NSA Whistleblower just shredded Obama's 'Russian Hacker' narrative

originally posted by: imjack
a reply to: network dude

You're cherry picking Assange? This argument is a dead horse. I never said anything about emails. Defend your mother Russia to the end.

He did leave the possibility open that Guccifer 2.0’s leaks to the media were a Russian plot.


“Now, who is behind these, we don’t know,” he said. “These look very much like they’re from the Russians. But in some ways, they look very amateur, and almost look too much like the Russians.”

This is the whole point. Even known cyberscandals don't exist, look away says 'network dude'! it wasn't the Russians!

What a pointless topic, where people are divided into two equally presumptuous camps.

Defend mother Russia? um....no. How about looking for factual evidence? Or is that not allowed here?
The whole "it was the Russians" thing was created to tar Trump with the old "commie" brush. It's 2016 and the world has changed. That dog won't hunt anymore.

Maybe it was the Russians. But if that was the case, they hacked the DNC, then gave the files to a US Government insider, and then that person gave them to Assange. If that was the case, we have much, much bigger issues than Russian hacking.

What people are divided about is being lied to by the MSM and this administration. And the lies aren't even good ones, I guess that's the Hubris of the dems thinking the rest of the world are knuckle dragging idiots compared to their superior logic. (pro tip- there are a few who aren't quite that dumb)


ETA:
to be sure you understand "cherry picking"

"Our source is not the Russian government," Assange told "The Sean Hannity Show." "So in other words, let me be clear," Hannity asked, "Russia did not give you the Podesta documents or anything from the DNC?" "That's correct," Assange responded.

Please point out the ambiguity there.

How about blaming the actual producers of the emails who also more or less left them on proverbial silver platter for the picking.

It's moot whether the Russians, insiders or my neighbors dog got ahold of them, the mere existence and content should be the main issue.

Not moot would be any provable connection to Seth Rich as murder charges would become pending. Not moot would be PAC coordination. Not moot would be pay for play.

I guess so long as that party wants blame others for loss instead of cleaning house, then another 20 plus senate seats can change hands in 18'

originally posted by: network dude

"Our source is not the Russian government," Assange told "The Sean Hannity Show." "So in other words, let me be clear," Hannity asked, "Russia did not give you the Podesta documents or anything from the DNC?" "That's correct," Assange responded.

1. his Source.
2. He has 1 source? Are they promised not to be Russian-American?
3. That was not all the hacked information and cyberscadals are not encompassed by this statement. He's specifically talking about these instances, not all information he receives and distributes.
4. The Russian Government is not "The Russians". Private Russians exist, just like Americans, that are very powerful, and have strong muscles.
5. He's talking about the infiltrators specifically, not something like an operation for example, Russians could be financing the source, who is not Russian.
6. He could be lying. Protect the source, duh.

a reply to: sad_eyed_lady

To those of us that have been paying attention in an objective way this is obvious. It's good to hear it from a credible source though, as this helps fight people ridiculous social engineering.

a reply to: imjack

The issue that people are having is that the information posted was taken for a spin through several media outlets...

1. The emails were fabricated
2. The emails were then "stolen material" as if the information contained within them should be invalidated
3. The Russians did it
4. The Russians did it with Putin behind the act.

Many outlets continued to put Democrat operatives on their respective shows just to spin a narrative rather than report on the facts. I know you are trying to be objective in your analysis, but I just want to point a few things out. No one knows if the Russians did it, so why report so definitively? The emails demonstrated how the Democrats and the Clinton campaign consorted with several media outlets in order to give Hillary Clinton the nomination over Bernie Sanders as well as clearly biased stories that were released to the public. Now, I know that media personalities must develop "relationships" with those in power so that they may get scoops or get chances at interviews, but certain members of the media/DNC very clearly crossed ethical lines. With this information now known, many many people don't trust the reporting. It almost seems as if the "Russian hacking" story that has been chanted for weeks now is just providing cover so that the media doesn't have to report on clear bias and the DNC and Donna Brazile don't have to answer for corruption.

Could it have been the Russians? Sure. Could it have been someone else? Possibly. But why isn't it being reported this way? No one knows who did what.

It is very hard to push Assange into an area where he is lying. Taking into consideration every thing this man has done to release material that shows how our government lies and spies on us, I wouldn't challenge his word until he has proven untrustworthy. He is risking his life to expose the corruption that has infested DC.

a reply to: sad_eyed_lady

The same guy that headed a group in 2010 warning the US Government that Israel was going to Unilaterally Attack Iran within 30 days?
link

The same guy that headed the Group in 2014 sending a letter to German Chancellor Engel telling her to disregard the US intelligence that Russia had invaded Ukraine???

