About Me

My photo
SEEKONK, MASSACHUSETTS, United States

Tuesday, September 10, 2019

APA- Call for abstracts: GSC session at the 2020 APA Central Division meeting.




 
Dear DAVID,
 
The Graduate Student Council of the American Philosophical Association invites proposals for a session exploring the scholarship and voices surrounding common graduate student challenges, to be held at the 2020 APA Central Division meeting, February, 26–29, in Chicago, IL.
 
There are a number of challenges which are particularly pernicious for a majority of graduate students and early-career philosophers, such as impostor syndrome, establishing authority in the classroom, setting appropriate boundaries with students and advisers, balancing teaching with research and coursework, and feelings of isolation—just to name a few.
 
This session aims to facilitate productive and scholarly discussions around these issues as they relate to the experiences of graduate students. We welcome abstracts that tackle any of the listed challenges or any other challenges related to graduate study, professional life, and social life in philosophy. Preference will be given to proposals that either (a) demonstrate significant engagement with relevant scholarship on the topic, or (b) describe a clear question for facilitated discussion.
 
Graduate Student Council sessions are expected to be highly interactive. The 250- to 500-word proposal should indicate how audience members will participate in the session.
 
Please send abstracts for anonymized review to Danielle Clevenger at dclevenger@wisc.edu by September 30, 2019.
 
For more information about the Graduate Student Council of the APA, please visit our webpage.
 
Find us on Facebook or e-mail us at contact-gsc@apaonline.org.
 
Thanks,
 
Sahar Joakim
Chair, APA Graduate Student Council


The American Philosophical Association
University of Delaware
31 Amstel Avenue, Newark, DE 19716
 
Click here to change your subscription settings. To unsubscribe, click here.

THE MUELLER REPORT AND TESTIMONY, ARTICLES AND POSTS, START TO FINISH:BREAKING DOWN THE MUELLER REPORT: FOR ANSWERS, LOOK IN THE RIGHT PLACES.



Sunset, Cloud, Meditation, Buddhism

(Any words that are colored RED represent portions
of the Transcript that were BLACKED OUT, 
AND COULD NOT BE READ. WORDS LIKE
"INVESTIGATIVE TECHNIQUE" ARE NOT
MY CREATION, BUT WERE PLACED OVER
BLACKED OUT AREAS)


As you go through the MUELLER REPORT, there is one very important detail that must be acknowledged: IT IS THE STORY OF TWO INVESTIGATIONS. Why do I say this? BECAUSE CONCLUSIONS DRAWN WERE NOT ARRIVED AT BY THE SAME PROCESS,WITH JUST ONE AGENCY, DEPARTMENT OR INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBLE FOR EVALUATING EACH EVENT, AND THE VALUE OF THE CORRESPONDING EVIDENCE.

WHAT DO I MEAN? CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING EXCERPTS, TAKEN 
DIRECTLY FROM THE TEXT. (IN ITALICS)

The Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion. Evidence of Russian government operations began to surface in mid-2016. 

As set forth in detail in this report, the Special Counsel's investigation established that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election principally through two operations.


First, a Russian entity carried out a social media campaign that favored presidential candidate Donald J. Trump and disparaged presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. 

RUSSIAN SOCIAL MEDIA CAMPAIGN. 

(HERE ARE SOME EXCERPTS FROM THE BODY OF THE TEXT.)

Internet Research Agency (IRA) carried out the earliest Russian interference operations identified by the investigation. A social media campaign designed to provoke and amplify political and social discord in the United States.

- The IRA was based in St. Petersburg, Russia, and received funding from Russian oligarch Yevgeniy Prigozhin and companies he controlled. Pri ozhin is widely reported to have ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin. HARM TO ONGOING MATTER.

- The campaign evolved from a generalized program designed in 2014 and 2015 to undermine the U.S. electoral system, to a targeted operation that by early 2016 favored candidate Trump and disparaged candidate Clinton. 


- The IRA later used social media accounts and interest groups to sow discord in the U.S. political system through what it termed "information warfare." 


 The IRA' s operation also included the purchase of political advertisements on social media in the names of U.S. persons and entities, as well as the staging of political rallies inside the United States. To organize those rallies, IRA employees posed as U.S. grassroots entities and persons and made contact with Trump supporters and Trump Campaign officials in the United States. 
-


Second, a Russian intelligence service conducted computer-intrusion operations against entities, employees, and volunteers working on the Clinton Campaign and then released the stolen documents. 


RUSSIAN HACKING OPERATIONS. 
(HERE ARE SOME EXCERPTS FROM THE BODY OF THE TEXT.)

