Ricnvolved1956

What's your argument here, since they are going to break the law and spy anyway it's better to bend over than fight back? Because three letter agencies exist to screw people over and are above the law we should be good sheeple and accept that? I personally have no illusions about who these people are and what they stand for and how they operate. And I have no idea why I should be glad that authorities spy on people and trade intelligence, are you perhaps under the delusion that government is your friend and the authorities look after you? So the government agencies give and take and you act like it does people any good, no idea if you refer to the fake war on terror (which is just a war on our freedom) or what you are thinking of. Oh well, I guess you are right - I see now that I have to do my own research and if I do it will turn out that you have made excellent points and were right about everything. Silly me. 

Hello! Zhang isn't a Staff member, but he'll surely take it as a compliment that he could be mistaken for one . He's therefore also not employed by Air. Thus he doesn't represent Air in an official sense either and what he says likewise doesn't reflect official AirVPN policies or thoughts. Only the Staff account does. Zhang and Staff often state things very matter of factly and don't use too many smiles, yet this is just a writing style. Yet you can be sure he didn't mean what he said in a bad way. Good day.

I will just say that media tries very, very hard to convince people that their fears are the same as the establishment's fears - and we see the results here. And anyone concerned about mass surveillance under Trump should give big thanks to Obama, who have consistently expanded an inherently abusive system and made sure it's ripe for pretty much any additional abuse you can think of, just the way he wanted it to be. So sad to see him go 

What WOULD I do if you weren't here to keep me apprised on the best oracles to consult? ; )
 
No doubt SOME "oracles" around here would just whine about surreptitious Russian interference.... Vladimir Putin gonna completely take over Bitcoin and steal everyone's funds. I mean, Vlad the Impaler threw the election to Trump after all, RIGHT?! LOL
 
~Really cheesy Russian accent~ "In Amerika, you don't buy Bitcoin. Bitcoin buy you." ; )

Hello!
 
I recommend you contact Kepler. He may have a thing or two to say about this!
Ahem, just a random feeling I got of course, I can't imagine why I thought of Kepler

Kepler452_b-- Why don't you just leave if you're so unsettled about the outcome of the election? And I ask this while going out of my way to point out that I don't like it that Trump won.
 
Yes, I do watch RT. Everyday and often. I apologize to no one. If anyone thinks I'm letting myself be brainwashed, go right ahead and think it. I would counter that you're getting brainwashed by watching or reading any Amerikan or western based "news" entities.
 
A friend of mine many years ago had a saying about anyone who had ideological differences with him: "You go to hell your way and I'll go to hell mine."
 
(By the way, in response to LZ1 wondering if I'm a U.S. citizen, I've lived in North Carolina my whole life.)

Kepler452_b-- Why don't you just leave if you're so unsettled about the outcome of the election? And I ask this while going out of my way to point out that I don't like it that Trump won.
 
Yes, I do watch RT. Everyday and often. I apologize to no one. If anyone thinks I'm letting myself be brainwashed, go right ahead and think it. I would counter that you're getting brainwashed by watching or reading any Amerikan or western based "news" entities.
 
A friend of mine many years ago had a saying about anyone who had ideological differences with him: "You go to hell your way and I'll go to hell mine."
 
(By the way, in response to LZ1 wondering if I'm a U.S. citizen, I've lived in North Carolina my whole life.)

I wish Vladimir Putin WAS my president!
 
No... seriously. I'm not being sarcastic.
 
Putin has proven he possesses far better leadership and political skills than any Amerikan politician I know of since FDR. I'm not saying he's perfect; no politician ever is. But I will most certainly take him over any political dummy here in the U.S. Of bloody A.

I wish Vladimir Putin WAS my president!
 
No... seriously. I'm not being sarcastic.
 
Putin has proven he possesses far better leadership and political skills than any Amerikan politician I know of since FDR. I'm not saying he's perfect; no politician ever is. But I will most certainly take him over any political dummy here in the U.S. Of bloody A.

Hi nice to meet you. Some well-written posts .
 
