256 bit keys in context
August 10th, 2010 at 11:00 am by David FarrarAP in reporting on the encrypted Wikileaks files:
At the center of the drama was the posting last week of a massive 1.4 gigabyte mystery file named “Insurance” on the WikiLeaks website.
The “Insurance” file is encrypted, nearly impossible to open until WikiLeaks provides the passwords. But experts suggest that if anyone can crack it – it would be the National Security Agency. …
Legal questions aside, the encrypted file conjures visions of secret codebreakers hunched over their laptops, tearing open secret, protected files in seconds with a few keystrokes.
Reality is not that simple. It appears WikiLeaks used state-of-the-art software requiring a sophisticated electronic sequence of numbers, called a 256-bit key, to open them.
The main way to break such an encrypted file is by what’s called a “brute force attack,” which means trying every possible key, or password, said Herbert Lin, a senior computer science and cryptology expert at the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences.
Unlike a regular six- or eight-character password that most people use every day, a 256-bit key would equal a 40 to 50 character password, he said.
If it takes 0.1 nanosecond to test one possible key and you had 100 billion computers to test the possible number variations, “it would take this massive array of computers 10 to the 56th power seconds – the number 1, followed by 56 zeros” to plow through all the possibilities, said Lin.
How long is that?
“The age of the universe is 10 to the 17th power seconds,” explained Lin. “We will wait a long time for the US government or anyone else to decrypt that file by brute force.”
I may be wrong but I think the entire universe will have died by the time that file gets broken.
August 10th, 2010 at 11:17 am
I may be wrong but I think the entire universe will have died by the time that file gets broken.
It all depends on what algorithm was used to encrypt it and whether or not the NSA have found a way to break into that algorithm that is not just a matter of trying every key combination.
Remember the Germans in WW2 thought they had an unbreakable cypher, but in fact the Poles had broken it before the war even started and all through that war the allies were happily reading German traffic.
And recall that this had happened was kept top secret until around 1970 or so – for obvious reasons.
Wouldn’t be at all surprised if the American Government can crack any commercially available encryption routine – and I know that they have people who are working on breaking such things full time.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 11:17 am
I woudn’t underestimate the computer power available to the NSA, but my guess is that the entire point is that it’s a message for them.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 11:26 am
A ‘massive array of computers’? Pffft.. Give these treasonist POS Manning and Assange to the Taliban. After 15 minutes with a skinning knife, they’d beg to give the password.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 11:27 am
The encryption might have been using a 256 bit key, but if they used a passphrase of only lowercase characters for example, you have to sift through far fewer bits. And of course, the main thing, the length of the password: so it all depends on the passphrase wikileaks has used. If they used only a few characters, anyone can decode it.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 11:27 am
It’s a massive number, but it’s kinda amazing how small such massive real world numbers actually are. The age of the universe, in seconds(!), can be written in under 4 cm (100,000,000,000,000,000 seconds).
Computers have calculated π to 5 trillion decimal places, but 39 decimal places are sufficient to estimate the circumference of any circle that fits in the observable universe with precision comparable to the radius of a hydrogen atom.
[thinking of a DPF example] the numbers involved in the margin of error calculation for a political poll are many times more massive. A poll of 1000 people from a population of 1,000,000 can be said to have a margin of of error of around 3.3% at the 95% confidence level. What does this mean? If the real result is 50% on a yes/no question then 95% of all possible samples of 1000 people will give a result between 53.3% and 46.7%. How many possible samples of 1000 people are there? Around 10 to the 870th power.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 11:29 am
The file will only take a universe lifetime to crack if computing power stays constant.
When DES was released in the 70s with 56 bit keys, it was thought unbreakable, however by the late 1990s a few days on a machine that a private company could purchase would break this, hence the move to longer keys.
If Moore’s law or something similar continues to double computing power every 2 years or so, in 350 years a computer could break this in less than an hour.
Of course the data is so historic by that point the issue is moot.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 11:32 am
“WikiLeaks used state-of-the-art software requiring a sophisticated electronic sequence of numbers, called a 256-bit key, to open them.”
state of the art software, with a US govt backdoor built it…
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 11:33 am
I don’t see why the NSA would want to crack it. This is a social engineering problem, not an encryption problem. The easiest way to read that file is to get the password.
