22
simon_says 22 points ago +22 / -0

Law school wasn't for nothing, then. :-)

30
simon_says 30 points ago +30 / -0

Happy to help. This is an important one.

4
simon_says 4 points ago +4 / -0

I just posted this: https://greatawakening.win/p/15K6JSzFb9/

It updates my previous explanatory piece (which was stickied) relating to Montgomery and Lindell.

If you think this is worthy, I ask that you sticky it for the benefit of the GAW community.

4
simon_says 4 points ago +4 / -0

We don't have to trust Mr. Montgomery or anyone else.

The PCAP data will definitively speak for themselves with cryptographic certainty.

This evidence validates itself - or refutes itself.

6
simon_says 6 points ago +6 / -0

I'd be interested in "hearing" you relay Dr. Frank's assessment of Jovan, Byrne and Flynn...?

I'm positive I'm not alone on that.

7
simon_says 7 points ago +7 / -0

You are asking a good question. During my discussion with Dr. Frank, I was focused on trying to understand the underlying technical details about what actually occurred. I asked whether the packets were cryptographically signed, for example (Dr. Frank said they were, for the record). So I was focused on getting as much detail as I could about where things stood from an informational point of view.

Unfortunately, I neglected the "human" side of the affair. How did the encounter occur? Under what circumstances? Was there a backdrop for all of this? Etc.

I have considered trying to track Dr. Frank down at another speaking event to follow up with these sorts of questions. If he becomes aware of this, there is a reasonable likelihood that he will be reluctant to elaborate further.

9
simon_says 9 points ago +9 / -0

I surmise that much of what is to be done needs to be perceived to have been done by private citizens. When an agency or department does finally act, they will be responding to private citizens - i.e., they'd be "just doing their job"... not undermining their superiors.

11
simon_says 11 points ago +11 / -0

Happy to help.

And that's exactly what I wanted this to be: cliff notes.

6
simon_says 6 points ago +6 / -0

I think that's highly likely. I suspect a source inside the NSA directed Lindell to Montgomery's servers so that the source of the PCAP information was a private citizen - not the NSA.

7
simon_says 7 points ago +7 / -0

LOL.

I'm a little concerned about my identity getting "out there." If I get too close to the truth... who knows? Probably just being paranoid.

7
simon_says 7 points ago +7 / -0

One further thing that likely complicates things is that redirecting the captured data to your own personal servers was likely "not entirely legal." So the data is genuine, but obtained illegally.

7
simon_says 7 points ago +7 / -0

It is conceivable that the court order just changed all of this. I haven't seen the order yet, so I am unsure.

3
simon_says 3 points ago +3 / -0

I understand that news of the court order lifting the injunction came from one of Mr. Montgomery's attorneys.

I haven't seen the order for myself, yet. The order will clarify the realm of topics Mr. Montgomery is free to speak to, and whether he may reveal underlying evidence, i.e., PCAPs.

3
simon_says 3 points ago +3 / -0

I haven't seen the order lifting the injunction - yet. When I do, that will clarify matters relating to the realm of topics to which Mr. Montgomery is free to speak, and will further clarify whether he is at liberty to share the underlying data.

As for whether the order is "real," I believe the source of this information is one of Mr. Montgomery's attorneys.

12
simon_says 12 points ago +12 / -0

I'm just trying to help the community understand a somewhat involved and complicated story. I can't imagine the mods would have a problem with that?

5
simon_says 5 points ago +5 / -0

I just posted something to provide clarity and insight into the Dennis Montgomery situation.

https://greatawakening.win/p/15JnYrQlIR/

If you think it is worthy - give it a sticky, so the community can see it. Over and out.

3
simon_says 3 points ago +3 / -0

Thank you. I'm trying to figure out how to format a portion of this. I just want a simple table...?

1
simon_says 1 point ago +1 / -0

Thanks for asking - I'm well.

I haven't changed my mind about upcoming parts, I'm just a little tied up between work and some other things. I live in Tampa, and am presently bogged down with the hurricane. Part 4 is coming, though.

1
simon_says 1 point ago +1 / -0

Good point.

There is never enough money in the system to resolve all indebtedness.

But, until Commie #1, there was enough money to resolve our federal indebtedness. That's the distinction.

Thank you, tstr. Over and out.

6
simon_says 6 points ago +6 / -0

Thank you, and I'll get to some of these topics in this series. ...Keep in mind this will be constituted of several series - not all of which will treat economics as the primary focus.

3
simon_says 3 points ago +3 / -0

Thank you, CQVFEFE. I'm always a little overwhelmed when something I've written is well received. :-)

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›