Clinton supporters are still protesting, so I'm tempted to think something must've worked. I mean, if your supporters are still campaigning after you ended your own campaign, then something must've been done right, haha. I remember prior to Nov 8 how it was questioned whether Trump would be able to accept the election result. The irony.

Hello!
 
That's the ironic part of it isn't it. The same liberals who decry Trump on the basis of various human rights concerns, are the same people who would easily continue to be deceived under an Obama or Clinton administration; even in regards to violations of those very same rights that they're protesting about now. All because the likes of Clinton and co simply do a better job of hiding or downplaying their own repeated misdemeanors and acts of terrorism, just because they mostly occur abroad. If there's 1 good thing about a Trump presidency, it must surely be the chance that the US population finally wakes up and starts getting more interested in the Democratic process, by learning how to organise themselves and protest often. As opposed to now, where people are very atomised and split from each other. Then again, that's what Bernie tried to create.

I voted for Jill Stein. I despise Clinton and Trump equally. My initial preference was for Bernie Sanders, as he was for a lot of other people. But the DNC was hellbent to annoint $hillary no matter what. They sh*t on Sanders, ridiculed and talked down to his supporters ("the dirty f*ckin' hippies"). And after all that, Bernie decided to sell out his principles and his supporters and back you-know-who. The democratic party bureaucrats were so confident in their arrogance that it was impossible for them to entertain the thought for a split second that there would likely be very unpleasant consequences for their contempt. I heard there were some post-election polls showing that Sanders would easily have beaten Trump in the 3 crucial swing states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. (Another uncomfortable little item they will either aggressively ignore or heatedly deny.)
 
Clinton was a terrible candidate and her political advisors and campaign managers ran an even worse campaign. Clinton screeched more about the ridiculous accusations of Russian interference in the election, and generally just running a campaign of fear. I'm sure most people would rather have heard her talk more about her policy positions and how she planned to help them. I'm convinced that she and the party power structure truly believed there was no way they could lose the election. That's what bottomless arrogance and a self righteous sense of entitlement will get you.
 
Persistent lying about the emails; being in the pocket of Goldman Sachs and every other Wall Street crook you can name; being in the pocket of the military-industrial complex (doesn't anyone find it strange that so many career military and neo-conservatives came out so vocally in support of her?); taking money from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and various low-profile dictators around the world for The Clinton Foundation (which is nothing more than a thinly transparent money laundering lobbying vehicle); one of those leaked emails revealing that she knows for a fact that Saudi Arabia and other corrupt middle eastern states are heavily funding ISIL and other terrorist groups; another leaked email showing that during a State Dept. meeting she wondered aloud if it would be possible to simply drone Julian Assange. Destroying Libya and making it a failed state. An implicit promise to escalate U.S. military involvement in Syria, and anywhere else she damn well felt like it. (Gotta keep the Pentagon and those military defense contractors happy, dontchaknow....) Praising Comey and the FBI for choosing to ignore Clinton's intentional miscreance about using secret, unauthorized email servers..... and then crying like babies when Comey re-opened the same toothless, pro forma investigation with the same recommendation not to bring her lying, lawbreaking @ss to court. And THEN crying about any so-called "news" entity DARING to give even 5 seconds worth of coverage to that second sham investigation. What is so ironic is that those very same "news" entities had been Clinton's unabashed (and totally unprofessional) cheer leaders. Sorry, Clinton and DNC-- you can't have it both ways.
 
That's a short list that democrats and Clinton supporters aggressively stuck their collective head in the sand about. No one will ever convince me she's different enough from Trump to make any real difference. (George Wallace had a famous saying about the 2 major political parties: There ain't a dime's worth of difference between the two.) Regardless, the arrogant and stupid party assclowns have the next 4 years to keep lying to themselves that: it was Russia's fault; it was Vladimir Putin's fault; it was Julian Assange's fault; it was Bernie Sanders's fault; it was his supporters ("the dirty f*ckin' hippies") fault; it was the fault of people like myself... who chose to vote not out of fear against someone, but voted *FOR* someone we truly liked and wanted to win, no matter that candidate's chances of winning.... for choosing to vote conscience and principle instead of party and personality. One thing's for damn sure-- they will never, ever, ever allow themselves to think that the reasons they lost the election lie squarely with whom they see in the mirror. (That's assuming any of them can see their reflection in the mirror since they have no soul.)

