Cyberspace present an ideal medium for false flag operations. British intelligence have probably the world most sophisticated specialists
in false flag operations. And history of false flag operations is going back to emperor Nero (A
Fake False Flag Hoover Institution)
The burning of Rome by Nero, which he blamed on the Christians; the forging of the Zinoviev Letter in 1924 by elements connected
to MI5 in order to discredit the Labour party during the 1924 British general election; the Mukden Incident in which Japanese saboteurs
created a pretext for the invasion of China in 1931, and the Gleiwitz incident in which the SS faked an attack on Germany by Poland
in September 1939. Unlike the World’s Fair, all these were genuine False Flag incidents.
It is clear the CIA uses hacks for false flag operations and has tools that do just that -- imitate malware from a particular
state or some hacker group, while performing the hack themselves. Then blaming the target of this false flag operation. False flag operation
in cyberspace are much easier then with material object as there are more possibilities to hide the trace. And use accomplices
for the "investigation" if the hack occurred on the USA or allies territory.
And it is clear that this can be very powerful tool by which CIA and other agencies have a veto power of any politician:
On the other hand, combine “Umbrage” with the seemingly invincible false narrative that President Donald Trump is a tool of
Russian interests, and plenty of Americans would be willing to believe Trump really does have substantial ties to the Kremlin, something
that has not been proven. Even now there is still no publicly available evidence the Trump campaign somehow colluded with the Russian
government last year. Sources in newspaper articles are never identified. All that exists is the alleged say-so of faceless CIA spooks
and people like former CIA employee and would-be presidential spoiler Evan McMullin whose motives are questionable.
In other words any politician who is considered to be a threat to intelligence agencies can be easily blackmailed and possibly politically
destroyed using well crafted falsifications of their connection with suitable for the particular case foreign power with the ample evidence
planted via false flag operations.
For example, what if Crowdstrike planted worms, or other signs of Russian intrusion to hide the fact that this hack was actually
a leak (download of tenails to a UCB drive by an insider, possible Seth Rich), and then attributed their falsified, planted findings
to "evil Russian hackers" in an attempt to to create a smoke screen that district form content of the emails which reveals that Hillary
stooges in DNC (and DNC in general what completely was under control Hillary operatives) to derail Sanders and ensure Hillary
victory in Democratic primaries.
A fake attack from Russia could also have been easily organized to solidify the evidence as foreign intelligence agencies consider
Russian hacking "community" as one of the most lucrative sources of information, email leaks, and blackmail of Russian officials
(see Shaltai Boltai hacking group story below.) And if Russians are for some reason are not available there are always Estonians,
Latvian and Ukrainians or Georgians who would happily lend a helping hand pretending to be Russians and operating from Russian IP space.
I sometimes wonder, if what is called "black web" represents the playground for intelligence agencies to a larger extent than for criminal
hackers. Perfect for demonization of a "strategic competitor" -- you can attribute to the "bad guys" of anything your want. Hacking
Presidential election in favor of Trump -- yes of cause. Attempt to hack voting machines (which are not connected to Internet)
more difficult but also possible.
In other words to organize false flag operation in cyberspace is a "no-brainer." And to trace it and distinguish flag flag operation
from a real attack is very difficult as at the time you get to the computers and able to analyze them the horse already left the barn
(and to add insult to injury eliminated or planted false trances of the attack). And even if you monitoring services pick up some
suspicious activities in real time how to tell if this is a real of false flag if, for example botnets can be used for sophisticated
set of redirections which even NSA might not be able to trace (especially if the guys who do it are from NSA ;-)
Add to this tremendous capabilities of intelligence services to subvert and exploit security tools installed (such as Kaspersky,
or MacAfee, of Microsoft Security Services) and the situation looks completly hopeless. Cyberspace is and will remain a paradise
for false flag operations.
Cyberspace is and will remain a paradise for false flag operations. Perfect for demonization of a "strategic
competitor" -- you can attribute to the "bad guys" of anything your want. Hacking Presidential election in favor of Trump
-- yes of cause. Attempt to hack voting machines (which are not connected to Internet) -- more difficult, but also possible ;-).
In cyberspace all signs of the attack such as IP address, language and codepages used during compilation of binaries, timestamps
can be forged. False identities can be constructed to "validate" planted narrative (Guccifer
2.0 might be one such example ) and used for nefarious purposes.
It you want a really dirty twisted tech/IT environment you can join one of hacker groups. Who manipulates whom in such groups is
not clear at all but intelligence agencies are not passive observers of the hacking scheme. They are active participants.
There has been no public detail as to the nature of the treason charges against Mikhailov, Dokuchayev, and Stoyanov. The Interfax
news agency on January 31 quoted "sources familiar with the situation" as saying that Mikhailov and Dokuchayev were suspected of
relaying confidential information to the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).
Pavlov told RFE/RL the individuals were suspected
of passing on classified information to U.S. intelligence, but not necessarily the CIA.
"We have no information about the CIA" in the matter, he said.
Later the head of the group got two year prison sentence.
