vector art

Pravda's pissed.

The Russian newspaper, once eagerly read by the CIA for hints about the USSR's Communist leadership, sent the junior senator from New York twelve questions.

They never received any answers.

In fact, they still haven't received a dah or nyet.

The paper was so peeved it published an editorial a several weeks ago taking Hillary Clinton to task for not even responding to their request a few years back for some answers.

Two years ago, the office of Senator Hillary Clinton was contacted with a polite message requesting an interview. A standard anonymous answer followed. Despite repeated contacts during the election campaign, not even a message of recognition was received, contrary to all the other political parties in the USA, including the office of Vice President Richard (Dick) Cheney. Here are the questions that Hillary Clinton did not answer:

Even Dick Cheney!

Although the Russian newspaper started sending their queries a few years ago, they must have added to their list since then, as the last couple questions pertain to Barack Obama's campaign, which wasn't announced until little over a year ago.

What were the questions that Clinton didn't even acknowledge?

Pravda published them on February 3 2008 along with a couple snide--some would say accurate--observations.

Here they are:

The Twelve Questions Hillary Clinton won't Answer 1. Senator Clinton, is it true that you insinuated President Putin does not have a soul? 2. You have said you wish to reform the US healthcare system. Could you please tell us how you plan to do this? 3. Why should you succeed where others have failed? 4. How would you comment on your statement that being a Republican and a Christian are difficult to conciliate? 5. Is it true that you have the support of the Jewish Lobby? If so, how will this influence your foreign policy? Will it continue to be controlled by Israel? 6. What is your message to the average American voter? How would you propose to make his/her life better? 7. What are your plans for Iran? Do you stand for a war? 8. How would you improve America's standing in the international community? 9. Why did you support the war against Iraq? 10. What are the reasons for your having fallen for the lies which were launched against Saddam Hussein? 11. Why does your Candidate website not have an email for the Press, whereas that of Senator Obama has? Would you agree this is a comment on the professionalism or the arrogance of your campaign? 12. Did you hope to gain an advantage over your opponent by announcing your trip to Florida and your support for the seating of Florida delegates just prior to the Florida primary?

After listing the above questions in their editorial, Pravda then followed them with a few obsevations.

The absense of an answer, on a systematic basis, can mean one or all of a number of things: Senator Clinton cannot answer these questions, does not want to answer these questions because she cannot find a credible enough reply, could not care less about the international press (in which case, what a fine candidate for a US President at a time when the USA needs to build bridges) or worse still, never received the messages in the first place, which would indicate a tremendous and shocking degree of lack of professionalism. If she cannot handle a website, how can she be expected to govern a nation of 300 million people?

The reader can decide for himself the wording or validity of Pravda's questions, especially those in #5.

However, more than a few Americans would agree with the conclusions they reached.

Pravda then fired a parting shot at Clinton's presidential campaign by noting that, "Indeed, for some reason Barack Obama’s website has a contact for the Press, whereas Senator Clinton’s has none."

Whatever one thinks of the questions that Clinton declined to decline to answer, one has to admit one thing.

They're tougher questions than anyone in the American MSM has asked the Democrat candidate to date.

Now Pravda knows how many American voters feel.

They've been trying to get some of those answers for years.

by Mondoreb
images:
* file
* RidesAPaleHorse
* journalism
Source: The Questions Hillary Clinton did not answer



Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.

A new study from Pravda. Since this is one of the days that I'm smarter and nicer but becoming emotionally dreamy (according to this story) then I've decided to post it.

Women become smarter and nicer only for seven days of their monthly cycle

How can women be so different? A sweet and tender bunny can turn into a spiteful and irritable bitch without any apparent cause. Where is their common sense? What for are all these groundless suspicions and jealousy? These are typical questions men have been asking for ages. Even Nancy Meyers in her “What Women Want” did not give a clear explanation to this question. But now it is science that can answer. It turns out that sex hormones rule over women’s brain. The knowledge of biochemistry can easily predict women’s emotions.

The difference between male and female brains is not a secret to modern-day science: cerebral hemispheres function in different ways. Neurons - nerve cells in woman’s brain – are always active. These factors cause constant changes in perception and handling of information.

Scientists explained this fact through experimental results. They discovered that pregnant mice are much smarter than their non-pregnant companions. The animals become cleverer because their brain receives more estrogen, the female sex hormone.