At the same time that the IRA operation began to focus ·on supporting candidate Trump in early 2016, the Russian government employed a second form of interference: cyber intrusions (hacking) and releases of hacked materials damaging to the Clinton Campaign. The Russian intelligence service known as the Main Intelligence Directorate of the General Staff of the Russian Army (GRU) carried out these operations. In March 2016, the GRU began hacking the email accounts of Clinton Campaign. 


In March 2016, the GRU began hacking the email accounts of Clinton Campaign volunteers and employees....the GRU hacked into the computer networks of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) and the Democratic National Committee (DNC). The GRU stole hundreds of thousands of documents from the compromised email accounts and networks. Around the time that the DNC announced in mid-June 2016 the Russian government's role in hacking its network, the GRU began disseminating stolen materials through the fictitious online personas "DCLeaks" and "Guccifer 2.0." The GRU later released additional materials through the organization WikiLeaks. 

The presidential campaign of Donald J. Trump ("Trump Campaign" or "Campaign") showed interest in WikiLeaks' s releases of documents and welcomed their Potential to damage candidate Clinton. Beginning in June 2016, HARM TO ONGOING MATTER forecast to senior Campaign officials that WikiLeaks would release information damaging to candidate Clinton. WikiLeaks' s first release came in July 2016. 




Now, the Investigation into the above 2 categories provided enough evidence to the committee that
made them confident in drawing definite conclusions, and in some cases, filing Criminal Charges. I will cover these in more depth at a later time, but there is one more category to cover. What you read below may seem to be a part of the RUSSIAN HACKING OPERATION...

...BUT THERE IS ONE MAJOR DIFFERENCE.


EXCERPTS FROM THE BODY OF THE TEXT.

In addition to targeting individuals involved in the Clinton Campaign, GRU officers also targeted individuals and entities involved in the administration of the elections. Victims included U.S. state and local entities, such as state boards of elections (SBOEs), secretaries of state, and county governments, as well as individuals who worked for those entities. 186 The GRU also targeted private technology firms responsible for manufacturing and administering election-related software and hardware, such as voter registration software and electronic polling stations.187 The GRU continued to target these victims through the elections in November 2016. While the investigation identified evidence that the GRU targeted these individuals and entities, the Office did not investigate further. The Office did not, for instance, obtain or examine servers or other relevant items belonging to these victims. The Office understands that the FBI, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and the states have separately investigated that activity. 

By at least the summer of 2016, GRU officers sought access to state and local computer networks by exploiting known software vulnerabilities on websites of state and local governmental entities. GRU officers, for example, targeted state and local databases of registered voters using a technique known as "SQL injection," by which malicious code was sent to the state or local website in order to run commands (such as exfiltrating the database contents). 188 In one instance in approximately June 2016, the GRU compromised the computer network of the Illinois State Board of Elections by exploiting a vulnerability in the SBOE's website. The GRU then gained access to a database containing information on millions of registered Illinois voters, 189 and extracted data related to thousands of U.S. voters before the malicious activity was identified.


GRU officers INVESTIGATIVE TECHNIQUE scanned state and local websites for vunerabilities. For example, over a two day period in july 2016, GRU OFFICERS INVESTIGATVE TECHNIQUE
for vulnerabilities on websites of two dozen states. INVESTIGATIVE TECHNIQUE.

Unit 74455 also sent spearphishing emails to public officials involved in election

administration and personnel at companies involved in voting technology. In August 2016, GRU officers targeted employees of **** ,a voting technology company that developed software used by numerous U.S. counties to manage voter rolls, and installed malware on the company network. Similarly, in November 2016, the GRU sent spearphishing emails to over 120 email accounts used by Florida county officials responsible for administering the 2016 U.S. election. 191 The spearphishing emails contained an attached Word document coded with malicious software (commonly referred to as a Trojan) that permitted the GRU to access the infected computer.192 The FBI was separately responsible for this investigation. We understand the FBI believes that this operation enabled the GRU to gain access to the network of at least one Florida county government. The Office did not independently verify that belief and, as explained above, did not undertake the investigative steps that would have been necessary to do so.



The Hacking operations that included the following:

- Individuals and entities involved in the administration of the elections.


- U.S. state and local entities, such as state boards of elections (SBOEs), secretaries of state, and county governments, as well 

as individuals who worked for those entities.

- Private technology firms responsible for manufacturing and administering election-related software and hardware, such 

as voter registration software and electronic polling stations.

- Employees of **** ,a voting technology company that developed software used by numerous U.S. counties to manage voter rolls, and installed malware on the company network. 