I’d start by asking why wikileaks would post an encrypted file, which the media seem to have completely overlooked. I can see a couple of possible reasons:
1. They were worried that somehow the US govt would shut them down and/or delete their remaining files. By putting the file out there without divulging the password, they let thousands of people around the world get a copy. All they have to do for people to read it is give the password out, presumably the password is something that they have memorised
2. It is some sort of threat to the US govt, basically saying help us with something, or else
Either way, I would presume the wikileaks crew told someone in the US govt the password when they posted the file – so that the US govt can look at it and see that it does, in fact, contain what they say it contains. In other words, I don’t think the US govt need to crack it, I think wikileaks already gave them the password.
My guess would be that wikileaks have asked the US govt to tell them which bits of the files inside it they consider sensitive. If they don’t help, then wikileaks will just release them all.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 11:39 am
OTOH, An all knowing God would know it instantly.
(cat,pigeons)
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 11:52 am
An all powerful all loving God wouldn’t have started the war in the first place. It wouldn’t have had to create encryption either.
Are the crack times maximum? The chances are a crack would be found without going through every possibility.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 11:54 am
“Give these treasonist POS Manning and Assange to the Taliban. After 15 minutes with a skinning knife, they’d beg to give the password.”
You only mean Manning is treasonous, right? Any lawyers able to tell me if intent is important when it comes to treason? I doubt this information was released by Manning with the intent of attempting or conspiring to overthrow, make war on or seriously injure the government of the US or the nation-state that is the USA.
To your suggestion, Redbaiter, have a quote: “Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And when you look long into the abyss, the abyss also looks into you.” To do so is to lose the moral high-ground and to make what you fight against pointless. Unless your wars aren’t about morality, bringing peace and cultural change or whatever?
I tend to agree with PaulL: Whether it can be cracked is irrelevant in a sense. It seems likely to be a threat against the US government attempting to shut wikileaks down. File downloaded by many, wikileaks goes down because of the actions of the US government, password gets released, presumably sensitive information becomes available.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 12:00 pm
While the algorithm might be hard to crack often the software that implements the algorithm is written in such a manner as to leave traces of data in the computer system that can be identified and used to crack the encryption. Encryption software tends to advertise the fact that it uses tried and true open source encryption code but forgets to mention that the implementation of that code also needs to be secure.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 12:02 pm
The easiest way to decrypt it would be to simply create a Quantum Computer and decrypt it in 1 CPU clock cycle.
Vote:oh wait … nope, think we are a few years off that yet.
August 10th, 2010 at 12:31 pm
clone the file, attack each clone from a different starting point.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 12:37 pm
clone the file, attack each clone from a different starting point.
You may have missed the bit where the 10^57 seconds was the time to check all the combinations using 100 billion computers.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 12:38 pm
And of course, the main thing, the length of the password: so it all depends on the passphrase wikileaks has used. If they used only a few characters, anyone can decode it.
Perhaps the NSA should try the entire text of “The Hobbit” first
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 12:46 pm
“To do so is to lose the moral high-ground”
What do you think the Chicom Generals would do if Manning was in their army and posted their documents on the internet? Now ask yourself if you want those Generals to win or lose.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 12:48 pm
I agree with PaulL, there is a specific reason they have posted this file and not the key (the title -Insurance – gives you a hint too). It’s their insurance policy – and they want people to make copies. I surmise that if something untoward happens to them then the key will somehow be released.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 12:55 pm
PFC Manning is a good example of why Don’t ask don’t tell is a bad policy.
If you could be OPENLY GAY in the military he wouldn’t have leaked.
And if you believe that ……………
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 12:58 pm
“I surmise that if something untoward happens to them then the key will somehow be released.”
If the threat is designed to release information that preserves the releasers from prosecution but puts our troops in danger, then all the more reason to arrest, try and execute them. Or at the least, give them sixty years.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 1:01 pm
Jivekitty: agree with you on moral high ground.
Neebone and dime: I’d guess that wikileaks used an open source encryption program, one written outside the US such as PGP. It’s unlikely that there is a US govt backdoor in it, or that it leaves traces – there’s a very active encryption community outside the US that looks at the code for just those things. I’m assuming that the wikileaks crowd weren’t silly enough to use an encryption algorithm provided by the US govt. Having said that, it’s a bit of a moot point – as I said, they aren’t trying to protect it from the US govt, in fact I expect they’d rather that the US govt did read it. The only important point is that it is secure against everyone except the US govt. Which I suspect it is.