After a two-day trial conducted behind closed doors, the Moscow City Court on Thursday sentenced Vladimir Anikeyev, the head of
a hacking group that the authorities cracked down on last winter, to two years in a penal colony.
The state prosecutor had asked for a sentence of two and a half years.
Mr. Anikeyev, a former journalist who led a collective known as Shaltai Boltai — Humpty Dumpty — until his arrest last November,
admitted his guilt in illegally gaining access to the private data of a number of targets, including high-ranking officials, businessmen
and journalists, according to Russian news reports.
His cooperation with law enforcement made a swift trial possible, but the involvement of classified information meant it was closed
to the public.
Among those whose email inboxes and mobile phones are said to have been penetrated are Natalya Timakova, the spokeswoman for
Dmitri A. Medvedev, the prime minister and former president; Arkady Dvorkovich, a deputy prime minister; Andrei Belousov, an adviser
to President Vladimir V. Putin and a former minister of economic development; and Dmitri Kiselyev, the Russian government’s chief
propagandist.
Some of the information obtained by Shaltai Boltai was auctioned online. Emails stolen from Mrs. Timakova, for instance, netted
Mr. Anikeyev’s team 150 bitcoins. Other information was used to blackmail officials, who had to pay Shaltai Boltai to keep it confidential.
Shaltai-Boltai, or Humpty Dumpty, terrorised Russian officials for three years, combining hacking, leaking and extortion
Not much know about their activities (Wikipedia) or the personalities
of People who were charged with treason (three members of this group). Ther central figure among those three was Sergei Mikhailov,
who was the deputy director of FSB's Center for Information Security
Mr. Mikhailov’s possible ties to Shaltai Boltai emerged in Russian news reports. Other Russian news outlets reported a competing
theory for the intelligence officer’s arrest: that he had passed to the F.B.I. secrets about
Russia’s government-backed hacking programs, helping in the investigation of Russian meddling in the presidential election.
Anonymous International is a hacking group
known for leaking Russian government
information and personal documents of government officials. They target high-ranking members of the government, large corporations,
and media, and sell the stolen data. These actions are publicized on their blog, Shaltai Boltai, (Шалтай-Болтай,
Russian for "Humpty
Dumpty"), the name by which the group is also known.[1][2]
Over a period of 15 months the group published information about Russian politicians on 75 separate occasions.
In October 2016, Vladimir Anikeev (Владимир Аникеев), known under the
handle of "Lewis," considered the group's leader, was arrested
and charged with unlawful access to computer information. In addition to Anikeev, five more people were detained, among them one
of the leaders of the FSB's
Information Security Center, Sergei Mikhailov, and his deputy Dmitry Dokuchaev, as well as Ruslan Stoyanov, the former head of
Kaspersky Lab's Computer Incident Investigation Department.
=== from Mikhailov case - Wikipedia =====================================================================================
In December 2016, officers of the CIS FSB Sergey Mikhailov, Dmitry Dokuchaev, head of the cybercrime investigation department
of Kaspersky Lab Ruslan Stoyanov, and Georgy Fomchenkov were arrested for treason. After that, the largest international media published
information according to which the case of Aeroflot was again in the news, because based on the new data, the real reason for the
prosecution of Vrublevsky was his investigation materials against Mikhailov and the rest of those arrested as long back as in 2010
on the basis of which he privately accused the a group of individuals working for foreign intelligence agencies to promote the
myth of Russian cyber crime. Ultimately, this group of people was able to successfully fabricate the case against Vrublevsky
himself. In this case, in 2016 was shed light on the early investigation of Vrublevsky and Mikhailov's group was arrested by the
Self Security Unit of the FSB of Russia.[28][29][30]
In January 2017, it became known that the head of the site "Humpty Dumpty", journalist Vladimir Anikeev, also known as the
"Anonymous International", who hacked the mail of Russian businessmen and high-ranking officials, was detained shortly before the
arrest of FSB officers. In January, Rosbalt told about the circumstances of the capture of Anikeev: the FSB detained him in
October 2016, and later, according to his testimony, high-ranking FSB officers Dmitry Dokuchayev and his boss Sergey Mikhailov were
arrested. They were accused of state treason and cooperation with the CIA.
In February 2017, Reuters reported that the case of a state treason in the FSB was due to Vrublevsky's testimony from 2010.[31]
In March 2017, the US Department of Justice announces the involvement of Sergei Mikhailov and Dmitry Dokuchaev in the hacking
of 500 million Yahoo mail accounts.[32]
In the same month, information is published that the accusation in the state treason is directly related to the transfer of data
on the activities of Pavel Vrublevsky to foreign special services back in 2010. In response to the arrests of the US, they accused
a number of the same FSB officers (Dokuchaev) of cybercrime and announced them on the international wanted list, posting their photos
on the FBI website, which resulted in a complete rupture of cooperation between
the United States and
Russia on cybercrime.
On June 12, 2017, a significant part of the documents on the Mikhailov case was sealed with a "secret" stamp, Rosbalt reported,
citing an informed source.[33]
Rafia Shaikh in her Jan 26, 2017
article (Wccftech) notes that "the accusation of Mikhailov tipping
US officials is huge, which, if true, would mean that the US had employed spies right in the Kremlin’s cybersecurity center."
Regardless of Fomenko’s connection with Russian security agencies or election hackers, the accusation of Mikhailov tipping US
officials is huge, which, if true, would mean that the US had employed spies right in the Kremlin’s cybersecurity center.
In a separate report, it was also suggested that Mikhailov could be a member of the hacker collective “Anonymous International”
known in Russia as “Shaltai Boltai”. Anonymous International has on various occasions leaked private emails and other data to embarrass
public Russian figures, but none of these leaks have ever resulted in any arrests since the content of these revelations is more
“embarrassing than criminal,” Moscow Times
added.
Reportedly the second-most senior figure in the Center for Information Security at the FSB, Mikhailov is also responsible
for operating Cozy Bear, another APT (Advanced Persistent
Threat) group. His arrest is being called as the highest-profile case within the Russian security agency since the breakup of the
Soviet Union.
Sergei Mikhailov was arrested one year ago,
on Dec. 5, 2016. Officers of the agency’s internal security division seized him at his office and led him away with a sack over his
head. Mikhailov is a black belt in karate and the officers feared that he might resist, explained one of the colonel’s acquaintances.
Prior to his arrest, Mikhailov was head of the 2nd Directorate of the FSB’s Information Security Center (TsIB)
and within Russian intelligence circles he was considered the main authority on cybercrime.
Now he and three other men — Dmitry Dokuchayev,
an FSB major and former criminal hacker, accused in the U.S. of hacking 500 million Yahoo! accounts in 2014;
Ruslan Stoyanov, a former Kaspersky Lab employee; and
Georgy Fomchenkov, a little-known internet entrepreneur — are suspected
of state treason. The four are being held in Moscow’s high-security Lefortovo Prison
Members of Shaltai-Boltai hacking gang have admitted to
forging some parts of the correspondence that they hacked. The putative aim was to boost the profile of their group.
Reading between the lines of this, we can hypothesize that Shaltay-Boltay were indeed not hackers in a conventional sense. They were
traders in an illicit information economy, including fabricating that information with possible input or at the request of foreign intelligence
agencies (of course, for solid remuneration).
Saint Petersburg, Savushkina, 55 is the most famous office building in the world, thanks to the relentless promotion of the United
States government, the CIA, FBI, and by the powers of the entire Western media, financed by Western governments. VOA, NPR, and Svoboda,
by the government of the US; the BBC by the government of the UK; CNN by the governments of Saudi Arabia; the DW, by the government
of Germany; and so on and so forth. You name it, they all punched time to promote this office building.
To be specific, it's not even a building, but several adjoined buildings that cover an entire city block, an urban development
plan common for Saint Pete's. That's why every business here has the address of Savushkina, 55 followed by a building number. You
can take a virtual tour around it, to see for yourself. The buildings are shared by several dozens of private businesses, by the
local Police department, and by the newsrooms of half a dozen Russia Media sources like the FAN (Federal News Agency), the Neva News
(Nevskie Novosti), Political Russia, Kharkov News Agency, publishing Ukrainian news, and others. They all are privately owned and
operated and generate over 55 million unique visitors per month. Overall, several thousand people come to this building to work every
morning. But you wouldn't know this by account of Western media. For over two years now, these people are being harassed and collectively
branded as "THE KREMLIN TROLLS."
The building is very popular because it's located in a quiet historical neighborhood and is in walking distance from a suburban
train station. It's newly renovated offices offer open floor plans with Scandinavian fleur so very appreciated by the news people.
In addition, the rent for this building is less than in center city. Which is why Evgeny Zubarev, a former top editor for the RIA
NEWS, choose it for his media startup. He took several offices allowing him to manage his growing media giant without wasting time
to commute. Now, the FAN newsroom alone employs about 300 journalists.
This wasn't always the case.
At the beginning of 2014, the building was still under construction and renovation, when an anti-Russian government group
of hackers called first "The Anonymous International" and latter "Shaltay-B0ltay" fingered it as the "Kremlin trolls' layer."
Their wordpress blog is still here. It was last updated on November 2016. Its title states: "Anonymous International. Shaltay
Boltay/Press Secretary of the group. Creating reality and giving meaning to words."
November 7, 2014, Khodorkovsky, who acted as an integral part of the CIA "Kremlin trolls" Project, tweeted the picture of one
of the entrances to one of the buildings saying: "Savuchkina 55. New home for bots. ID check system. Not a sign there. I won't say
who took the photo."
... ... ...
The phone number on the picture 324-56-06 belongs to the commercial real estate company
Praktis Consulting & Brokerage that managed the rent of offices.
Midsummer 2014, Evgeny Zubarev with his start up and several hundred journalists moved in, along with the Police department, and
a slew of other businesses people. Little did they know what was to come.
The best way to get information is to make it up.
Everything what we know now about the so-called "Kremlin trolls from the Internet Research Agency paid by Putin's favorite
chef," came from one source, a group of CIA spies that used the mascot of Shaltay-Boltay, or Humpty-Dumpty, for their collective
online persona.
