It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Why do so many people think the CIA, FBI and the NSA are lying about Russia?
originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Echo007
Where is the proof Russia agents hacked the DNC. All we hear is "trust us, RUSSIA did it". that is pure propaganda.
Are you saying that the Russian government is incapable of doing something that the President Elect says any fourteen year old can do? That's pure Russophobia, thinking Russians are stupid and/or incompetent. Russia got exactly the results they wanted:
John McCain, the man who meet with the leader of terrorist group ISIS.
No, he met with men with beards whom Russian state media falsely identified as ISIS leaders. That's pure propaganda.
originally posted by: opethPA
Or in Awakened Mind types the defacto choice is to blame the CIA, FBI ,NSA, USA regardless of how little is known because someone on 4Chan heard a rumor on Reddit which someone else Tweeted.
Hell proof isnt given to the public while a case is fluid on simple crime let alone involving world based actors yet people are crying "what proof do they have". I would assume people crying about the lack of proof have never been invovled in an emergent or fluid situation and think everything fits in a nice 60 min episode like on TV.
Dont really care if that loses me stars or flags here, at one point this site was supposed to be about denying ignorance and not just fitting a narrative.
originally posted by: facedye
originally posted by: opethPA
Or in Awakened Mind types the defacto choice is to blame the CIA, FBI ,NSA, USA regardless of how little is known because someone on 4Chan heard a rumor on Reddit which someone else Tweeted.
Hell proof isnt given to the public while a case is fluid on simple crime let alone involving world based actors yet people are crying "what proof do they have". I would assume people crying about the lack of proof have never been invovled in an emergent or fluid situation and think everything fits in a nice 60 min episode like on TV.
Dont really care if that loses me stars or flags here, at one point this site was supposed to be about denying ignorance and not just fitting a narrative.
you don't think you're conforming to a narrative when you accept extraordinary lack of evidence for extraordinary claims by way of the situation being "fluid"?
did you read the DNI report? they question their own assertions page after page. I don't know that that would be the appropriate behavior when you actually have evidence.
if I work for the FBI and tell you your best friend killed someone in the woods last night, but told you I can't prove it to you or give you any qualifying details, would you be inclined to believe me?
originally posted by: opethPA
originally posted by: facedye
originally posted by: opethPA
Or in Awakened Mind types the defacto choice is to blame the CIA, FBI ,NSA, USA regardless of how little is known because someone on 4Chan heard a rumor on Reddit which someone else Tweeted.
Hell proof isnt given to the public while a case is fluid on simple crime let alone involving world based actors yet people are crying "what proof do they have". I would assume people crying about the lack of proof have never been invovled in an emergent or fluid situation and think everything fits in a nice 60 min episode like on TV.
Dont really care if that loses me stars or flags here, at one point this site was supposed to be about denying ignorance and not just fitting a narrative.
you don't think you're conforming to a narrative when you accept extraordinary lack of evidence for extraordinary claims by way of the situation being "fluid"?
did you read the DNI report? they question their own assertions page after page. I don't know that that would be the appropriate behavior when you actually have evidence.
if I work for the FBI and tell you your best friend killed someone in the woods last night, but told you I can't prove it to you or give you any qualifying details, would you be inclined to believe me?
In your example if the case was not closed or close to closure I wouldn't tell you anything beyond what you needed to know , that is basic opsec.
if I work for the FBI and tell you your best friend killed someone in the woods last night, but told you I can't prove it to you or give you any qualifying details, would you be inclined to believe me?
To Moscow, Humphrey certainly was preferable to Richard Nixon, who had founded and built his career on opposing communism and was considered profoundly anti-Soviet. Our leadership was growing seriously concerned that he might win the election. As a result the top Soviet leaders took an extraordinary step, unprecedented in the history of Soviet-American relations, by secretly offering Humphrey any conceivable help in his election campaign—including financial aid.