On the ways to break it – a brute force attack would take a very long time. I’d start off with the assumption that whatever passkey they used is something that someone (or several someones) can memorise. Anything that has to be written down or stored can be taken off them. So it likely uses some subset of the possible keys – and is potentially susceptible to a dictionary attack using only alphabetic/printing characters. Of course, even that is a massive undertaking, just not as big an undertaking as trying every possible key.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 1:38 pm
I am interested to see how this Wikileaks situation develops further. In my opinion it was a very smart move on their behalf to release this encrypted information.
The rise to prominence of the organisation is far from a bad thing. A powerful Government such as the US needs to be held accountable to the people, regardless of which party is in control of the Congress and White House. That is becoming harder to do when it is hiding more and more information. Imagine if it had been exposed 7 years ago that President Bush had built the case for the Iraqi invasion on a series of lies? Obama has backtracked on his election promises to not continue the shady practices started by Bush, and so a safe haven for whistle-blowers is needed to keep the public aware when other things like this occur.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 1:43 pm
The greatest weakness in any computer network is the people that operate it. If you want to crack a hard nut you become creative, obtuse, refractory. For instance $10,000 is a lot of money to some people.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 1:46 pm
I’d try “passw0rd”, with a zero instead of an o.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 1:49 pm
“Imagine if it had been exposed 7 years ago that President Bush had built the case for the Iraqi invasion on a series of lies?”
I think we would gain much more by paying much closer attention to liars and propagandists like you who smear people and put our armed forces in danger for political advantage. To try and use this myth to justify this kind of treason is much more harmful to democracy than anything George Bush ever did. And all just to advance the political fortune of the extreme left? You stink to high heaven.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 2:02 pm
You’re right, Graeme, I did
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 2:06 pm
The brute force approach is a waste of time.
Here’s how the NSA would crack it IMO. They know some of the documents that might be leaked and included in the file. All they have to do is generate a likely string of encrypted data and search through the file. If they get a hit then comparing the two reveals the encryption key.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 2:08 pm
“What do you think the Chicom Generals would do if Manning was in their army and posted their documents on the internet? Now ask yourself if you want those Generals to win or lose.”
So they become the same as them in order to defeat them, and it matters who wins or loses, why?
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 2:10 pm
So the US Govt had no proof of WMD’s, how do you justify the invasion of Iraq (and all the money, US & Iraqi lives that were sunk into the war)?
Once again Redbaiter, you are playing the man and not the issue. Wikileaks has provided a valuable service over the last 4 years – being one of the hosts for the Climate Change emails, releasing the block lists of supposedly free countries that want to install an internet filter, Sarah Palin’s Yahoo email (which was being used to get around a couple of pesky laws [also, lol Palin]), documents on the Cult of Scientology and dodgy dealings by a major Icelandic bank.
But now you’re crying after Afghani War documents detailing possible crimes over the last few years have been released? And I’d say the insurance file was uploaded in case any senior editors of Wikileaks are quietly victims of extraordinary rendition.
Has the NSA tried pa55word?
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 2:16 pm
On a side note.
Vote:“The age of the universe is 10 to the 17th power seconds,” explained Lin. “We will wait a long time for the US government or anyone else to decrypt that file by brute force.”
Interesting about these numbers as I read an article somewhere that even allowing for all the atoms in the Universe and all the so called time it has been around. there hasn’t been enough time for a multi-cellular organism to have been randomly made according to the maths of randomness.
So that blows macro evolution.
August 10th, 2010 at 2:22 pm
“Once again Redbaiter, you are playing the man and not the issue.”
Over estimate yourself there Keiran. As a low life communist liar and coward, you’ve got a hell of a long way to go if you’re ever going to be a man. You’re just a lowlife propagandist using the freedom of the western world, that provided by the soldiers you malign, to betray and destroy that freedom. Where are the leaks on Wiki from the Russians or the Red Chinese?
