"It's about time that governments feared the people instead of the other way around." - Henry Rollins

User login

Who's online

There are currently 0 users and 23 guests online.

Welcome to iBrattleboro!

Welcome to iBrattleboro!
It's a local news source by and for the people of Brattleboro, Vermont, published continually. You can get involved in this experiment in citizen journalism by submitting meeting results, news, events, stories, reviews, how-to's, recipes, places to go, things to do, or anything else important to Brattleboro. Or, just drop by to see what others have contributed.

Find iBrattleboro on:

 Twitter YouTube

Search the Archives

Ye Olde iBrattleboro Archive

Use the pulldown to choose desired number of results.


Search the first decade
of iBrattleboro archives
at Archive-It.org
Feb 20, 2003 to Feb 6, 2013

Please Explain

A political question.

The Democrats wants us to be mad that Russia interfered with the US election because wikileaks published real communications of the DNC and Podesta. It is wrong for outsiders to interfere with a country's election!

But, Obama just released a video telling the French to vote for Macron. "The success of France matters to the entire world."  It is our duty to interfere in another country's election!

So, which is it? Is international concern and "meddling" expected and normal, or is it something we should abhor in all instances? I'd like to do the right thing!


Comments | 10

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Viva la France!


All cleared up, then

So it is right to meddle with other countries. Thanks for the quick answer!


You may say I'm a dreamer

I ascribe to a world without borders. Some of the names are nice, though.

"Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people living life in peace, you
You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope some day you'll join us
And the world will be as one" ~Lennon


Chris, I generally find your

Chris, I generally find your posts to be spot on. However, your equating an ex-president of the US voicing an opinion about the elections of our oldest ally with the active interference of an adversary in collusion with a presidential candidate in our election has me scratching my head.
Bob Fagelson


Well, I'll explain a bit more

1. No evidence of Russian hacking so far, just innuendo. Proof has yet to be on display. More likely someone within the DNC walked out with files. And Podesta was using passwords that were hard to guess, such as "password"...

...but even if Putin did somehow want Americans to vote for Trump, who exactly did he influence by giving real (not fake) information to wikileaks? Deplorables? They weren't going to vote for Clinton. Clinton supporters? They were not voting for Trump. Sanders supporters might have been the target, but they were not voting for Clinton long before the leaks, and Clinton did nothing to win them over.

So, even if he did leak real documents, I don't see it having much effect. And I don't think it was Russia.

Much more impact was Comey, imho.

2. Both Obama and Putin are/were heads of powerful countries, both with long relationships to France. Obama made a video for the French people... that's more than offering an opinion. He could say "I hope the French all vote, and take this election seriously" without endorsing someone. What if his endorsement backfires?

3. Trump also weighed in and said to vote LePen. He's a current US president voicing an opinion of an old ally. Okay to do?

I'm just curious. When should another country weigh in? Always? Never? If they are noble and good?


US far-right threw weight behind hacking against Macron

After months of trying to move the political needle in favor of Marine Le Pen in the French presidential election, American far-right activists on Saturday threw their weight behind a hacking attack against her rival, Emmanuel Macron, hoping to cast doubt on an election that is pivotal toFrance and the wider world.

The efforts were the culmination of a monthslong campaign against Mr. Macron after his candidacy began to gain steam this year, with digital activists in the United States and elsewhere regularly sharing tactics, tips and tricks across the English- and French-speaking parts of the internet.

“It’s the anti-globalists trying to go global,” said Ben Nimmo, a senior fellow of the digital forensics research lab at the Atlantic Council, a think tank, who has studied the far right’s recent efforts against Mr. Macron and others in France. “There’s a feeling of trying to export the revolution.”

The origin of the leaks in France is still not known. The French news media has been ordered by the electoral commission not to publish their contents.




The question of whether it is right or wrong to "meddle with other countries" is too black or white in a world of dramatically rising globalism.


Explaining the Political Question

Keep in mind a nefarious organization hacked the DNC and Podestra email accounts. That information, a mix of authentic and false documents, was given to Wikileaks. Wikileaks then posted the illegally obtained information. Why did they do that? Why did they want a Trump victory? To this day, there is no explanation.

President Obama openly expressed his support for French presidential candidate Emmanuel Macron…and he stated his reasons. It is all out in the open. Keep in mind that Obama is now a private citizen. Yes, he has more clout than you or I, but he simply expressed his opinion. On the other hand, as head of state, Russian President Vladimir Putin has endorsed the other French presidential candidate, Marine Le Pen.

Which one is the true meddler interfering in another country's election, private citizen Obama or Russian President Vladimir Putin? The answer, obviously, is Putin.


Differentiating Difficulties

Perhaps there is some correlation here: Between not seeing the difference between Obama speaking out and Russian interference, and not being able to see the difference of what would happen if Clinton was elected or if Trump was elected.

In addition to the differences already noted in the posts, I think we are worse off for the Russian interference, and worse off for Trump being elected, than Obama speaking out and if Hilary had been elected.


a lot of unwarranted assumptions

Hard to wade through all the assumptions, but here are some: Russian interference was much broader than their outlet known as Wikileaks. There is agreement from the intelligence community that Wikileaks operates/operated as an organ of Russian intelligence. There is considerable debate whether the material from Wikileaks was fully accurate or partially made up. The material utilized by Wikileaks was stolen by Russian intelligence. Comparing all that to President Obama's call for Macron's election is quite the reach.


Upcoming Events

iBrattleboro Poll

With my current income, I could probably afford a total (town + school) tax increase of about