December 24, 2018
— Johanna Ross (@shottlandka) December 23, 2018
Everyone knows I’m a Russian shill, so maybe when I say this stuff it doesn’t carry the weight it should. But the Russian hacking bullshit is literally the biggest scam since the Holocaust.
Or perhaps I should say: the biggest scam since global warming.
This is just not real. What they are saying is made up. All of it.
And the proof – other than the fact that there is no proof to support the initial claim – is that it just keeps getting goofier.
The Times has hit a new Russia-bashing low, publishing a hit piece on the Moscow funded outlet Sputnik. The ‘name and shame’ article lists eight employees of Sputnik, complete with their photos and full names.
The story published on Sunday by one of the most respectable British newspapers is your usual attack on Russia and its foreign outreach efforts, described, of course, as propaganda. Technically it reports on the controversy over Integrity Initiative, the UK-funded psyop pushing London-favored narratives under the guise of fighting ‘Russian disinformation’. But it also focuses on the British-based branch of Sputnik, a news website and internet radio station funded by Moscow.
Halfway through the story you find a collage of eight employees of Sputnik: Some of them from management, some correspondents and one who is the head of the IT department, complete with their full names. The Times also gives an approximate location of Sputnik’s office in Edinburgh.
A possible reason for that? Sputnik – so the Times says – was “among the first to report details of the hack” of Integrity Initiative. “It has fuelled suspicion that Russia was behind the hack and used its media outlets to amplify its impact,” according to the Times.
Okay now let me get this straight: the Russians are such hacker geniuses that no one on earth can catch them in the act. Despite being accused of hacking literally the entire world, there is no evidence of them ever doing it once.
And yet, they are so stupid that they rush to report on their own hacking operations before anyone else to “amplify” the impact?
And how does news reporting “amplify the impact” of a hacking operation?
I can’t see if the Times article explains how that works, because all but the first three paragraphs are behind a paywall.
Russians who live in Scotland and engage in “information warfare” to destabilise Britain should face having their assets seized, according to a leading MSP.
There is mounting suspicion that the Kremlin sponsored last month’s cyber attack on the Institute for Statecraft (IFS), a think-tank set up to counter Russia’s disinformation war and funded to the tune of more than £2m by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
Russia’s English-speaking news channel RT (formerly known as Russia Today) and Sputnik, an internet radio station based in Edinburgh, were among the first to report details of the hack, which was mounted on November 5. It has fuelled suspicion that Russia was behind the hack and used its media outlets to amplify its impact.
Obviously, this was a think-tank set up to attack Russia, so a Russian media outlet is going to be covering that closely. Also, they are “among the first” to report on it, not “the first.” Most likely, this is because Sputnik runs like a blog, and they can very quickly put up the details of an event from another source and get an article up within minutes of when news breaks.
Here is the story in question, from the 15th of December.
All they did was summarize documents released by hackers that ARE ABOUT AN ANTI-RUSSIAN GROUP SET UP TO FIGHT THEM SPECIFICALLY.
The whole “integrity in media” term is about combating “Russian propaganda,” which means RT and Sputnik.
Furthermore, the hacked documents in question were about a BRITISH PLOT TO PROVOKE WAR WITH RUSSIA – BY PUTTING UNDERWATER MINES OFF THE COAST OF CRIMEA!
Who is at war with whom here?