the 'Russian state actors and/or trolls trying to cause chaos in the midterms' is one scenario that should be kept in mind, I think

@bold sure, if someone had coherent thought and especially if the bombs were real and armed.

if however they're a nutso far right fringe lunatic they may have sent bombs to liberals to sent a message, then attempted to frame ISIS for it. either to also harm arabs, or to cover their tracks, or perhaps both. the person is insane afterall.

i'm not saying it IS a far righty, but your statement that it cant be is silly to me. we're dealing with an insane person here that clearly has mixed messaging baked into the cake given the liberal targets vs ISIS contradiction.



now theres tinfoil i can get on board with, explains the contradiction.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Oct 24 2018 12:32pm

also explains the spelling errors.

actually i'd say that points to a southerner, a russian would use google.

I was already thinking about the same.

targetting high-profile liberals would direct the blame towards right-wing extremists, putting ISIS signs on them directs the blame towards arabs. both these things together dont make any sense. so in the end, all this creates is total confusion, and undisciplined partisans will jump on the opportunity to blame the other side for it.

either this was the work of a person who is completely crazy and scarily incompetent, or it was the work of professional trolls seeking to sow chaos and distrust. in the latter case, that would most certainly be russians.

but yeah, I wouldnt discount the possibility of right-wing nutjobs yet.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Oct 24 2018 12:38pm

Does Hillary being a big meanie to Putin in 2011 still justify anything the Russians do in 2018?

it's not about hillary, it's about amplifying tensions, distrust, partisanship and paranoia.

Is an eye for an eye ever justified? I look for motive, the rationale behind rational actors. Not their morality.
I'd like to figure out the motive behind these attacks, but the only thing clear is that nothing is clear yet.

Hillary's milquetoast statements in 2011 and the Russian interference in 2016 wasn't an eye for an eye.

But I'm just asking if 2018 interference by the Russians can be justified or explained by Hillary being a shrill, aggressive woman in 2011? I want to get you on the record before November.

And Hillary bankrolling Russian dissident groups and the main opposition leader that was stirring up a populist uprising just after the US toppled the Libyan government and had Gaddafi sodomized to death in a populist uprising? Putin didn't see that as toothless.

I have the benefit from 2016 of enough facts being out in the open to know what happened and why. We haven't got a clue what Russia is up to in 2018 so far, and I can only speculate what they might be doing. Its a long road from speculation to explanation.

This post was edited by Goomshill on Oct 24 2018 12:52pm