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 2:44 pm
I was hoping to get a thoughtful and measured answer to my first question, but I guess that was too much to ask. I’ll just make do with discussion over my masculinity and other insults. Good chat though.
http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:Russia
http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:China
Most articles and leaks seem to be from US Congressional Research about those two countries though. Maybe in those countries Wikileaks doesn’t have many sources with access to documents they believe the public need to see. Or maybe it’s because Wikileaks hates freedom so much that they are running an agenda (obvious to only you and I Redbaiter) to single-handedly bring down the freest nation (with their Patriot Act, warrantless wire-tapping, laws against filming the police in public, extraordinary rendition) in the world.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 2:52 pm
“I was hoping to get a thoughtful and measured answer to my first question”
I’m mystified as to why you would think that. Your posts are all premised on deliberate and obvious falsehood and indicate you have little grasp of reality or of reason. Why would anyone waste time with a reasoned response?
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 3:30 pm
An accurate selfdescription of yourself, Red.
It’s amusing to see how you fight for freedom, openness and transparency, except of course where it is inconvenient for you.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 3:49 pm
No insults? Now we’re getting somewhere. The point you originally took issue with was “Imagine if it had been exposed 7 years ago that President Bush had built the case for the Iraqi invasion on a series of lies?”
As it has long since been revealed that US military action in Iraq was based on very shoddy WMD evidence, and that President Bush made false statements in the lead-up to the invasion, how do you justify the war in Iraq (and all the money, US & Iraqi lives that have been sunk into the war)?
Is there a justification? Or are you just going to say the Bush Administration had good hard evidence of Iraqi WMD’s and links to the 9/11 bombings? (Protip: they didn’t. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,158228,00.html Fox News even!)
While the invasion of Iraq may seem off topic, I’m again using it to demonstrate that if information like this was leaked to a safe haven in 2003, it may have provided some resistance to the pro-war sentiment that was being whipped up at the time. Then there would have been no Collateral Murder video released, because the incident may have never occurred. (I’d also like to state my belief that video should have just been released without a massive editorial slant and emotive title attached to it).
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 4:01 pm
You’re all assuming that it is encrypted data at all.. It could just be 1.4GB of random noise, uploaded as a bluff..
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 4:08 pm
“No insults? Now we’re getting somewhere.”
We’re not getting anywhere and they’re not insults. They are dispassionate statements of fact. You are a liar and a propagandist cloaking your obsession to control and dominate with words that profess your concern for freedom but are false and deceitful. You claim to care for such matters but your heroes are mass murderers like Che Guevera. You decry US “imperialism” but seek alliances with Fidel Castro and the Chicom Generals who murder and imprison to maintain political dominance.
You smear George Bush as a liar with the objective of destroying the US’s global moral standing, but you never speak out on the lies of your socialist mentors. You make the sweeping claim that Bush lied, but can never, in all my experience of dealing with your hate driven odious type, give one example of a lie.
If asked, you merely repeat the sweeping allegation, or produce a long list of manufactured or out of context quotes, but you will never put just one “lie” here and discuss it and justify your smear. If I ask you to do that, I know you will avoid it, so it is pointless engaging with such evasiveness, such duplicity and such outright cowardly dishonesty.
You wage your little war and smear the right with propaganda techniques that would make Goebbels envious (Journolist for example) while deliberately avoiding the corruption and crime so widespread on the left. For example, the fact that Obama and his thugs engineered the caucus votes throughout the states and paved the way for this crook and fraud to attain the Presidency. (See “We Will Not be Silenced”, a film made by DEMOCRATS).
While all this happens, and while this fraud and his cronies sit in the White House destroying America and liberty, you whine on about George Bush lying to invade Iraq. You’re deranged, you’re a coward, you’re a liar and I have nothing for you but contempt, and even that is too much. Fuck off.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 4:20 pm
Kieran, you have been inducted into Redbaiter’s Hall of Flame.
You’ll see most of his “statements” are gems of self parody. Good for amusement when it doesn’t get too repetitive. 0-bit-keys required to decipher his intent.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 4:22 pm
“You’ll see most of his “statements” are gems of self parody.”
You’ll more likely see that Pete George is absolutely and endlessly determined to prove to all and sundry that he has the comprehensive skills of a garden slug.
Unable to cope with the simple disparity that anyone cheering for a small unnoticeable government presence cannot in any way be compared to a big government worshiping socialist who desires the state to be his be all and end all.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 4:24 pm
A ‘massive array of computers’? Pffft.. Give these treasonist POS Manning and Assange to the Taliban. After 15 minutes with a skinning knife, they’d beg to give the password.