- Florida county officials responsible for administering the 2016 U.S. election...


WERE NOT EVALUATED, IN TERMS OF THE QUALITY OF THE EVIDENCE, BY THE OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL.


FROM THE TEXT:
"While the investigation identified evidence that the GRU targeted these individuals and entitiesthe Office did not investigate further. The Office did not, for instance, obtain or examine servers or other relevant items belonging to these victims. The Office understands that the FBI, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and the states have separately investigated that activity." 


"The Office did not independently verify that belief and, as explained above, did not undertake the investigative steps that would have been necessary to do so."


WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? WHILE THE OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL IDENTIFIED EVIDENCE THAT THE GRU"TARGETED THESE INDIVIDUALS AND ENTITIES", NO FURTHER INVESTIGATION WAS DONE.

WHY?

"The Office understands that the FBI, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and the states have separately investigated that activity."


"The Office did not independently verify that belief and, as explained above, did not undertake the investigative steps that would have been necessary to do so."


Well this answers the question: "Who is exonerated by the Mueller Report?"
ANSWER: NO ONE. The Evaluation of the
most important information regarding fraud in 
the 2016 election was not part of their 
responsibility. They couldn't exonerate anyone
even if they wanted to. 

THE MUELLER REPORT AND TESTIMONY, ARTICLES AND POSTS, START TO FINISH:BREAKING DOWN THE MUELLER REPORT. THE ENEMY WITHIN...?



Hatred, Emotion, Rejection, Faces, Hate

Those of you who are long time readers, will recall my evaluation of the 2016 Presidential Election revealed that the Trump victory was due to Election Fraud in at least Six States. However, nothing was done to investigate the bogus numbers that handed DONALD TRUMP the White House. Why do I mention this? Read on.
You can find my articles on this subject on the WEBSITE; 
WWW.SEARCHINGFORREASON.NET



The most disturbing actions involving the RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT, AND ITS AFFILIATED
INDIVIDUALS AND GROUPS, WENT FAR BEYOND:

- Spreading False Information and Innuendo.

- Hacking into Computers to Steal Information to aid the Trump Campaign.

-  Creating Bogus Political "Groups" on Social Media that were not created
   by Americans, but Russian Agents working to ensure a Trump victory.
   etc...

While these are bad enough, the Mueller Report gives us a far more disturbing
look into RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE IN THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.

As an aid to understanding the magnitude of this assault on our country, the following
definition is essential:

WHAT IS THE GRU? ( FROM THE ARTICLE: "WHAT IS RUSSIAS GRU MILITARY INTELLIGENCE AGENY?" BY GUY FAULCONBRIDGE, FOR REUTERS)



What is the GRU?
Russia’s military intelligence service is commonly known by the Russian acronym GRU, which stands for the Main Intelligence Directorate. Its name was formally changed in 2010 to the Main Directorate (or just GU) of the general staff, but its old acronym - GRU - is still more widely used.
Its published aims are the supply of military intelligence to the Russian president and government. Additional aims include ensuring Russia’s military, economic and technological security.
The GRU answers directly to the chief of the general staff, Valery Gerasimov, and the Russian defense minister, Sergei Shoigu, each of whom are thought to have access to Russia’s portable nuclear briefcase.
WITH THAT OUT OF THE WAY, HERE ARE A FEW DIRECT
QUOTES TAKEN FROM THE TEXT OF MUELLER REPORT. 

THESE QUOTES APPEAR UNDER THE HEADING:"Intrusions Targeting the Administration of U.S. Elections "
"...GRU officers also targeted individuals and entities involved in the administration of the elections. Victims included U.S. state and local entities, such as state boards of elections (SBOEs), secretaries of state, and county governments, as well as individuals who worked for those entities."

"...also targeted private technology firms responsible for manufacturing and administering election-related software and hardware, such as voter registration software and electronic polling stations."


"By at least the summer of 2016, GRU officers sought access to state and local computer networks by exploiting known software vulnerabilities on websites of state and local governmental entities."



.
..AND THERE ARE THOSE WHO ARGUE THAT RUSSIA IS OUR ALLY? IF THAT IS TRUE, I HATE TO SEE WHAT OUR 
ENEMIES ARE UP TO.

TO BE CONTINUED...

THE MUELLER REPORT AND TESTIMONY, ARTICLES AND POSTS, START TO FINISH:BREAKING DOWN THE MUELLER REPORT...EXONERATES NO ONE, ANSWERS NOTHING.

United States Of America, American Flag

The introduction addresses the nature of the RUSSIAN INVOLVEMENT, AND POSSIBLE "COLLUSION" WITH THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN.