They were arrested in November 2016 and
revealed as the FSB and former FSB officers . One of them even managed a security department for the Kaspersky Lab. They all
were people highly skilled and educated in manipulating and creating large online databases, in any online research imagined, and
the knowledge of hacking and altering databases, including those that were run by the Russian government. They weren't poor people.
They weren't there for the money. They were ideologically driven. Their hatred towards Russia and its people was the motive for their
actions.
At some point, Gazeta.ru, an online Russophobic publication, suggested that " Shaltai-Boltai was just a distraction meant to confuse
everybody." They themselves were more concise by stating that they were working to change the reality.
Russian authorities, the courts, and the lawyers, refused to call these men hackers. There was a reason for this. They weren't
so much hackers in a classic sense, as in when someone gains access to real information and copies it. This group wasn't necessarily
hacking existing information, but planting information. They were creating files about fake nonexistent companies and employees,
files with blurry fake paystubs, memos, emails, phone messages and so on. The fakes looked convincing, but they still were forgeries
that could be easy disproved for someone who had access to the real information.
That's when the hacking took place, when the FSB agents went into government databases and created records of people and companies
that didn't exist.
I think that part of the reasons why some of them got the mild sentences of three years in general security prison, and some were
left free, wasn't just the fact that they agreed to collaborate with the Russian government, but also the fact that they didn't actually
steal information from government officials like Medvedev and his press secretary, Nataliya Timakova, or the owner of the largest
in Europe catering business, Evgeny Prigozhin. They made information up and claimed that it was real.
These guys gave a bad name to all hackers, whistleblowers, leakers and spies. Now, journalists presented with some "hacked" and
leaked secrets has to think it over, less they end up with an egg on their face like journos from the Fontanka, Vedomosti and Novaya
Gazeta in case of the "Kremlin's trolls."
If we accept that the Shaltay-Boltay group was working to create and distribute documents they forged, claiming that those files
were "hacked," we would also understand a mysterious statement made by them to BuzzFeed.
"We are trying to change reality. Reality has indeed begun to change as a result of the appearance of our information in public
," wrote the representative, whose email account is named Shaltai Boltai, which is the Russian for tragic nursery rhyme hero Humpty
Dumpty."
Bazzfeed also said back in 2014, that " The leak from the Internet Research Agency is the first time specific comments under
news articles can be directly traced to a Russian campaign." Now, this is a very important grave mark.
Just think about this working scheme: Shaltay-Boltay with a group of anti-government "activists" created the "Internet Research
Agency," they and some "activists" created 470 FaceBook accounts used to post comments that looked unmistakably "trollish."
After that other, CIA affiliated entities, like the entire Western Media, claimed the "Russian interference in the US election."
Finally, the ODNI published a report lacking any evidence in it.
The link to their report is here, but I don't recommend you to read it. You will gain as much information by reading this report
as you would by chewing on some wet newspaper. Ask my dog for details.
Only three paragraphs is interesting on the page 4:
"Russia used trolls as well as RT as part of its influence efforts to denigrate Secretary Clinton. This effort amplified stories
on scandals about Secretary Clinton and the role of WikiLeaks in the election campaign.
The likely financier of the so-called Internet Research Agency of professional trolls located in Saint Petersburg is a close
Putin ally with ties to Russian intelligence.
A journalist who is a leading expert on the Internet Research Agency claimed that some social media accounts that appear to
be tied to Russia's professional trolls -- because they previously were devoted to supporting Russian actions in Ukraine -- started
to advocate for President-elect Trump as early as December 2015."
In other words, in its report with a subtitle: "Background to "Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections":
The Analytic Process and Cyber Incident Attribution" the Office of the Director of National Intelligence ODNI, is quoting the Shaltay-Boltay,
a group that had been proved to work for the CIA by "creating reality."
The only reason why they don't provide us with evidence, with at least one lousy IP address with the Russian trace roots that
would convincingly point at the company named the Internet Research Agency, is because this company never existed, it never had any
IP addresses assigned to it that would be verifiable via third parties like RIPE network coordination and via online domain tools.
We understand that having hundreds of people working ten to twelve hours a day, as they claimed, posting hundreds messages hourly,
would use huge amount of bandwidth. They would need a very fast internet connection with unlimited bandwidth that only a business
can get. Inevitably, this internet connection would come with the assigned IP addresses. No internet provider would let this kind
of bandwidth hog to create this kind traffic without being forced to separate them from other customers.
One example, a woman with the last name Malcheva filed a lawsuit in court against the companies "Internet Research, LLC" and "TEKA,
LLC," claiming unpaid wages.
An IP address that was assigned to a luxury hotel in Saint-Petersburg. A hotel that was awarded multiple international awards
for excellence. An immensely popular hotel among discriminating travelers. A very expensive hotel located in the center of a historic
city. The woman claimed that she was an "online troll' working from this location ten hours a day with hundreds of other virtual
trolls. The judge didn't believe her. Would you?