Why would the Taliban harm their allie’s?
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 4:31 pm
It's not a smear, it' an "dispassionate statement of fact".
Vote:I think Bush and Cheney have done a pretty good job of "destroying the US's global moral standing".
August 10th, 2010 at 4:47 pm
MikeNZ 2:16 pm,
Indeed, Mike.
Based on macro evolution, you and I are just figments of each others imagination …
That being said, if I take an aspirin will Pete cease to exist?
Vote:What about if we ALL took an aspirin at the same time? – the mind does indeed boggle.
August 10th, 2010 at 4:56 pm
eszett 4:31 pm,
George dubya is my hero – unlike his replacement – a parody of a human being. As we’re talking about “destroying the US’s global moral standing”. The current incumbent is a ‘man’ devoid of morals and principles, and if left unchecked will lead to the destruction of certainly the US, and possible the rest of the free world.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 5:08 pm
>>mentors
I presume you mean Obama? Or maybe I was mentored by Marx and Lenin and Helen? Who knows. Anyway my first post here mentioned “Obama has backtracked on his election promises to not continue the shady practices” as an argument for Wikileaks, as it may be able to help keep the administration of either party accountable.
I repeated the question, provided some evidence from FOX NEWS that the invasion was built on shoddy reasoning. I asked you if you had a third justification, one that may have kept the American public interested in the war if they had known in 2003 that the terrorism/WMD arguments didn’t justify an invasion. After a 5 paragraph rant where the closest you get to answering is….well, nowhere, I can assume you can’t justify it either.
I had a quick search for the film on major public torrent sites, and a couple of private ones I use, and couldn’t find it. I found the website and on the front page it has “Please Donate So That We Can Finish the Documentary.” Pretty difficult to watch a film that hasn’t been completed. I’ll have a look through the documents. I hope they have some decent supporting evidence rather than just sore loser stories from the Hilary campaign.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 5:13 pm
Kieran, there is a big difference between saying that the invasion was based on shoddy reasoning, and saying (as you originally did) that “President Bush had built the case for the Iraqi invasion on a series of lies”. Lies means that he knowingly misled the public. I don’t believe he did that. Shoddy reasoning, that’s more arguable.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 5:26 pm
interesting syntax, Kris. you can easily read that as:
George dubya is my hero, a parody of a human being – unlike his replacement. Freudian slip, maybe?
It does not surprise me that dubya is your hero. Like to like.
BTW, you and MikeNZ need to seriously read up on evolution. it’s really embarrassing how little you know. Ah, I forgot. Dubya is your hero. Reading must not be your thing, especially not science.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 5:27 pm
MikenZ:Interesting about these numbers as I read an article somewhere that even allowing for all the atoms in the Universe and all the so called time it has been around. there hasn’t been enough time for a multi-cellular organism to have been randomly made according to the maths of randomness.
So that blows macro evolution.
Only if you use creationist arithmetic.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 5:43 pm
That is true PaulL, the terms are not interchangable. But if you believe the evidence was weak, then it can be a viewpoint which doesn’t mesh with how the Bush administration were talking of Iraq being an imminent threat. It is easy to judge in hindsight that they weren’t, but if notes from a top-level meeting in Britain (or America) had leaked that detailed what was being said in private was different to what was being said in public then perhaps America could have saved itself a lot of trouble.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 5:45 pm
You’re not suggesting that they try to read “The Evolution of Pet Goats” upside down?
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 6:08 pm
How unusual to see the sleazy serial liar and smearer Pete George joining in the untrue slander that George Bush was not a reader of books. Do some research moron rather than just buying into the usual Journolist propaganda. (No mind of your own at all, have you?).
In fact George Bush was well known as a voracious reader and polished off more than 100 books per year while at the White House. Obama, at the rate he admits to reading, might complete about 5-10 books this year.
You know what the meaning of Pravda is? You should, because its as meaningful there as when it comes from anything you lot claim.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 6:18 pm
Lighten up Reddy, you joke about birth certificates and Alaskans often enough, why shouldn’t the occasional goat joke be allowed? What was your second half name again?