I voted for Jill Stein. I despise Clinton and Trump equally. My initial preference was for Bernie Sanders, as he was for a lot of other people. But the DNC was hellbent to annoint $hillary no matter what. They sh*t on Sanders, ridiculed and talked down to his supporters ("the dirty f*ckin' hippies"). And after all that, Bernie decided to sell out his principles and his supporters and back you-know-who. The democratic party bureaucrats were so confident in their arrogance that it was impossible for them to entertain the thought for a split second that there would likely be very unpleasant consequences for their contempt. I heard there were some post-election polls showing that Sanders would easily have beaten Trump in the 3 crucial swing states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. (Another uncomfortable little item they will either aggressively ignore or heatedly deny.)
 
Clinton was a terrible candidate and her political advisors and campaign managers ran an even worse campaign. Clinton screeched more about the ridiculous accusations of Russian interference in the election, and generally just running a campaign of fear. I'm sure most people would rather have heard her talk more about her policy positions and how she planned to help them. I'm convinced that she and the party power structure truly believed there was no way they could lose the election. That's what bottomless arrogance and a self righteous sense of entitlement will get you.
 
Persistent lying about the emails; being in the pocket of Goldman Sachs and every other Wall Street crook you can name; being in the pocket of the military-industrial complex (doesn't anyone find it strange that so many career military and neo-conservatives came out so vocally in support of her?); taking money from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and various low-profile dictators around the world for The Clinton Foundation (which is nothing more than a thinly transparent money laundering lobbying vehicle); one of those leaked emails revealing that she knows for a fact that Saudi Arabia and other corrupt middle eastern states are heavily funding ISIL and other terrorist groups; another leaked email showing that during a State Dept. meeting she wondered aloud if it would be possible to simply drone Julian Assange. Destroying Libya and making it a failed state. An implicit promise to escalate U.S. military involvement in Syria, and anywhere else she damn well felt like it. (Gotta keep the Pentagon and those military defense contractors happy, dontchaknow....) Praising Comey and the FBI for choosing to ignore Clinton's intentional miscreance about using secret, unauthorized email servers..... and then crying like babies when Comey re-opened the same toothless, pro forma investigation with the same recommendation not to bring her lying, lawbreaking @ss to court. And THEN crying about any so-called "news" entity DARING to give even 5 seconds worth of coverage to that second sham investigation. What is so ironic is that those very same "news" entities had been Clinton's unabashed (and totally unprofessional) cheer leaders. Sorry, Clinton and DNC-- you can't have it both ways.
 
That's a short list that democrats and Clinton supporters aggressively stuck their collective head in the sand about. No one will ever convince me she's different enough from Trump to make any real difference. (George Wallace had a famous saying about the 2 major political parties: There ain't a dime's worth of difference between the two.) Regardless, the arrogant and stupid party assclowns have the next 4 years to keep lying to themselves that: it was Russia's fault; it was Vladimir Putin's fault; it was Julian Assange's fault; it was Bernie Sanders's fault; it was his supporters ("the dirty f*ckin' hippies") fault; it was the fault of people like myself... who chose to vote not out of fear against someone, but voted *FOR* someone we truly liked and wanted to win, no matter that candidate's chances of winning.... for choosing to vote conscience and principle instead of party and personality. One thing's for damn sure-- they will never, ever, ever allow themselves to think that the reasons they lost the election lie squarely with whom they see in the mirror. (That's assuming any of them can see their reflection in the mirror since they have no soul.)

Ironically I think this is a great move.
People will start interesting more in cryptocurrencies, and both the users will
become more anonymous and VPN providers will enjoy less painful payment
proccess, without fraud and chargebacks and crazy fees.
PayPal is a huge rip-off, charging 4% just to move a number in their database
is insane, back in the 90s it was acceptable but definitely not today.
Providers who fail to implement cryptocurrency support should either start
doing so or fade away.

Thank you for the clarification. They're usually always nice ^^.
 
