Prove it. List which ones are into beastiality. I want see just how big Kash Patel’s eyes can pop when he has to explain it.

Weirdly, this is the most normal he’s ever really looked, even with the external eyeballs. Never realized just how big of an impact those bugeyes have.

his coke eyes are designed to see DOGS of all breeds from anywhere on the world.

why is this giving

Love that show.

What slow?

The Amazing Digital Circus. It’s a great animated show, well worth a watch if your brain got a sprinkle of brain rot, but it still deals with some good subject matters.

Judging by their past work, this group is probably bluffing in an attempt to extort easy marks.

this post made my day !

It’s a real shame the feds don’t hire the nerds who might’ve prevented this. The tl;dr is hiring freezes, reinstated fitness tests, and drug usage disqualifications put cops behind computers, not IT. Who saw that coming.

Smoking the Devil’s lettuce? GTFO. Into fucking dogs? You’re hired!

Right? They’re gonna relax the standards for dog fuckers but not for weed?

Weed intoxicates the brain . That’s bad.

But they do allow bestiality now.

How is this the one photo where he doesn’t look like he’s holding in a massive shit?

Dogs really are the best.

To me he always looks like he got caught masturbating to horse porn by his parents. I’m amazed he managed to take a decent photo as well.

That’s his afterglow face.

He does look a little flushed.

Names/addresses/ages/phone numbers/applications, shit they could have just found the login for one of the hiring groups indeed profiles, lol.

Plus DOGE got rid of basically all the competent cybersecurity professionals.

Instead, they hire the people who do it.

In wandering around the entrance to the rabbit hole, I came across the Wikipedia article about The Com, which is a lose umbrella organization that includes many hacker communities, including the one accused of hacking the FBI.

There’s this:

The Com is connected to a group of skinheads active in Russia and Ukraine responsible for random attacks on people and acts of murder.[14] Edward Coristine, a high-ranking employee of the DOGE, US government organization, was a former member of The Com.[15]

the whole reason that the group that hacked the FBI did it was because the FBI claimed they were part of The Com and they took offense to the claim.

Good for them.

Truly a service to humanity, if they assure the information is "used for good", whatever the hell that means.

I’m just glad everyones having fun.

This kinda sounds like the last GRDS hack maybe? Would need some proof to even say if this is new.

Who are the dog fuckers and who stole from their employers or hired prostitutes?

Are the hackers PETA?

It would make sense if the dog fuckers and dog killers were at odds with each other.

on a scale of kash patel to peta , how much do you love dogs ?

ruh oh…

Is that Sparky Patel? Poor doggo.

Meh, these are the same fucks who breached the Canvas backend and held student data for ransom. I don’t care if they target a government agency I don’t like - they’re just another bunch of assholes out to make a profit.

" don’t care if they target a government agency I don’t like" - you should. This opens all of them up to blackmail and worse by foreign govts. Massive problem for both you, me, and everyone else. The first Tom cruise mission impossible movie was about this very same thing except it was the CIA.

By everyone do you mean in the globe, or is everyone limited to America.

Don’t take a fragment of a sentence out of context to make me say something I didn’t. What I said was that even if they attack someone I don’t like, I still won’t celebrate it because I know what their motivation is.

What you said was “I don’t care if they target a government agency I don’t like - they’re just another bunch of assholes out to make a profit.” not “even if they attack someone I don’t like, I still won’t celebrate it because I know what their motivation is.”.

In or out of context, "I don’t care if they target a government agency I don’t like"means the exact same thing. It’s a stand alone statement not impacted by your second sentence.

Your rephrasing makes more sense and the two parts of your sentence can not be separated without changing the meaning.

In or out of context, "I don’t care if they target a government agency I don’t like"means the exact same thing. It’s a stand alone statement not impacted by your second sentence.

Incorrect on all counts. “Whether they attack someone I hate or not doesn’t matter” is what the complete sentence conveys. Quit playing semantic games to make me say the opposite. Actually just get blocked for being an unserious bad faith poster.

In or out of context, "I don’t care if they target a government agency I don’t like"means the exact same thing. It’s a stand alone statement not impacted by your second sentence.

That’s just not true. The fact that it can form a complete sentence on its own doesn’t divorce its meaning from the surrounding context.

In my favourite example, “I want to make sure the children die with the parent” is a complete sentence, but outside of a programming context, it’s quite fucked up.

In this case, the sentence you quoted is equivalent to a parenthetical to add nuance to the second half you omitted: “They’re just another bunch of assholes out to make a profit (even if they target a government agency I don’t like).” It’s the opposite of a standalone statement: It’s the subordinate qualification to a different, standalone statement.

Just because you can quote it outside its context doesn’t mean that it’s independent of context.

wrong, the following statement had no impact on the first.

I’m really not sure why it seems like most people here think context matters, but you keep insisting that it doesn’t. The two parts of that second sentence, which you treat as separate statements, were literally linked with a dash. It’s also not like the statement or its parts stood alone:

The first sentence implies disapproval of the hackers’ previous antics. The second one first concedes that they also hit someone the commenter dislikes, which in that context is a clear setup for a “but”, which follows and makes it clear that this isn’t enough to redeem them, since the motive likely isn’t ideological nor political, but plain greed.

You’re taking a sentence in isolation and pretending its meaning is self-contained. That’s not how human language works.

It is syntactically two independent clauses (or a compound sentence) joined by an em dash rather than a single, indivisible thought. Each half contains its own subject and verb structure. Punctuation does not equate to inseparability. You assume second half acts as a pivot (“setup for a ‘but’”). But look at the actual words: there is no “but” or ideological reversal present. They were expressing two distinct emotional stances: a political/institutional cynicism (“I don’t care if they target a government agency I don’t like”) followed by a cynical motive attribution (“they’re just another bunch of assholes out to make a profit”).

It is syntactically two independent clauses (or a compound sentence) joined by an em dash rather than a single, indivisible thought.

You’re mistaking syntactical shape for semantic content. Independent clauses can still have context-dependent meaning. In fact, that’s the norm for sentences placed together. By being in sequence, all three statements are implicitly connected.

What’s more, the dash explicitly signals that the thoughts are connected. That’s a common use of dashes: juxtaposition of opposed thoughts. They’re dependent both by the implicit context-dependency and by virtue of being marked as dependent.

Figuring out how the distinct statements are connected and how these dependencies shape them is a fundamental linguistic puzzle. You didn’t find the solution, which isn’t a bit deal, but even when you had the solution explained to you, you keep insisting there is none.

You assume second half acts as a pivot (“setup for a ‘but’”). But look at the actual words: there is no “but” or ideological reversal present.

“They hit someone I don’t like” is something you’d expect people to approve of, but in this context, it’s juxtaposed against both the preceding and succeeding statements of disapproval of their actions and motives respectively, which creates a contradiction: If they target someone you don’t like, aren’t you happy about that?

That contradiction is preemptively resolved by “I don’t care if … – …”. If you’re looking for words to pin the pivot to, those are the closest you’ll get. They express the semantic connection between the facts “they targeted someone I don’t like” and “I disapprove of their actions”: the former has no bearing on the latter.

a political/institutional cynicism (“I don’t care if they target a government agency I don’t like”)

I see your confusion here: “I don’t care if” isn’t actually part of the fact being presented. It’s not a distinct emotional stance, but rather part of the linguistic construct linking the independent statement “they target a government agency I don’t like” to the one following it. If anything, it’s the negation of an expected emotional stance.

I completely disagree. The two statements are completely clear. You can take one or the other independently and they maintain their original meaning. Like I said, the second statement bears no impact on the first no matter how you try to bend the rules. Have a nice day.

The statements aren’t the ones you claim though.

“I don’t care if it’s raining. I’m going for a walk.” doesn’t mean I never care about rain at all. It means that the fact that it’s raining has no bearing on my decision to go for a walk. I could join them with a dash to make their connection clear, but even if I don’t, the composite meaning is obvious.

“I don’t care if …” is the construct joining the two clauses into a full sentence, indicating that the first statement (“they target something I don’t like”) has no bearing on the second (“they’re still assholes”). The second part doesn’t itself have a bearing on the first, but the sentence as a whole and the disqualifying particle in particular do.

You split the sentence wrong, altering the meaning of the first clause by prepending a part that doesn’t belong to it.

That was fucked up and they are wrong for that but if they keep going after feds I’m all for them.

Wish they could leak the Epstein files (without pics and vids).

Their talents were wasted on Canvas if they have this kind of capability.

Either that or, the FBI’s database just has ultra piss poor security which sounds about right anymore.

If they were “going after” the feds, they’d release everything they got instead of bragging about what they got. Either they got nothing or they’re holding it for ransom, but if it’s the latter what are their demands? None of this is passing the smell test.

Interestingly they are taking a different route with this data than they usually do (in the article).

Apparently I’m OOTL on some weird Kash Patel shit?

He looooves beastiality.

We already knew that.
Is this related to the hack? (Is it the spouse part?)

we had couch fucker, and now we have bear fucker.

get these two a room with a nice couch and rug and they’ll have a blast.

Or dress up Patel as a racoon and send RFK in.

Or And dress up Patel as a racoon and send RFK in.

dogs, cats, horses, sheep, goats, and cows.

He wants to be Mr Hands.

Since Musk and his retarded entourage stole US government data at the begining of Trump’s second term, who doesn’t have FBI data!

So, “Hacked” in this case means asked Grok where they could buy a “Female Body Inspector” tshirt and Grok coughed up the personal details of everything FBI?

Mods abusing rule 3.

Edit - pointing out that concern over data security is a moot point after a gaggle of non-security cleared Musk datascrapers at the start of Trump’s term already stole untold data, and have no protocol to secure it like the government does is factual and poignant. “Be excellent to each other” is a flagrant abuse of censorship.

in fairness, you called someone “retarded”. some people on here get triggered around the word “retarded”, even if they were not the target of the word, they somehow felt you meant they were “retarded”.

remember. don’t use “retarded” use “mentally deficient”.

just want to make sure everyone is aware here. even if you were talking about flame “retardant” material, it’s still not acceptable. the new term is “flammably deficient”.

Technically the word ‘idiot’ was utilised for the highest grade of mental deficiency. Do you feel that word should be banned too?

Not trolling, I’m genuinely curious.

any retard with half a brain can see that an idiot is far less deficient than a retard.

flammably speaking.

The government needs to provide all FBI employees with 1 free year of credit monitoring. That free year is the resolution I’ve seen from the corporations that were hacked. Remember when a couple credit bureaus were hack multiple times and they provided this? The FBI should also provide compensation for the hack if employees sign up in time. Usually you get like $20 for the data leak.

Then years later they can claim the $4 check from the settled class action lawsuit

Maybe if our justice system actually punished people, things would be different

How many more poor’s need to be punished for a different outcome?

I think when OPM was hacked that is what employees got lol

Yup, it just ran out recently.

Turns out firing all the experts and replacing them with incompetent sycophants has consequences

Before they leak it, they should coerce the FBI to leak the Epstein Files and then leak the FBI stuff anyway. Would be hilarious. We be top tier.

That won’t work though because the federal government doesn’t negotiate with terrorists*.

Instead, they do their negotiating with rich pedophiles.

You appear to have two paragraphs that are accurate… Without a footnote. What was the * for?

:p

To indicate terrorists are subjective

Instead, they do their own terrorism. FTFY

Release it all please.

My favorite part is that the exploit was an Oracle issue. The Ellison family sucks.

selling of parts paramount to the saudis, they overextended thier purchases.

Didn’t oracle just pay out a settlement for a data breach?

I honestly DGAF about the employees, I do care about the internal documents indicating what they’re collecting on innocent parties and sitting on regarding the rich and dirty ones.

If it’s profitable it’s legal. Just cut Trump in on it and there will be no consequences.

So… How many of them had engaged in beastiality prior to being hired? 🤔

You should see it. If you have the eyes for it.

We’ve all heard about breaches in security by hackers affecting so many millions of people, but I never hear about that data leak being used against the innocents. Like, it has no effect on we the poors.

They seem to hold our data for ransom, and steal crypto directly from the rich, because of course they do, that’s where the most profit is. And, that is why they’re so dangerous… to the rich.

If you dig into this a little you’ll see plenty of accounts of The Com associates doing awful things against children, but I suspect that’s a very small part of what a few of them do, it’s just hyped and pushed forward to make us hate them all. In fact it’s quite possible that within the larger community, those few players are themselves, shunned, the same way Christians shun but don’t condemn the more radical members of their cult. But, the only way to hear that side of the story is to be in The Com. We’ve all seen this happen in online communities--outsiders condemning an entire large group for the actions of a few, who are shunned within the group.

Remember, we’ll never get the whole story from one side, and the story we do get will be biased in favor of the side that tells it--there will always be distortions, lies of omission, and outright fabrications and lies. The same way we’re wary of content now because of AI, we should be skeptical of any claims made, and the more powerful the claimant, the more skeptical we should be that we’re getting the whole story.

Hacking is pejorative insult! Their dialup modem escaped containment after watching that hack the planet with the nice boobied goth/punk girl movie.