People from the Shaltay-Boltay group weren't hackers in the proper terms because they worked with and for the CIA. Middle-of
the-road and run-of-the-mill intelligence agencies would collect and analyze information for their governments. The CIA invents information,
then goes on to manufacture and forge documents in support of their invented information; they then recruit people inside other countries
and other governments to claim that they "obtained" this explosive evidence. Being the dirty cops that they are, the CIA doesn't
obtain and secure evidence, but instead they plant fake evidence on their victims.
By this act alone they change our current and past reality, and they change our future. They change our history by forging never
existing "proof" of invented myths. They hire and train groups of military men to act as "protesters" around government buildings,
while other military men from other countries shoot at unsuspected bystanders whose death allows Washington to claim the sovereign
governments' wrongdoing.
CIA-operated groups arrest and kill government officials or force them to flee, like in Ukraine. They take over a couple of government
buildings and declare their victory over a huge country, just like it happened in Russia in 1991 and 1993 and in Ukraine in 2005
and 2014. For some reason, they claim that governments are those people who take over a couple of buildings in one city. When in
fact, our countries' governments are those people whose names we wrote on ballots, regardless of where these people are located.
We don't run around like chickens with our heads cut off electing a new president every time our current president leaves the country.
Going back to the CIA's Humpty-Dumpty project that came online sometime in 2013. Why would anyone name their enterprise after
such predictable failure, you might ask. Because, in the Russian alliteration, Shalti-Boltai means "shake up and brag about it" and
not as in its original Carroll's version of "humping and dumping."
I actually listened to the clip itself, in which they brought up the Internet Research Agency" from SP. Knowing full well
that the hackers who "leaked" the information about this "Agency" were arrested and successfully charged for treason because they
worked for the CIA should prevent the CIA to run fake news about the entities and people they themselves made up. You would think
that the matter of the "Kremlin trolls from Saint Petersburg" should be dead and buried after the arrest. The CIA and other 16 intelligence
agencies should know better than to use information that is being known now as "discovered' with their "help."
Because it's all fake and we know it.
We also know everything that the CIA touches is fake. Speaking in layman's term, it's as if all those middle aged bald guys
would start licking their balls while claiming to be in fulfilling relations. If it's just you, guys, there is no relations. It's
just you. Deal with it!
The American intelligence community cannot claim an existence of threats against America if all fingers in those "threats" are
pointing back at the American intelligence community.
By stating that someone interfered with the US election using the Internet Research Agency in SP, is plainly to state that it's
CIA that interfered in the American elections.
Everybody understood that the system is pretty well rigged on federal level and there two levels of justice -- one for neoliberal
"masters of the universe" who are by-and-large above the law, and another for shmucks. That's not a news. The news is the
level of sophistication is escaping the changes and use of the accusation of hacking falsified via false flag operation as a new
smokescreen to pass the blame to selected scapegoat.
Here we see very successful efforts to unleash Neo-McCarthyism campaign and put all the blame for Hillary defeat on Russians, which
later was extended into the color revolution against Trump of falsified changed of Russia collision. Few people understand the US MSM
is just a propaganda department of the US intelligence agencies and do their bidding. The fact that at some point CIA controlled major
journalists was known from Church commission hearings. And there was some backlash. But now the situation reversed and due to the regime
to total surveillance their capability to dictate the agenda far exceed the level that was in the past.
moreover, now CIA cyberwarriors can cook any accusation using their "technical capabilities" and spread is using subservant MSM in
a matter of days creating the wave of hate which far exceed what was described in famous dystopian novel 1984 by George Orwell.
Refuting those "cooked" intrusions (which are a new and very nasty form of false flag operations) is difficult what when (and if) it
is done, typically it is too late. As Hermann Goering said (Hermann Goering War
Games):
“Of course the people don’t want war. But after all, it’s the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it’s always
a simple matter to drag the people along whether it’s a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.
Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them
they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger.”
— Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials
... ... ...
His comments were made privately to Gustave Gilbert, a German-speaking American intelligence officer and psychologist who was granted
free access by the Allies to all the prisoners held in the Nuremberg jail. Gilbert kept a journal of his observations of the proceedings
and his conversations with the prisoners, which he later published in the book Nuremberg Diary. The quote offered above was
part of a conversation Gilbert held with a dejected Hermann Goering in his cell on the evening of 18 April 1946, as
the trials were halted for a three-day Easter recess.
Paradoxically while the value of cyberspace for offensive operations against adversaries is unclear, it is clear that it has tremendous
potential for conducting false flag operations serving as a pretext for real wars, or some "Show trials" of dissidents in best Stalin
traditions. and witch hunt against Trump is a just form of Show Trials in a court of public opinion.
Everything can be forged in cyberspace -- source of attack, attack methods. Fake personalities like
Guccifer 2.0 can be created to support the accusations. Sky is the limit
for false flag operations in cyberspace. Steele dossier in this sense is old school falsification. It is "DNC hack" that is the
harbinger of things to come.
Sky is the limit for false flag operations in cyberspace. Steele dossier in this sense is old school
falsification. It is "DNC hack" that is the harbinger of things to come.