“This hormone stimulates the growth of dendrites, neuron sprouts; and this, in its turn, improves cerebration,” Professor Craig H. Kinsley said.

The professor believed at first that the experiment held true only for animals. But his colleagues from York University of Toronto proved that estrogen positively influenced all mammalian female beings, especially human beings of female sex. The latter should not necessarily be pregnant to be wise: their quick-wittedness depends on the menstrual period.

The concentration of estrogen in female body grows in about ten days after the beginning of the menstrual period. As a result of this process women become smarter and nicer, but only for seven days. Men can quickly tell the difference between photographs of one and the same woman made in different monthly periods.

“On these days women are also prone to rivalry. Her senses including hearing, vision, smell, her skin sensitivity, logic and emotions can either worsen or intensify during menstruation,” Charles Crawford, a psychologist from Simon Fraser University says.

On the basis of these experiments scientists compiled a peculiar calendar, which men can use in their relations with the opposite sex. The only difficulty is that men should possess enough information about women whose behavior they want to predict.

From the first till the seventh day of the cycle:

Women experience slight problems with understanding other people and prefer to simply smile back. The ability to express thoughts weakens. Women become dreamy and emotional.

From the eighth to the fourteenth day:

Women grow wiser and prettier, but become emotionally unbalanced at the same time. They make scathing remarks about other women, but are favorably concerned with men.

From the fifteenth to the eighteenth day:

This is a period of extreme suspiciousness and jealousy. The organism demands more sex and scandals. Mental capacity decreases. Skin becomes more sensitive to caress.

From the nineteenth to the twenty-second day:

Mental capacity fades away. Problems with memory are possible. Women become extremely confiding. Their color sensing is quite OK: all presented bouquets of flowers would be appreciated.


Source - Pravda

By LBG
Image [beststuff.com]





DBKP.com - Bigger, Better!.
Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page

An awesome display of electronic warfare capabilities by Israel in September sparked a sharp reaction in Russia today. It all may bode ill for Iran tomorrow.

Electronic warfare capabilities reached new heights during the September 9 Israeli attack on Syria. That was the revelation from the November 25 issue of Aviation Week & Space. The revelations apparently touched a nerve somewhere in Russia.

Today Pravda carried a story imparting their own spin to the events described in AW&S, along with an interview with Richard J. Aldrich and an editorial wrap-up that featured a scary prediction.

The article packed an informational punch. The authors of the AW&S piece, David A. Fulghum, Robert Wall and Amy Butler, covered a lot of ground.

Among the highlights were: the elements of the electronic attacks carried out by the Israelis; methods the Israelis used to penetrate Syrian air defenses undetected; an Israeli claim that rejected any link between the Syrian and Iranian nuclear programs; and a rebuttal to that claim by John Bolton.

First, the highlights of the Aviation Week & Space article, "Israel Shows Electronic Prowess".

Elements of the electronic attack:

Elements of the attack included some brute-force jamming, which is still an important element of attacking air defenses, U.S. analysts say. Also, Syrian air defenses are still centralized and dependent on dedicated HF and VHF communications, which made them vulnerable. The analysts don’t believe any part of Syria’s electrical grid was shut down. They do contend that network penetration involved both remote air-to-ground electronic attack and penetration through computer-to-computer links.

“There also were some higher-level, nontactical penetrations, either direct or as diversions and spoofs, of the Syrian command-and-control capability, done through network attack,” says an intelligence specialist.

The penetration by non-stealthy aircraft using electronic means:

That ability of nonstealthy Israeli aircraft to penetrate without interference rests in part on technology, carried on board modified aircraft, that allowed specialists to hack into Syria’s networked air defense system, said U.S. military and industry officials in the attack’s aftermath. Network raiders can conduct their invasion from an aircraft into a network and then jump from network to network until they are into the target’s communications loop. “Whether the network is wireless or wired doesn’t matter anymore,” says a U.S. industry specialist (AW&ST Nov. 5, p. 32; Oct. 8, p. 28; Feb. 19, p. 31). Now development of the technology in Israel is being confirmed.

The links between the various nuclear programs:

Israeli officials reject any suggestion that the Syrian and Iranian nuclear programs were or are linked in any way. “I don’t think Iran knew anything about what Syria was doing,” says a long-serving member of the Israeli parliament with insight into military affairs. “I don’t think they would have told the Iranians. They didn’t need Iranian assistance because they had help from the North Koreans.”

