Philosophy without borders: our latest posts, 9-16 september 2019.

PHILOSOPHY WITHOUT BORDERS, which is home-based on Patreon, here— 
www.patreon.com/philosophywithoutborders
is an open-source, open-minded forum for sharing original philosophy, 
produced by critically thoughtful, insightful, reflective people for 
other critically thoughtful, insightful, reflective people, with no 
restraints on what form the philosophy may take; and with no 
restriction by borders or boundaries of any kind, be they restrictions 
inherent in schools of thought, educational institutions, states or 
national boundaries, or legal or moral systems.

Here’s our blog, AGAINST PROFESSIONAL PHILOSOPHY—
https://againstprofphil.org/

Here are the latest posts on our blog—

Manacles 10–2.16 DAD.
https://againstprofphil.org/2019/09/11/manacles-10-2-16-dad/

How To Win The Kant Wars.
https://againstprofphil.org/2019/09/09/how-to-win-the-kant-wars/

Thoughts on Postmodernity 2: The Tensions of the Past and the Fluidity 
of the Present.
https://againstprofphil.org/2019/09/06/thoughts-on-postmodernity-2-the-tensions-of-the-past-and-the-fluidity-of-the-present/

And here are our two journals—

BORDERLESS PHILOSOPHY
https://www.cckp.space/

CONTEMPORARY STUDIES IN KANTIAN PHILOSOPHY
https://www.cckp.space/

PHILOSOPHY WITHOUT BORDERS assumes universal enfranchisement and 
emancipation as a goal, so that all people may participate in the 
generation and discussion of philosophy. Its only requirement is that 
the cultural products shared, whether they may be philosophy in the 
strict sense, being the continuation world’s history of philosophy 
from all parts, including western and eastern or any other philosophy; 
or whether they be other thought provoking cultural products including 
conversations, serious or humorous writing, the visual arts, crafts, 
multimedia, and future art, so long as they contain real philosophical 
thinking.

By “real philosophical thinking,” we mean thinking that is unhindered 
and not self-censored by subservience to any so-called philosophical 
authority or canon, aimed at least in some way at generating, 
elucidating or commenting on philosophical ideas; and respectful of 
the assumed universal enfranchisement and emancipation of all people 
and therefore communicating in a spirit of love, peace, and 
understanding – not hate, conflict, or vilification.

PHILOSOPHY WITHOUT BORDERS belongs to a radical phase in the 
philosophical project that flowered in the period of western culture 
which has become known  as the Age of Enlightenment,  occurring mostly 
in Europe during the 18th century. The ideas of the Enlightenment 
undermined the authority of the monarchy, church, and state, paving 
the way for subsequent emancipatory political revolutions in the cause 
of freedom from oppression of any kind. Radically enlightened 
philosophers have existed in all cultures and all ages, readily 
recognised by their support of unrestricted reason and universal 
respect for human dignity as the two primary vehicles for creating 
understanding real and imagined worlds, and for disseminating the idea 
that disputes and conflicts can be resolved or avoided by means of the 
search for logically-guided, evidence-based truth rather than personal 
beliefs, creeds, mysticisms, or other oppressive, mind-enslaving 
ideological constructs.

PHILOSOPHY WITHOUT BORDERS is a safe haven for thinkers to explore and 
warn against the incursions against radical enlightenment by abuses of 
greed, power, control, oppression, obedience, censorship, hate, 
derision, bullying, xenophobia, nationalism, feudalism, group-think, 
enforced zeitgeists, and other crimes against and limitations of 
humanity. PHILOSOPHY WITHOUT BORDERS in this sense can be thought of 
Enlightenment Redux, not just a passing phase, but the underlying 
principles of all humane activity. Radical enlightenment opposes 
oppression by complacency, stupidity, and evil, which persist all 
around the world, not only in despotic regimes, but also in supposedly 
enlightened ones, mostly as a result of an obsession with 
self-interested competition and the possession of coercive power, 
rather than on mutual aid and constructive cooperation as the bases 
for rational human activity.

***

Again, PHILOSOPHY WITHOUT BORDERS is home-based on Patreon, here—
https://www.patreon.com/philosophywithoutborders

Please consider becoming a patron!

Tell Trump and McConnell: NO shutdown this time, Jennifer Wexton.

David,

Congress is back in session, and Jennifer is hard at work to improve the lives of her constituents.

But first, we need to make sure that Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell, and their extremist allies in Congress don't force us into another reckless and harmful government shutdown at the end of September.

We must reach an agreement by the end of the month to keep the government open. The American people want a clean funding bill, and we need to show Trump and McConnell that we won't tolerate any political games on their part this time.

When Trump and McConnell forced a shutdown last December, they hurt the livelihoods of tens of thousands of federal workers and contractors in Jennifer's district. She stood up for her constituents then, and she's doubling down today to make sure they don't have to endure another period without paychecks.

We finally ended the last shutdown because Trump and McConnell succumbed to public pressure. So we're building that pressure early this time.

Will you stand with Jennifer and tell Trump and McConnell to support a clean government funding bill and avoid another shutdown? We want to get 15,000 signatures to show that the public is on our side.

Thank you,

Team Wexton

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.

(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 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." 


"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.