We may feel uneasy by the idea that people now could be so easily manipulated into sacrificing themselves in wars at the whims of
the neoliberal elite, but perhaps we can be more concerned (and maybe even scared) at the thought that the capabilities to deceive us
are now greater not less that it was before. Much greater. They now really can create "artificial reality" using MSM.
In any case capabilities of intelligence agencies to hatch and then inject into MSM "DNC hack style disinformation" to blackmail
a major political figure using a "cyberspace" false flag operation are now enormous. Even POTUS can be the target of such blackmail.
In this sense the current Russiagate hysteria makes Joseph McCartney like a pretty uninventive, even somewhat dull guy with very limited
capabilities to frame his victims ;-) Recently even Nunes was accused (with impunity) to be a Russian agent. This is "communists
under each bed" type of witch hunt on a new level.
Now we know that Russiagate was initially the criminal plot to exonerate Hillary and derail Sanders campaign hatched by intelligence
community in cooperation with connected members of Clinton campaign like John Podesta (who as a former WH chief of staff has deep connections
to "intelligence community".) Intelligence agencies and journalists connected with intelligence services were recruited and the
well planned obfuscation campaign started. which later morphed into color regulation against Trump (typical for color revolution charges
of rigged election were replaced by accusation of "collision" with foreign power.) All this was done with full cooperation
and eager participation of NYT, WaPo, CNN. MSNBC and other neoliberal outlets. As the result in May 2016 a Special Prosecutor was appointed
to take care of Trump removal.
Sanders did not have the courage to switch to alternative Open Convention to get a nomination from Democratic Party. He was so aftraid
(or was threatened, the meaning of his visit with Obama is not known) that he chose to betray his voters and support Hillary. So with
the help of neoliberal MSM a brazen plot to exonerate Hillary Clinton from a clear violation of the law (with regard to the way she
handled classified information with her private email server; absolutely a crime, absolutely a felony) did succeed. In this
sense Russiagate is in reality FBI-gate.
It is an established fact that Comey and the senior DOJ officials conducted a fake criminal investigation of Hillary Clinton. Following
none of the regular rules, gave her every break in the book, immunized all kinds of people, allowed the destruction of evidence, no
grand jury, no subpoenas, no search warrant. That was not an investigation, that was a Potemkin village. It was a farce.
DOJ should convene grand jury to indict the major players (whose in high positions in DOJ and FBI should be fired). If like torturers
in Bush II era will not be brought to justice this is just another sign that the USA is neither a republic not a democracy.
Unfortunately Trump while a good tactician, is not strategic thinker on any level. He might have some courage which allowed him to
fire Comey, and then tell that truth to American people that this firing is about "Russiagate". But you need more that courage
to take on "deep state". You need to have a plan. You need to have a coalition. And we do not know if Trump was threatened
or not (see Chuck Schumer remark above.) He should address the nation from Oval Office and tell that FBI story can only be believed
by people with IQ below 70. And that DOJ should immediately appoint a Special Prosecutor investigating this matter. But
this will most probably just a fantasy.
Summarizing we can say that "FISA memo" is a testimony of tremendous personal courage of Nunes (note that one neoliberal MSM jerk
already accused him being a Russian spy). He did tremendous job driven by noble motives of restoring justice. And his memo undermined
the Color revolution against Trump by making Mueller position more vulnerable as he is clearly a member of the gang of FBI Mayberry
Machiavellians. It also put Rosenstein into defensive position. But this is an uphill battle and he might lose at the end of the
date. The neoliberal swamp is way too powerful and can consume even such courageous people as Nunes.
One year ago, most people on either side of Atlantic had scant or no knowledge of the NSA and its activities. Edward Snowden’s revelations
changed all that and rocked one of the pillars of transatlantic relations. It proved that the USA (as well as its ally Israel,
which probably enjoys high level of cooperation) has sophisticated program of weaponizing worms and other malware. this is very
similar to the way biological weapns are produced. You kate something from "natural habitats" and modifies it for specific purposes
to be more dealy, less detctable and such. like is the case with biological weapons such an activity should be prohibited, but currently
it is not.
But NSA was not the only player in development weapons for cyberspace. CIA, which is rumored to be highly envious of NSA elected
status brought by universal Internet connectivity and importance of electronic communication, has an independent program to produce
similar weapons as well. Which is easy as both agencies are effectivly out of control of civil government and can spend allocated funds
"as they wish".
the net result of this activity eventually was leaks and parts of this leak were published WikiLeaks as so called "Vault 7". Vault
7 is a series of documents that WikiLeaks started publishing on 7 March 2017.
The most important among those revelations was that CIA cultivated capabilities for false flag operations in cyberspace. Actually
cyberspace is an ideal space for false flag operation and using such unscrupulous middleman as Crowdstrike you can both the plant the
worm or other traces and later "discover" it. So two competing rivals were developing a set of sophisticated cyber weapons (and
Stuxnet was really a new generation of malware opening new turn in the this cyberweapns race0 , but CIA collection has a twist
-- its focus of attribution of cyber attack to other party (CIA Capable
of Cyber 'False Flag' to Blame Russia):
As Wikileaks notes, the UMBRAGE group and its related projects allow the CIA to misdirect the attribution of cyber attacks by
“leaving behind the ‘fingerprints’ of the very groups that the attack techniques were stolen from.”
