This package can be improved by redacting IP addresses, time-stamps and agent-identifiers while maintaining traceable, reproducible links to what is believed to be Russian sources.
While such redactions would result in a significantly larger report, it would simply be published over the World Wide Web and remain available for protected public discussions within the security analysts community.
The election of Donald Trump (Twitter: @realDonaldTrump) presents a unique opportunity to the world community. We witnessed a political brawl, the result of which could have gone in either direction. Our opportunity is this: We can get behind Trump, as we have with every other freely elected President, in order to allow him to lead. We can lend our intellectual resources to monitoring progress and offering course corrections as needed. There is no good reason, proposed to date, to not proceed as suggested.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, in response to Emails and other documents leaked during the election year of 2016, has expressed a serious allegation: The Russians have interfered in the American Election Process. This has resulted in the following, unavoidable, twin considerations:
Did Russian agents attempt and/or succeed with an attempt to influence our election results?
Are such suggestions logically reducible to the well-known “Shoot The Messenger” fallacy?
While it might appear to be “unfair” that the conservative voter was awakened to the knowledge of these less-than-desirable exposures of messaging among Democrat operatives, does this imply that we have to hold off the election until a similar exposure of Conservative messaging has been observed?
If not, can we accept the facts as they are? Here is the fact: The American electorate is more fully informed now and continues to try to become more fully informed during this period after the election.
There appears to be, at this time, no way to proceed except by adopting a positive acceptance of 5.2.2 above. However, 5.1 remains alive as a serious allegation that cannot just be shunted aside. It can however be tabled for a period of time until the work has been done to produce supporting evidence. Hence, redaction and publication over the global internet is warranted in order to bring the matter before interested parties for careful, cool-headed analysis.
#FakeNews is a specialized term that represents the “Shoot The Messenger” fallacy above while ensuring that neither side gains an unearned rhetorical advantage in the upcoming debate. In actuality, #FakeNews presents a far more serious problem to all of us and this in itself adds supporting rationale to the general advice that we might simply table this matter over the near term. We remain open to acceptance of proposals for alternative characterizations (other than #FakeNews).
It is our observation that ISIS, ISIL, Al Qaeda and similar “ideological-species” types become suicidal when met strongly by keystone ideological species defending USA, Russian, Chinese, Israeli and other intelligent interests. The invading species, Islam, remains dangerous. Damages to human brains have become visible across the EU. Swedish females, as an example, have been left defenseless. Rapes have become common. Humanity had no excuse for this but we have identified a 100% cure: We can observe our predicament and dig ourselves out as soon as possible. We start by restraining and re-educating the agents of Islam for however long it might take.
We observe that human beings are critically and cognitively vulnerable to suggestions of false, punishing gods. We have produced undeniable evidence that such gods cannot exist because we observe that we also engage in beautifully rewarding human relationships with those we have learned to love. Thus any ‘punishing-entity’ is not a ‘god-type’ entity and as such has not, and cannot ever exist. In other words, we have here a complete refutation of what is most commonly taught as Islam and we have identified the work ahead of us to improve Islam, Christianity and Judaism to their most rational expressions.
We, as a people, can go forward as theists, agnostics, atheists or any combination of the above. We can do so in a manner that maintains full compatibility: we can go arm in arm, trusting each other, hoping for the best for each other, spotting the undeniable benevolence that appears to be permeating this existence. We no longer have any reason to fear, distrust or threaten each other. We can ask questions, answer them, and improve our understandings of Islam, Christianity, Judaism as well as the systems of atheism, agnosticism and polytheism warranting consideration today as we venture out to survive in this impossbily beautiful world.