TEXT FROM THE REPORT:
"As set forth in detail in this report, the Special Counsel's investigation established that Russia interfere~ in the 2016 presidential election principally through two operations. First, a Russian entity carried out a social media campaign that favored presidential candidate Donald J. Trump and disparaged presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Second, a Russian intelligence service conducted computer-intrusion operations against entities, employees, and volunteers working on the Clinton Campaign and then released stolen documents. The investigation also identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign. Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."
END TEXT.

How can we make sense of this? At one point, the report comments about the contacts between the TRUMP CAMPAIGN, AND THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT: "The investigation also identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign."
Yet, at another point, it seems to exonerate the TRUMP CAMPAIGN with the following: "...the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."

Further Down, we see the reasoning used in evaluating any CRIMINAL LIABILITY THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN MAY HAVE, INVOLVING THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENTS ACTIVITIES TO INFLUENCE THE OUTCOME OF THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. IT IS HERE THAT WE FIND OUT HOW MUCH OF A "WITCH HUNT" THIS INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN. THE TRUTH MAY SUPRISE YOU. 


TEXT FROM THE REPORT.
1) "In evaluating whether evidence about collective action of multiple individuals constituted a crime, we applied the framework of conspiracy law, not the concept of "collusion." In so doing, the Office recognized that the word "collud[ e ]" was used in communications with the Acting Attorney General confirming certain aspects of the investigation's scope and that the term has frequently been invoked in public reporting about the investigation. 2) But collusion is not a specific offense or theory of liability found in the United States Code, nor is it a term of art in federal criminal law. For those reasons, the Office's focus in analyzing questions of joint criminal liability was on conspiracy as defined in federal law. In connection with that analysis, 3) we addressed the factual question whether members of the Trump Campaign "coordinat[ ed]"-a term that appears in the appointment order-with Russian election interference activities. Like collusion,4) "coordination" does not have a settled definition in federal criminal law. We understood "coordination" to require an agreement-tacit or express- between the Trump Campaign and the Russian government on election interference. 

5) That requires more than the two parties taking actions that were informed by or responsive to the other's actions or interests. We applied the term coordination in that sense when stating in the report that the investigation did not establish that the Trump Campaign coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities." 
END TEXT.

THE NUMBERS 1-5 ABOVE CORRESPOND WITH THOSE BELOW, IN GIVING A BASIC INTERPRETATION OF THE MEANING OF THE ABOVE TEXT.

1) THE POPULAR TERM "COLLUSION" HAS NO BASIS IN LAW, THE LAW REGARDING "CONSPIRACY" WAS USED.


 2) JOINT CRIMINAL LIABILITY WAS DETERMINED BY THE FEDERAL LAW REGARDING "CONSPIRACY."


3) DETERMINED WHETHER OR NOT MEMBERS OF THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN "COORDINATED" WITH THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENTS INTERFERENCE ACTIVITIES.


4) THE OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL COUNCEL DECIDED THAT TO ACCUSE THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN OF "COORDINATING" WITH THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT, THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN BOTH BODIES, "TACIT OR EXPRESS." 

5)"That requires more than the two parties taking actions that were informed by or responsive to the other's actions or interests."

WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? A MEMBER OF THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN COULD HAVE ENGAGED IN "CONSPIRITORIAL CONDUCT" WITH THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT AND/OR AFFILIATED INDIVIDUALS OR GROUPS, BUT IF IT WAS NOT DONE AT THE EXPRESS ORDER OF THE CAMPAIGN ITSELF, with the approval of the Russian Government, NO CRIME WAS COMMITTED.

CUTTING THROUGH THE NOISE, HERE IS WHAT IT MEANS: THAT NO ONE IN THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN IS EXONERATED. BY THIS VERY NARROW DEFINITION, ANY INDIVIDUAL OR GROUP IN THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN COULD HAVE "CONSPIRED" WITH THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT, OR ANYONE WORKING ON BEHALF OF THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT, AND AS LONG AS THERE WAS NO EXPRESS AGREEMENT AMONG BOTH THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN AND THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT, THE FINDING WOULD BE THAT OF NO "COLLUSION" OR NO "CONSPIRACY."

THIS IS A TRAVESTY. IT LITERALLY GIVES INDIVIDUALS AND GROUPS A FREE PASS TO HAVE COMMITTED ELECTION FRAUD, AS LONG AS THE "LEADERSHIP" DID NOT FORMALLY APPROVE IT.