Don't you think you're exaggerating just a little bit, regarding a Democratic future being in jeopardy? Trump was elected on democratic grounds - or as democratic as it is in the us. 
 
I think you're biased towards Democracy and living on the assumption that Democracy is automatically the best or most desirable form of government. This is a big mistake in my view, but it's not unexpected. It's a little funny really, in that it seems that people who hold views similar to yours (respectfully), desire open-mindedness (no sexism, bigotry, racism, anti-abortion, etc.), yet instantly turn away anyone with a different mindset or approach. Say someone votes for Trump (or even that Brexit thing), it seems there's a tendency to reduce them to being racists and bigots (of course, some are). Similarly, those who don't subscribe to your notion of Democracy, are repressive fascist regimes. I wonder if you think this is wrong or not. Because the fact remains that both Russia and China have been doing pretty well for themselves. Especially China, in virtually all metrics besides internet-freedom and pollution(although this is improving). Yet you apparently don't care about this, as long as they're not Democratic. I think that's strange, respectfully. Because if you go to China, you may find that China is arguably more Capitalist and free in many ways, compared to the US.
 
The Great Firewall does have some positive effects though: Since there's often a greater convenience in not bypassing the wall, Chinese consumers will often favor local companies. Which in turn means more jobs, as these companies then grow. This can then positively impact the economy and then later, the rest of the world, as giants like Alibaba and Tencent expand. Likewise, more Chinese people learn how to use VPNs (hehe). But in terms of being in an opinion bubble, how is that much different from being on Facebook or Google? The Chinese people I've met, have no illusions about their government.
 
I think it's very easy to compare the us with China and/or Russia. I think you're sadly very very mistaken about the us. Again, respectfully speaking . Just because the us may be Democratic, it doesn't mean it's not capable of being an evil or bad country - yes, evil "on par" with whatever evil you can ascribe to China/Russia. There's plenty evidence that shows that the US actually hates any form of "Democracy"; especially outside its own borders. So perhaps you're right that the US can't be compared to China/Russia, except that the equation is reversed. You may think China is being aggressive with its territorial grabs in Asia, but did you consider why China is doing what it's doing? I think it would be too simplistic to resort to saying something along the lines of "well, because it's a fascist dictatorship". Even if it were a fascist dictatorship, that wouldn't help your Democracy argument, seeing as said dictatorship is currently outpacing the US very quickly in a number of ways. Perhaps especially with Trump at the helm now.
 
Us Democracy is also quite questionable in many ways after all: Extremely low voter turn out, all manner of electoral quirks as each state votes differently, counts differently, has different rules and different methodologies. Through to things such as the Electoral College and the notion that a candidate can lose a vote, like HIllary did, despite getting most votes, to campaigns being funded through SuperPACS by rich companies and the list goes on. Not to mention that while there's technically multiple parties in play, in practice there's only 2 - which speaks to the illusion of choice that you also alluded to. To speak nothing of how us politics is dominated
and how americans continually don't get what they want. So to call it a Democracy may in fact be a little insulting in the eyes of those countries whom arguably may have more robust systems . 
I can't see how you can justify calling China's "slave labor" system out, when it has clearly proven to have worked very well for the country and is thus increasingly being rolled back now; hence why China isn't the cheapest place to manufacture in anymore, Chinese tourists are some of the biggest spenders and the Chinese economy is the 2nd biggest in the world (number 1, if you go by PPP). Thus it's estimated around 600 million people have been taken out of extreme poverty. That's double the us population. It seems like you're not willing to accept that things cannot be *ideal* from the start. That you can't have humane working conditions instantly for example. They made sacrifices and it worked. It's the same story in the West - just look at coal miners for example. As for Russia, you should keep in mind which country often creates the problem to begin with. During days past, it was promised that the West wouldn't "take one step to the East" in the form of NATO. Yet what happened? Yep, steps right towards Russia. Hopefully you can also appreciate the Russian security point of view. I think HC would've exacerbated this situation tremendously. 
 
I can agree to jail for GW and co though . But since HC has so much free time now, perhaps we shouldn't forget our manners: Ladies first!

@emaus78
Your English is fine man, no problems .
 