I received a top-secret instruction to that effect from Gromyko person-ally and did my utmost to dissuade him from embarking on such a dangerous venture, which if discovered certainly would have backfired and ensured Humphrey's defeat, to say nothing of the real trouble it would have caused for Soviet-American relations. Gromyko answered laconically, "There is a decision, you carry it out.
"Shortly afterward, I happened to be at breakfast at Humphrey's home.Naturally, we talked about the election campaign, so I tried to take advantage of that to carry out my instructions as tactfully as possible. I asked him how his campaign was going, and then I moved the conversation diplomatically to the state of his campaign finances. Humphrey, I must say, was not only a very intelligent but also a very clever man. He knew at once what was going on. He told me it was more than enough for him to have Moscow's good wishes, which he highly appreciated. The matter was thus settled to our mutual relief, never to be discussed again.
originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: facedye
if I work for the FBI and tell you your best friend killed someone in the woods last night, but told you I can't prove it to you or give you any qualifying details, would you be inclined to believe me?
If I knew my friend was a killer: absolutely. Vladimir Putin was a KGB officer. The KGB covertly tried to influence American elections. Here is former Russian ambassador to the United States describing events that took place in 1968:
To Moscow, Humphrey certainly was preferable to Richard Nixon, who had founded and built his career on opposing communism and was considered profoundly anti-Soviet. Our leadership was growing seriously concerned that he might win the election. As a result the top Soviet leaders took an extraordinary step, unprecedented in the history of Soviet-American relations, by secretly offering Humphrey any conceivable help in his election campaign—including financial aid
.I received a top-secret instruction to that effect from Gromyko person-ally and did my utmost to dissuade him from embarking on such a dangerous venture, which if discovered certainly would have backfired and ensured Humphrey's defeat, to say nothing of the real trouble it would have caused for Soviet-American relations. Gromyko answered laconically, "There is a decision, you carry it out.
"Shortly afterward, I happened to be at breakfast at Humphrey's home.Naturally, we talked about the election campaign, so I tried to take advantage of that to carry out my instructions as tactfully as possible. I asked him how his campaign was going, and then I moved the conversation diplomatically to the state of his campaign finances. Humphrey, I must say, was not only a very intelligent but also a very clever man. He knew at once what was going on. He told me it was more than enough for him to have Moscow's good wishes, which he highly appreciated. The matter was thus settled to our mutual relief, never to be discussed again.
Anatoli Dobrynin, "In Confidence," p. 195.
originally posted by: IkNOwSTuff
From what Ive seen and read John McCain is no hero.
...
Your a hero when you defend your homeland, I cant think of a word low enough to describe people who travel overseas to kill others because their Gov was worried about
seriously, in blunt words, what is your point?
originally posted by: facedye
originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: facedye
if I work for the FBI and tell you your best friend killed someone in the woods last night, but told you I can't prove it to you or give you any qualifying details, would you be inclined to believe me?
If I knew my friend was a killer: absolutely. Vladimir Putin was a KGB officer. The KGB covertly tried to influence American elections. Here is former Russian ambassador to the United States describing events that took place in 1968:
To Moscow, Humphrey certainly was preferable to Richard Nixon, who had founded and built his career on opposing communism and was considered profoundly anti-Soviet. Our leadership was growing seriously concerned that he might win the election. As a result the top Soviet leaders took an extraordinary step, unprecedented in the history of Soviet-American relations, by secretly offering Humphrey any conceivable help in his election campaign—including financial aid
.I received a top-secret instruction to that effect from Gromyko person-ally and did my utmost to dissuade him from embarking on such a dangerous venture, which if discovered certainly would have backfired and ensured Humphrey's defeat, to say nothing of the real trouble it would have caused for Soviet-American relations. Gromyko answered laconically, "There is a decision, you carry it out.