Not sure how a POTUS had time to read that many books while he had a job, unless of course they were kids books.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 6:21 pm
no sense of humour, our masterbaiter has.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 6:22 pm
Not when it comes to cowardice no. Sorry, just can’t muster a smile when I observe a bunch of gutless wonders maligning a decent man with lies and smears.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 6:35 pm
Is Pete George the chairman of the “gutless wonder” club that Paul P belongs to?
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 6:36 pm
Ok, RB we won’t mention the birth certificate again.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 6:47 pm
If Redbaiter was trolling this thread then I’d rate him 3/10. No annoyance, his responses were more amusing than anything. Personal insults always detract from trolling, especially things like “low life communist liar.” I salute you Redbaiter, you caught me out alright. I only voted for ACT because I thought Roger Douglas was still closely aligned with Labour.
But after 10,000+ posts, it’s kind of obvious that he’s actually serious and believes in his posts. Which in that case HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, oh wow.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 6:48 pm
“Ok, RB we won’t mention the birth certificate again.”
That is funny seeing as you lot even forced George Bush to front up with his dental records but have allowed an undocumented Kenyan fraud to assume the Presidency by means of false state certification (signed by Pelosi who will also be jailed when the truth is out, see http://falfn.com/CrusaderRabbit/?p=921 ) and a past so murky that practically nothing is known of the man. (other that he hung out in Chicago with crooks and was mentored by communists and terrorists.)
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 6:51 pm
“Which in that case HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, oh wow.”
Oh there it goes again. The favourite communist strategy. Ridicule. You people really are mired in the past aren’t you, still thinking that this sort of past its use by date crap will win you points.
BTW, its because of ignorant politically incoherent kooks like you that ACT is a complete basket case electorally.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 7:12 pm
Lets see:
Killing babies by crushing their heads with a pair of pliers = Good.
Dairy cocky inducing otherwise natural birth of calf = Bad.
Publishing military secrets that compromise security of ‘our’ side and get allies murdered = Good.
Israelis legally defending their borders = Bad.
I can’t think of anything more disgusting or depressing than the thought(?) processes of the left thinking lemmings of our society.
When ‘it’ starts, I think I will be facing to the rear of the trench.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 7:12 pm
ACT is a basket case…..because I gave them my party vote in the hope that they would get enough seats in Parliament to pull National to the right? Well, shit.
And the birther story comes out again. Sigh. Even the Republicans were doing their best to distance themselves from the birth certificate yarn.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 7:15 pm
I’ve had nothing to do with the George Bush or Obama presidencies, I’m not American and I’ve never been to Hawaii or kenya. But I know “you lot” is just your code for “anyone I disagree with”.
Not that you would ever attempt anything like that, eh. Except self, just not sure if it’s inadvertent or not.
You’re still trying birther shit on Rabbit, I guess you moight get someone there agreeing with you.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 7:19 pm
I guess this is quite a diversion from discussing cryptology. However, since BDS appears to still be with us, even when the man has left office – and although emotional eruptions in the heat of partisan combat should have calmed down by now to allow the subject of the Iraq war to be approached with something like thoughtful discussion it has not happened. People still insist on throwing in silly little unthinking soundbites, so…….
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 7:20 pm
“Even the Republicans were doing their best”
And someone should care about what the fucking Republicans do? You’re right out of the loop aren’t you, you uninformed sap.
“But I know “you lot” is just your code for “anyone I disagree with”.”
Nope, it just (generally) means commies. Sometimes it also means fuckwits.
Vote:August 10th, 2010 at 7:23 pm
There is more sanity in agreeing with Red than you PG.
Vote:“I guess you moight get someone there agreeing with you.” I guess you ‘moight’ be right on that score.
August 10th, 2010 at 7:35 pm
I wonder if Wikileaks will have anything new to add to the trial that started today. The first Military Tribunal under the Democratic Party administration that is – in Guantanamo Bay no less.
Excellent to see the President following the lead of President Bush – and Franklin Roosevelt too.
Still, I can’t help thinking that Bush could have been as ruthless with the UAV attacks as Obama has been. Obviously Bush was too intimidated by all that “Wedding Party” propaganda. As Obama said in a different context: they bring a knife, we bring a gun. Good to see the Chicago way brought onto the world stage, should improve the standing of the US no end.
Now if only Wikileaks can get hold of some Predator footage.
Vote: