July 14, 2018
It is hard to do old-fashioned atrocity propaganda, because people will be like “yeah okay – where’s the video?”
You can fake the video like with GAS BABY MEME in Syria. But the chances of getting caught are high. Or you can actually do the atrocity yourself in your own country like with Theresa May using chemical weapons on people. But that is also very risky business.
But with the cyber – you can just say whatever the hell you want.
“Russia is doing infinity cyber… we know because we backtraced it.”
You can call bullshit but then they will just fall back on “it’s really complicated.”
I honestly can’t believe they’re indicting people based on the Crowdstrike analysis.
Just a little refresher here:
- Crowdstrike was hired directly by the DNC to analyze their server
- The FBI nor any other government body ever looked at their server, all FBI claims (and Mueller’s subsequent claims) are based on the analysis of a private company hired by the DNC
- The FBI either never asked to look at the server at all, or was told by the DNC that they weren’t allowed and then didn’t subpoena it
- Crowdstrike co-founder, Dmitri Alperovitch, is on a vicious anti-Putin ethnic Russian, a member of an anti-Russian thinktank funded by both NATO and George Soros
- Crowdstrike is funded by Google
- Crowdstrike was caught lying about Russia hacking a weapons app in the Ukraine… to make guns shoot wrong; they admitted that their analysis was wrong and retracted the report – and the DNC report was based on much of that same data (Ukraine hoax was the origin of “Fancy Bear”)
- The Wikileaks Vault 7 release shows that any hacking software can be used by any country
- Crowdstrike has refused to testify before the House Intelligence Committee
- Julian Assange of Wikileaks – who released the DNC emails – maintains that they were the result of an insider leak, not a hack
- Wikileaks has a 100% accuracy rate, Julian Assange has never been caught in a lie
- Intelligence experts much more relevant than “Crowdstrike” have continually leaned toward it being a leak and not a hack
- Ex-British Ambassador claims he received the emails personally from the insider
- Julian Assange is under a vow to never disclose a leaker’s identity, but has heavily implied it was mysteriously murdered Bernie Sanders-supporter and DNC employee Seth Rich (his murder has never been solved)
- Kim Dotcom claims he was in contact with Seth Rich and Seth Rich leaked the emails
It goes on and on, of course.
But that is the background for Mueller’s 11th hour Hail Mary series of indictments to “prove” Russian hacking – 48 hours before Trump’s meeting with Putin.
Along with the alleged Facebook memes posted from a Russian IP (which Putin says the Jews probably did), the Crowdstrike report is the single bit of “evidence” for “Russian hacking/interference/meddling.”
The media is going nuts.
A particularly deranged article was printed by the New York Times, quoting some absolute kook who says Russia is going to start hacking our power plants.
The nation’s top intelligence officer said on Friday that the persistent danger of Russian cyberattacks today was akin to the warnings the United States had of stepped-up terror threats ahead of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
That note of alarm sounded by Dan Coats, the director of national intelligence, came on the same day that 12 Russian agents were indicted on charges of hacking the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. Mr. Coats said those indictments illustrated Moscow’s continuing strategy to undermine the United States’ democracy and erode its institutions.
“The warning lights are blinking red again,” Mr. Coats said as he cautioned of cyberthreats. “Today, the digital infrastructure that serves this country is literally under attack.”
Oh my mercy.
Who the hell does this guy think he is?
No, my friend. You are no Ron Paul – you are what Ron Paul warned us of.
Coming just days ahead of President Trump’s meeting with President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, Mr. Coats’s comments demonstrate the persistent divisions within the administration on Russia — and on how hard a line senior administration officials should take with Moscow on its cyberspace activities.
The government’s national security agencies, particularly the intelligence agencies, have been far more concerned about Russia’s 2016 interference campaign — and efforts still underway.
The government’s national security agencies are running a massive, treasonous secret war against Donald Trump – under the guise of concern trolling about this kook Russian hacking gibberish.
Which we now know started before the Wikileaks DNC release in June. And the DNC leaks were the first public claim of “Russian hacking.”
It’s just… I’m so exhausted.
Mr. Coats, a former Republican senator from Indiana, has helped position the intelligence agencies in the more hard-line camp, pushing for more aggressive actions to halt cyberattacks by Russia and other nations.
In his remarks on Friday, Mr. Coats did not directly address Mr. Trump’s coming meeting with Mr. Putin. But Mr. Coats did say that if he was meeting the Russian president, he would deliver a sharp message that the United States knows what the Russians are doing and that Mr. Putin’s government is responsible for the cyberattacks.
Would he prevent evidence to Putin of this claim?
If so, then why in fuck will he not present it to us?
Why does it appear that there is ABSOLUTELY ZERO EVIDENCE for any of these claims?
Mr. Coats also expressed frustration with cyberspace strategies that emphasize only defense, and not offense as well. Evoking President Ronald Reagan’s Cold War approach to the Soviet Union, Mr. Coats suggested that if Russia continued to try to take on the United States in the cyberarena, then the administration should “throw everything we have got into it.”
The comments by Mr. Coats reflect the view by the intelligence community that Russia’s campaign remains a grave threat.
“Russia continues to be aggressive across the board,” Mr. Jones said. “Much as the Soviets did in the Cold War, the Russian active measures are much bigger than just elections.”
Mr. Coats has previously warned about continuing Russian attempts to influence future elections, including the midterm elections in the fall.
At a Senate hearing this year, Mr. Coats said that Russia viewed the midterm elections as a potential target, and he said Moscow’s activities were designed “to exacerbate social and political fissures in the United States.”
Another wild statement, backed up by absolutely nothing.
Was the US trying “to exacerbate social and political fissures” in Russia when the State Department funded a violent overthrow of the government of the Ukraine?
I mean, what are we even talking about here?
Mr. Coats said on Friday that the intelligence community was working with the F.B.I. and the Department of Homeland Security to support states’ efforts to secure their elections.
The federal effort has been hampered by the fact that elections are controlled at the state and local levels. States have had different levels of cooperation with the federal authorities.
“Secure the elections” how?
What does that mean?
Are we back to hacking the voting machines?
Is that what that means?
I thought we ALL agreed that it was impossible to hack voting machines without literally sending a hacking man to the polling site? I thought this “hacking” thing was about releasing emails?
What exactly are we talking about here?
Why does it seem so impossible to speak in plain language? What is the need to rely on vague innuendo?
Is it because this is all completely fake?
It sure does seem like a pretty WILD COINCIDENCE that Mueller decided to indict invisible Russian hackers based on a discredited private report by a discredited private company 48 hours before Trump meets Putin.
Almost as if the Mueller team is attempting to sabotage American foreign policy.