John Bolton disputes that view:

However, John Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, disagrees. “I’d be very surprised if the Syrians were to engage at least without Iranian acquiescence,” he says. And, “it may be beyond that,” he tells Aviation Week. Since Syria alone lacks both the funding and expertise for a nuclear weapons program, it would logically turn to Pyongyang for technology and oil-rich Tehran for funding, he says.

Moreover, Bolton says the use of network attack is a clever move by the Israelis. He contends that it will serve as a deterrent for Iran. Or, at the very least, it sends a message that even the advanced, Russian-built air defense systems won’t protect Iran’s nuclear activities.

Next, the Pravda take.

The Russian paper starts out first with a claim that the U.S. provided monitoring assistance during the attack itself.

The U.S. provided Israel with information about Syrian air defenses before Israel attacked a suspected nuclear site in Syria, Aviation Week & Space Technology is reporting in its Nov. 26 edition.

The U.S. was monitoring the electronic emissions coming from Syria during Israel's Sept. 6 attack, and while there was no active American engagement in the operation, there was advice provided, according to military and aerospace industry officials.

The first event in the raid involved Israel's strike aircraft flying into Syria without alerting Syrian air defenses. The ultimate target was a suspected nuclear reactor being developed at Dayr az-Zawr. But the main attack was preceded by an engagement with a single Syrian radar site at Tall al-Abuad near the Turkish border, Aviation Week reports.

Next, Pravda poses several questions concerning the attack to Richard J. Aldrich.

Pravda.Ru has interviewed Professor Richard J Aldrich, Department of Politics and International Studies University of Warwick, to find out more about US interference into the conflict between Israel and Syria.

Pravda.Ru: Can we speak here about the US interference into the conflict between Israel and Syria?

Richard Aldrich: Not really. Intelligence and technical co-operation amongst friendly countries is now so widespread that it is hardly meaningful to talk about 'interference'. Many European countries also exchange intelligence with Israel. Indeed, during the Cold War, Israel even exchanged intelligence with the Soviet Union. Even intelligence rumored to come from Israeli espionage operations inside the United States!

In this case, Aviation Week has made it clear that it was Israeli personnel and units that undertook these electronic operations, not Americans.

However, there are important benefits from this close relationship for both the United States and Israel. Israel clearly benefits from very advanced technological assistance in the area of electronic intelligence and network warfare which may have helped with this operation. Equally, it is likely that the United States received reports on the operational effectiveness of this equipment in return. In short, the operation against Syria would have provided the US military with great opportunities to see the latest secret equipment under "live battle conditions". This is always considered to be invaluable.

Pravda.Ru: It is well-known fact that most part of Syrian strategic objects is operated by Russia. Is there a possibility that it was US intelligence operation against Russia?


Richard Aldrich: Not really. It is unlikely that Russia has given its latest air defense equipment to friendly countries in the Middle East and so the United States would not learn much about current Russian capabilities by looking at Syrian Air Defense. Its more likely that the United States would gather useful intelligence against Syria itself during this operation. The information might also be useful against another regional power operating similar types of equipment.

Pravda.Ru: Can we speak here that this operation will launch a new war in the field of electronic and digital technologies?

Richard Aldrich: Electronic warfare has been around a long time and had already reached quite a level of sophistication during the Second World War. However, the new aspect of this operation was the use of network attacks. It appears that the command and control systems of the Syrian military were directly attacked by Israelis using computers as weapons. This is a specialist form of military hacking. For many years there has been an active debate about how practical and realistic the idea of pure 'network warfare' really is. During the wars in the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s this activity seemed to be limited to fairly trivial "denial of service" attacks.

Finally, the Pravda piece sums up with a scary prediction--especially if you're a Russian military planner or ally.

Now, perhaps we have seen the first live example of the military application of network warfare.

One of the troubling issues with network warfare is that it is hard for the victim to know if they have been attacked - or merely suffered a network failure. Even if they are sure they are being attacked, they can't always tell who is attacking them?

For this reason, Israel's attack on 6 September appears to herald a frightening new era in the realm of electronic warfare.

All this happened in the last couple of days; it's a lot of information.

And it's only the parts that we know.


by Mondoreb
notes by: Little Baby Ginn
[image: bsos.umd.edu]

Sources:
Pravda, "USA Helps Israel Only to Test Its Arms Under Live Battlefield Conditions"
Aviation Week & Space, "Israel Shows Electronic Prowess"




Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.