In other words, the CIA’s sophisticated hacking tools all have a “signature” marking them as originating from the agency. In order
to avoid arousing suspicion as to the true extent of its covert cyber operations, the CIA has employed UMBRAGE’s techniques in order
to create signatures that allow multiple attacks to be attributed to various entities – instead of the real point of origin at the
CIA – while also increasing its total number of attack types.
Other parts of the release similarly focus on avoiding the attribution of cyberattacks or malware infestations to the CIA during
forensic reviews of such attacks. In a document titled “Development
Tradecraft DOs and DON’Ts,” hackers and code writers are warned “DO NOT leave data in a binary file that demonstrates CIA,
U.S. [government] or its witting partner companies’ involvement in the creation or use of the binary/tool.” It then states that
“attribution of binary/tool/etc. by an adversary can cause irreversible impacts to past, present and future U.S. [government]
operations and equities.”
While a major motivating factor in the CIA’s use of UMBRAGE is to cover it tracks, events over the
past few months suggest that UMBRAGE may have been used for other, more nefarious purposes. After the outcome of the 2016 U.S. presidential
election shocked many within the U.S. political establishment and corporate-owned media, the CIA
emerged claiming that Russia mounted a “covert intelligence operation” to help Donald Trump edge out his rival Hillary Clinton.
Prior to the election, Clinton’s campaign
had also accused
Russia of being behind the leak of John Podesta’s emails, as well as the emails of employees of the Democratic National Committee
(DNC).
Last December, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper – a man known for
lying under oath about NSA surveillance –
briefed senators in a closed-door meeting where he described findings on Russian government “hacks and other interference” in
the election.
Following the meeting, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), a ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee,
remarked:
“After many briefings by our intelligence community, it is clear to me that the Russians hacked our democratic institutions and
sought to interfere in our elections and sow discord.”
Incidentally, the U.S. intelligence community’s assertions that Russia used cyber-attacks to interfere with the election overshadowed
reports that the U.S. government had actually been responsible for several hacking attempts that targeted state election systems.
For instance,
the state of
Georgia reported numerous hacking attempts on its election agencies’ networks, nearly all of which were traced back to the U.S.
Department of Homeland Security.
Now that the CIA has been shown to not only have the capability but also the express intention of replacing the “fingerprint”
of cyber-attacks it conducts with those of another state actor, the CIA’s alleged evidence that Russia hacked the U.S. election –
or anything else for that matter – is immediately suspect. There is no longer any way to determine if the CIA’s proof of Russian
hacks on U.S. infrastructure is legitimate, as it could
very well be a “false flag” attack.
Given that accusations of Russian government cyber-attacks also coincide with
a historic low in diplomatic relations between Russia
and the U.S., the CIA’s long history of using covert means to justify hostile actions against foreign powers – typically in the name
of national security – once again seems to be in play.
We can now talk about global cyber war unleashed by the USA after year 2000. It already has three stages:
Stuxnet discovery (2010) and Flame revelations (2012). Those worms were pretty complex creation which were clearly stated
by state actors. They are typically attributed to the NSA (although Israel may also participated in the development in some role).
At this point (2010) the technologies used in Stuxnet and Flame became public knowledge and the trust toward the US producer
of hardware was undermined.
Edward Snowden revelations (2013) signify the round two this Global Cyberwar. As the result the confidence
in Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, Amazon, etc was undermined (many companies prohibited employees to use Facebook) and in government sector
completely disappeared. That also changed behaviour of both US friends and "adversaries" (which are few states which does not want
to accept the USA dictat). The level of damage Snowden did to the USA "intelligence complex" should be underestimated. There
was a huge fallout. For example Obama personally and his administration did lost moral high ground. From this point Obama generally
looks more like an employee of a three letter agency (specifically as Brennan subordinate) rather then the President of the
country. Public was really alarmed and became somewhat paranoid. As one commenter stated: "it's easy to poke fun at the
Snowden affair from many angles, but I, for one, do not like the idea of any Agency anywhere, governmental or private, reading my
e-mails and monitoring my calls. "
There was angry voices:
Peter Schaar, Germany's freedom of information commissioner, told Reuters he wanted "clarity" from the United States "regarding
these monstrous allegations of total monitoring of various telecommunications and Internet services." Another German official
has called for a boycott of the companies. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who is running for reelection, has said she will raise
the issue with Obama this week either at Lough Erne or in Berlin.
"The most upset party in all of this, I think, is the Germans," said Michael J. Geary, an assistant professor at Maastricht
University in the Netherlands and an expert on Europe. "The Germans were the most snooped-upon country, apparently, in March.
In a country where memories of the former East German Stasi are still quite fresh, the response has been quite critical."
