer -- total captive of the Chicago and Springfield machines.
Posted by: Steve White ||
08/21/2008 17:02 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Prospective Home Buyer --- Purchased a high-end property $ 300,000. under listed asking price.
#2
There's also the fact that it's on Larry Johnson's website. Remember a couple of months back when he started a rumor about a video of Michelle Obama supposedly doing an anti-white rant? Bob Beckel and other Dem operatives picked up on it...and of course, the MSM blamed the Trunks for getting the story going.
Posted by: Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) ||
08/21/2008 2:24 Comments ||
Top||
#3
This guy would be putting himself in a world of sh*t if it wasn't true. But in this case, I don't know if you can get the justice dept. to make a move, too afraid of someone screaming racism at them.
#6
Larry Johnson is a jerk and a liar, and we at Rantburg are not going to help him spread his nonsense.
I'm letting this post stand but am deleting the link, and everyone should be clear: all future links to Larry Johnson and his 'noquarterusa' blog will be deleted immediately.
AoS
Posted by: Steve White ||
08/21/2008 12:45 Comments ||
Top||
#7
he's a fine running back who's suffered a few injuries, no reason to get all down on him...
what's that? Ohhh never mind
/Emily Littela
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/21/2008 20:56 Comments ||
Top||
A tool that automatically steals IDs of non-encrypted sessions and breaks into Google Mail accounts has been presented at the Defcon hackers conference in Las Vegas.
Last week Google introduced a new feature in Gmail that allows users to permanently switch on SSL and use it for every action involving Gmail, and not only, authentication. Users who did not turn it on now have a serious reason to do so as Mike Perry, the reverse engineer from San Francisco who developed the tool is planning to release it in two weeks.
When you log in to Gmail the website sends a cookie (a text file) containing your session ID to the browser. This file makes it possible for the website to know that you are authenticated and keep you logged in for two weeks, unless you manually hit the sign out button. When you hit sign out this cookie is cleared.
Even though when you log in, Gmail forces the authentication over SSL (Secure Socket Layer), you are not secure because it reverts back to a regular unencrypted connection after the authentication is done. According to Google this behavior was chosen because of low-bandwidth users, as SLL connections are slower.
The problem lies with the fact that every time you access anything on Gmail, even an image, your browser also sends your cookie to the website. This makes it possible for an attacker sniffing traffic on the network to insert an image served from http://mail.google.com and force your browser to send the cookie file, thus getting your session ID. Once this happens the attacker can log in to the account without the need of a password. People checking their e-mail from public wireless hotspots are obviously more likely to get attacked than the ones using secure wired networks.
Perry mentioned that he notified Google about this situation over a year ago and even though eventually it made this option available, he is not happy with the lack of information. Google did not explain why using this new feature was so important he said. He continued and explained the implications of not informing the users, This gives people who routinely log in to Gmail beginning with an https:// session a false sense of security, because they think theyre secure but theyre really not.
If you are logging in to your Gmail account from different locations and you would like to benefit from this option only when you are using unsecured networks, you can force it by manually typing https://mail.google.com before you log in. This will access the SSL version of Gmail and it will be persistent over your entire session and not only during authentication.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
The University of Illinois on Tuesday refused to release records relating to Barack Obama's service to a nonprofit group linked to former 1960s radical activist William Ayers.