@Kepler
Even with a runaway technical breakthrough, nothing will change as long as you have a system that has vested interests against such change. For instance, there's nuclear technology based on a resource known as Thorium(LFTR - Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor) which has been lying around for 50 years. Thorium powered nuclear reactors are epic because:

Passive safety. Due to the design, if something goes wrong, even if it's a power cut, the reactor will set itself into a safe configuration. Automatically. No humans needed. There's no high pressure. Thus a reactor meltdown is physically impossible. There's only high heat, which is fine in itself. Thorium can't be used in nuclear weapons, due to its chemistry. Thus the Iran nuclear deal wouldn't be a problem with a thorium reactor for instance. Thorium is literally everywhere on Earth and super plentiful. Unlike uranium or plutonium, which are precious. Pound for pound, thorium provides a massive amount of energy. Truly massive. You wouldn't need many reactors, to power the entire world. Due to there being no risk of a meltdown, you can build smaller reactor buildings. Which means it's faster and cheaper too. No 10 year lead times. Thorium reactors (called LFTR really, pronounced Lifter), can use the nuclear waste of *other* current-day reactors. So nuclear waste also won't be an issue. You never need to take out the Thorium from the core, so there's never any waste material and thus no nuclear exposure to anyone or anything. Yet despite all that, LFTR reactors are nowhere to be seen. China is supposedly building some now, but as you can see, when there's no political will, nothing happens. Nuclear energy also enjoys a pretty tainted image as well. I linked to the documentary - it's quite excellent IMO . It's basically nuclear power, without all the known drawbacks. So I frankly disagree with technical breakthroughs being necessary. As long as you have systems which favor things like privatization and/or de-regulation as in the neoliberal order, there's little incentive for this sort of thing. That's where I think Hillary wouldn't have made a difference .

 
I also can't cut the us slack. I can cut individuals some slack, but not countries. Your story is only half of it or barely even. It points to an extremely rosey point of view. Just because the us did the bare minimum to help out its allies after WW2, doesn't mean it's excused for all the deliberate crimes it then went on to commit throughout the world; of which I think most people are ignorant of, despite the fact we live with the consequences of them today . I'm sure you wouldn't be so comfortable with being told you're living under a Chinese "military umbrella" - yet you're perfectly fine with saying it about the us. Which is unjustified. China for instance, hasn't been in a war for around 20-30 years now. While the us has been in near-continual war for the same period. Likewise Russia hasn't been the one to instigate most of wars in the Middle-East and only has around 2 military bases abroad, versus the several hundred of the us. Yet you still argue those countries are bad or worse and that Hillary would be best? I think that's very questionable . I honestly can't see how you would reason that China or Russia would be worse than the us. In a Cyber context, I think China is worse due to the censorship of its internet and such, but geo-politically?
 
That's where a lot of the appeal lies with Donald Trump. Yes he's a bigot and all that. But the mere chance of doing things a different way, is attractive. Just look at what he has said about Russia and Putin. I think it's refreshing that he's willing to work with Putin, instead of the alternative: more hatred towards Russia, for no good reason really. In the end, while I agree with your view of Trump, it just doesn't work to respond with "that's racist! " or its equivalent, whenever people have real issues: unemployment, faltering economies, increasing levels of wealth inequality and so on. All compounded by all these "free trade" deals, which aren't about trade, but about everything except trade. Hillary would've continued this .

The consistency thing was more of a joke though, haha. Because as we know, he's very inconsistent.
 
But while I agree with your description of him, I don't see how that would make him any worse than Hillary would've been, in terms of bullying/terrorising the rest of the world. Because sadly, fact is the us has been doing just that, ever since WW2 ended . It's just either swept under the rug or made to sound justifiable. Due to DTs inconsistency, I also don't think it's worth being afraid of him not working out differences with non-whites, because even he, as a Republican, has been quite Democratic in terms of his views, at some points. So his views aren't even iron-clad. As many have said, there may be a distinction to be had between campaign-DT and president-DT behaviour.
 