In August 2014 Binney was among the signatories of an open letter by the group Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity to German chancellor Angela Merkel in which they urged the Chancellor to be suspicious of U.S. intelligence regarding the alleged invasion of Russia in Eastern Ukraine.

en.wikipedia.org...(U.S._intelligence_official)

The guy who wrote a letter saying that Assad HADNT used chemical weapons in Syria?
www.microsofttranslator.com... aere-warnen-merkel-vor-fehlinformationen%2F10655758.html

He is a one stop shop of Russian Propaganda...and has been CONSITENTLY DEBUNKED in his past BS

a reply to: bmullini

that pretty much addressed all my thoughts, ty

originally posted by: dr1234
a reply to: sad_eyed_lady

To those of us that have been paying attention in an objective way this is obvious. It's good to hear it from a credible source though.

He is the Opposite of a credible source...

He has backed Russian Propaganda that they didn't invade Ukraine (Which Putin has since admitted)
He said Israeli was going to attack Iran within 30 days...in 2010..part of a Russian push back on the UN sanctions of the Iranian Nuclear Program.
He is a Russian mouthpiece.

a reply to: Azureblue

If the Russians did all this hacking they are accused of then why has no Russian whistleblower emerged?

Because Russian hitmen are all over the world.

And in Russia there is no protection for dissidents.

Why do you all not apply the same standards to "news" that you do to UFO sightings and ghost videos?

Hmmm?????

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Are people saying that UFO videos need to be banned, that AI should crawl the Internet and scrub out any and all discussions about UFO's? Because that's where your fake news CENSORSHIP push is leading US in terms of dissenting voices and alternative perspectives.

a reply to: sad_eyed_lady

I was surprised to see this here. I just came back to ATS after several years. I am hearing from sources something fairly similar. I heard there was a staged coup within intel. That the real intel folks are on top of this. Obama is getting only some
intel. I also heard, second hand this past summer intel was going to take HRC down.

Reading mainstream news never made any sense. This whether true or not makes sense to me.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

What the hell?????
Did I say "censorship"? Did I say "ban"?

Nope.

no.



I was simply asking if the membership thinks as critically about the 'news' they get as they do about photos and videos and stories about ghosts, or UFOs, or alien abductions....
because it seems very similar to me.

No different than buying 'The STAR' or "National Enquirer" when it has a grainy b/w photo of a photo of a bigfoot who mated with a grey....you know.



That's why I asked that.

a reply to: network dude

www.foxnews.com...

fail.

a reply to: imjack

Well then... you have no arguments from me. Have a good day, sir.

originally posted by: Azureblue
a reply to: sad_eyed_lady

If the Russians did all this hacking they are accused of then why has no Russian whistleblower emerged?

Alexander Litvenko...X-KGB/FSB...Fled to London and got Asylum from the British Government and blew the Whistle on Putin Staging terrorist attacks in Chechnya..

Putin not only had him killed but did so in a way to send a message to everyone considering similar whistle-blowing and in a way that clearly bragged to the world that it was he who had him killed...Clear message and no doubt about the who and why.

Litvenko became the FIRST known murder victim involving Polonium ..aka Nuclear Material...and material with a signature conveniently leading back to the Kremlin.

British authorities identified the FSB agents who slipped the material into his food...and Putin immediately promoted them into government positions making them immune from extradition requests.

Here is Litvenko..

In his last statement he said about Putin:


...this may be the time to say one or two things to the person responsible for my present condition.

You may succeed in silencing me but that silence comes at a price. You have shown yourself to be as barbaric and ruthless as your most hostile critics have claimed.

You have shown yourself to have no respect for life, liberty or any civilised value.

You have shown yourself to be unworthy of your office, to be unworthy of the trust of civilized men and women.

You may succeed in silencing one man but the howl of protest from around the world will reverberate, Mr Putin, in your ears for the rest of your life.

May God forgive you for what you have done, not only to me but to beloved Russia and its people

What was your question again? Oh, that's right...Why hasn't anyone at FSB blown the whistle on Putin's hacking yet?

No doubt the reason the NSA, FBI and CIA are all on the same page about Putin directing the operation is that they have an asset inside team Putin...but we are never going to get a name until he is dead or farming rabbits in no name Idaho.

For effs sake...THAT...THERE..ABOVE...Is what Trumpites hero Putin does to "Whistle Blowers"..

Disgusting Putin love around here..

It sounds legit, it was an inside job. Who bought this information is an issue, if it was bought. The guy who works for the NSA would probably know this stuff. Also, there was no direct CIA determination anywhere in the writings that Russia released the files to Wikileaks. Obama on the other hand pointed directly at Russia. He should not word his speeches like he did there, he should know he is a lawyer. He should have parroted it just as he read it. I would expect this of Trump, he is not a lawyer. Oh wait, lawyers deceive people all the time and skirt the truth. I guess I just had a brain fart.

a reply to: IkNOwSTuff

Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes true

From 'Iraq had WMDS' to 'Russia hacked our election'.

Some people never learn.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: IkNOwSTuff

Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes true

From 'Iraq had WMDS' to 'Russia hacked our election'.

Some people never learn.

Iraqi WMDs was all Bush...the CIA docs that Bush ran with actually said the intelligence sucked.

Vice News via FOIA got those docs last year...catch up.

The CIA Just Declassified the Document That Supposedly Justified the Iraq Invasion
news.vice.com...