"Shortly afterward, I happened to be at breakfast at Humphrey's home.Naturally, we talked about the election campaign, so I tried to take advantage of that to carry out my instructions as tactfully as possible. I asked him how his campaign was going, and then I moved the conversation diplomatically to the state of his campaign finances. Humphrey, I must say, was not only a very intelligent but also a very clever man. He knew at once what was going on. He told me it was more than enough for him to have Moscow's good wishes, which he highly appreciated. The matter was thus settled to our mutual relief, never to be discussed again.
Anatoli Dobrynin, "In Confidence," p. 195.
wow you really just keep grasping. unreal.
what are you getting at? are you really going to sit there and not consider how many of our previous presidents have been heavily tied to the intelligence community themselves prior to holding office?
seriously, in blunt words, what is your point?
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: IkNOwSTuff
From what Ive seen and read John McCain is no hero.
...
Your a hero when you defend your homeland, I cant think of a word low enough to describe people who travel overseas to kill others because their Gov was worried about
That includes WW1, WW2, Korean, Viet Name, Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans in your definition of not being able to think of a "word low enough to describe" them.
You can call those folks whatever you like from the comfort of your keyboard, many of those people you despise fought for your right to do so, but personally I won't be taking anything you say seriously again.
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: facedye
originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: facedye
if I work for the FBI and tell you your best friend killed someone in the woods last night, but told you I can't prove it to you or give you any qualifying details, would you be inclined to believe me?
If I knew my friend was a killer: absolutely. Vladimir Putin was a KGB officer. The KGB covertly tried to influence American elections. Here is former Russian ambassador to the United States describing events that took place in 1968:
To Moscow, Humphrey certainly was preferable to Richard Nixon, who had founded and built his career on opposing communism and was considered profoundly anti-Soviet. Our leadership was growing seriously concerned that he might win the election. As a result the top Soviet leaders took an extraordinary step, unprecedented in the history of Soviet-American relations, by secretly offering Humphrey any conceivable help in his election campaign—including financial aid
.I received a top-secret instruction to that effect from Gromyko person-ally and did my utmost to dissuade him from embarking on such a dangerous venture, which if discovered certainly would have backfired and ensured Humphrey's defeat, to say nothing of the real trouble it would have caused for Soviet-American relations. Gromyko answered laconically, "There is a decision, you carry it out.
"Shortly afterward, I happened to be at breakfast at Humphrey's home.Naturally, we talked about the election campaign, so I tried to take advantage of that to carry out my instructions as tactfully as possible. I asked him how his campaign was going, and then I moved the conversation diplomatically to the state of his campaign finances. Humphrey, I must say, was not only a very intelligent but also a very clever man. He knew at once what was going on. He told me it was more than enough for him to have Moscow's good wishes, which he highly appreciated. The matter was thus settled to our mutual relief, never to be discussed again.
Anatoli Dobrynin, "In Confidence," p. 195.
wow you really just keep grasping. unreal.
what are you getting at? are you really going to sit there and not consider how many of our previous presidents have been heavily tied to the intelligence community themselves prior to holding office?
seriously, in blunt words, what is your point?
Thousands...
Vladimir Putin has had thousands of Journalists and political opponents beaten, tortured, arrested and killed and continues to do so today.
originally posted by: Zimnydran
Because.... they are part of the push for globalization.
Because Americans have just pointed the ship on a different course and there are some unhappy people. Brexit put England on a new course....and other nations seems set to do the same.
A lot of time. money and effort went in getting America on the path to globalization and they will do anything they can to prevent us from being sovereign.
originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: facedye
seriously, in blunt words, what is your point?
In blunt words: the question is not whether the Russians tried to help Trump become President, the question is: Did Trump knowingly accept their help? Humphrey didn't. Did Trump? That would explain his acceptance of the Russian seizure of Crimea, wouldn't it? Why is he trying to downplay the fact that Russian media made it very clear they wanted him to win? And it doesn't strike you as odd that the Duma would toast Trump's victory? Did they do that when Obama won?