I also do know that he denies climate change. He once said it was a Chinese plot, concocted to cripple american industry, due to the extra burdens of being environmentally friendly placed on them, haha. So while it's a tragedy he holds such views, at least other nations like China will continue to improve their respective environments. Even if, naturally, it may be slower now perhaps. It should be said Hillary was no angel even in this respect though. She actively supported fracking, which is lame. It's a shame nuclear power isn't supported more.
 
As for rule of law, I still don't think Hillary would be a major change in that regard either. Where was rule of law when Iraq was invaded illegally for instance? Or millions spied upon? Sure he represents greed, but yet again, how is that any different from Hillary, who was found to receive speaker fees from Goldman Sachs and others? I think it all just comes down to whether you want your vices hidden or thrown in your face. If hidden, then Hillary is the way to go. If thrown in your face, then DT.

Consider this.. The CIA 'desperately' wanted Clinton to win. So ask yourself why? That's how dangerous she would have been.
 
CIA drafted McMullin for Utah, knowing it 'could' be a clincher state. CIA pressured the Gov. in Virginia to commute, then bus 90,000 convicts to polling stations to vote. CIA chose former covert agent, and honeypotted Tim Kaine as her running mate. CIA released information on how to hack voting machines for $25 the day before the election using their front companies. (Cylance, Core Security) The list of methods the CIA used to try and toss this election to Clinton is rather remarkable. Clinton was a VERY controlled person. She doesn't even own herself. She's bought and paid for and there is too much dirt on her so the CIA makes her decisions for her. The FBI October Surprise was because of a bit of a internal struggle between the FBI and CIA, you saw that get fleshed out, the FBI has been working for years to try and become the new CIA so that power struggle was thrust to the forefront.
 
So think about that before dissing Trump. The CIA doesn't like Trump because he won't be bullied and he doesn't believe their incessant lies and manipulations. That to me, makes him our best choice.

No we are not.
The only thing I hope Crooked gets to wipe from now on is her jail cell.
Easier to wipe than servers, it should only be 20x20 meters max, if she is lucky.

I did not mean Hillary and Trump were identical candidates, I mean that both parties went out of their way to push identical establishment candidates but Trump succeeded with a hostile takeover while Bernie's attempt failed. Which is why Trump is the first candidate I have supported since I have no interest in or loyalty to either of the two corrupt parties, the establishment or the propaganda that MSM churns out 24/7. I would in fact have supported Bernie over Trump (for Fourth Amendment reasons plus the possibility of a Snowden pardon) but my main concern is the unraveling of the establishment of the two parties. Liberals and conservatives mean nothing to me, one side slightly better in some areas and vice versa - I have no preference. The predictable fear mongering over Trump from the "left" just mirrors the predictable fear mongering from the "right" on Sanders. Left/right is just a divide & rule ploy where two ideologies that are so different that you can't even tell which party has the president if you didn't already know, incites fear in people by repeating the same old tired talking points over and over knowing it will invigorate both sides while they can continue the corruption. I am equally skilled at pissing off both "sides" without even trying, but since I love everyone with the strength of 70 exploding suns I usually just nod and smile

@LZ1: Bernie might have pardoned Snowden, but make no mistake about it - the ridiculously corrupt DNC would rather have run Hillary even if they thought her chances of winning were only 0.1 percent, instead of Bernie. The establishment of both parties just want status quo to prevail, they can live with the identical candidate from the other team winning - what they desperately tried to stop was anyone disrupting their gig. But just like with the hostile takeover of RNC, DNC is next. It happens so fast when it finally happens that it hasn't really sunk in yet, but people have finally gotten tired. Exciting times
 
@Kepler_452b: While he has a difficult time now, he also has massive support - and all who love liberty have a special place for Snowden in their hearts. Status quo is cracking and will not endure, his day may yet arrive. Let us all hope he can stay free and alive until then

Maybe he wouldn't be so desperately needed if the DNC and the media hadn't cheated Bernie haha.  
Sent to you from me with datalove

Tonight at 04.30 eastern time,Edward Snowden is going to inform us about Privacy/Security under the new president
​mr.D. Tromp.
​https://www.startpage.com/snowden/ ​
​(startpage the search engine when you are privacy aware)
​
​Gr,Casper