Geary described Europeans as "peeved" and "quite annoyed" at the U.S. actions and said they have the potential to set back
sensitive trade negotiations and do damage to transatlantic relations. "It's a major PR disaster for the administration,"
he said. "Now, they have really lost the moral high ground."
Wikileaks Vault 7 release (2017). It was not the initial release, just the most publicized case. At this point the cat
was already out of the bag for a long time. Now with CIA tools available on the Internet we can talk about the
third phase of this global Cyberwar. One of the most damaging revelations ws that CIA has tools to create cyber
attacks under the false flag. It also became clea that CIA’s secret hacking division had produced malware and other means of hacking
iPhones, Android phones, Samsung Smart TVs. As well as some popular encrypted apps like WhatsApp, Signal, and Telegram. All of them
were also targeted. At some point CIA lost control of their whole arsenal of highly advanced hacking tools and malware and it became
its travel first of "dark Internet" and then on "grey. ". at this point cat was out of the bag and other government
start paying serious attention both to cyber-defense and cyber offence. This is not only a gross, malignant incompetence.
It shows clearly that CIA again is was totally out of control (and crossed the boundaries with NSA) for duration
of Bush II and two terms of Obama administration. May be longer.
Like with Snowden scandal Obama tried to swipe the dirt under the carpet ("change we can believe in" -- what a cruel joke)
There are several good YouTube presentation on the topic. Among them:
This first part in the series has 8,761 documents and files from a high-security network at Langley. WikiLeaks dump amounted
to several hundred million lines of code — bu this is probably less them full archive that was circulated among former U.S. government
hackers and contractors. WikiLeaks was given “portions” of the archive. In any case tremendous amount of taxpayers money was spent
on this dirty adventure
In other word the USA unleashed three stages of global cyberwar and which now endanger its own infrastructure. So by by virtue of
its own actions the USA became much less secure and now it is tremendously more difficult to protect the infrastructure from intrusions,
which became more sophisticated. To the great joy of all those snake oil security solutions salesmen like Crowdstrike.
So a lot of "security parasites" got access to serious money, imitating previous ISS "achievements" on the new level (with the same
dream of being bought by somebody big before some spectacular failure of their products).
One of first signs of this damages are talks that DNC was hacked specifically to conceal Seth Rich or somebody else leak and
then this hack was malignantly attributed to Russians using greedy and biased Crowdstrike cyber warriors which performed
the attribution (while details are secret, Crowdstrike attribution of DNC hack to Russians (which FBI took at face value; a very usual
step). BTW the level of hype over Crowstrike products does reminds me days of ISS glory ;-). Probably they are the same type of greedy
and unscrupulous security parasites ready for money to do anything. Both can sell for money their own mother.
CIA surveillance and hacking tools not eroded transatlantic trust but also reveals internal political struggle within intelligence
CIA, with some forces consider CIA too dangerous and out of control and ready to risk their life to cut CIA influence. As was
with Snowden revelations this is another game changer:
When the Guardian
started reporting on the largest disclosure of secret NSA files in the history of the agency in June, it was only a question of time
before the information spill reached America's allies overseas. That's because the NSA's prime duty is to monitor and collect global
signals intelligence. The agency is by law prohibited from conducting electronic surveillance on Americans except under special circumstances.
In the Guardian's first story on how the NSA was collecting the metadata of phone calls from Verizon, a major US carrier, it was
clear that data of European citizens would be involved, since the NSA's secret court order included all calls made from and to the
US.
But it was the second scoop on the NSA's
PRISM program that really blew
the story wide open. It revealed that the agency was siphoning off personal data like email, chats and photos from the world's biggest
Internet companies including Google, Microsoft, Apple and Yahoo.
This also reveals the real danger of modern smartphones and PC. Smartphones now are pretty powerful computer in their
own right and the fact the vulnerabilities are literally planted into popular operating system and applications caused public outrage.
It also might speed up balkanization of Internet, started after Snowden revelations, as foreign countries now clearly want to control
information flows from and to thier country. so far only China totally control those flows.
How it will affect US manufactures of hardware, especially PC and smartphone we can only guess.
Here are direct quotes from WikiLeaks describing Vault 7 (Heavy.com)
By the end of 2016, the CIA’s hacking division, which formally falls under the agency’s Center for Cyber Intelligence (CCI), had
over 5,000 registered users and had produced more than a thousand hacking systems, trojans, viruses, and other “weaponized” malware.
Such is the scale of the CIA’s undertaking that by 2016, its hackers had utilized more code than that used to run Facebook. The CIA
had created, in effect, its ‘own NSA’ with even less accountability and without publicly answering the question as to whether such
a massive budgetary spend on duplicating the capacities of a rival agency could be justified. In a statement to WikiLeaks the source
details policy questions that they say urgently need to be debated in public, including whether the CIA’s hacking capabilities exceed
its mandated powers and the problem of public oversight of the agency. The source wishes to initiate a public debate about the security,
creation, use, proliferation and democratic control of cyberweapons.”
These techniques permit the CIA to bypass the encryption of WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, Wiebo, Confide and Cloackman by hacking
the ‘smart’ phones that they run on and collecting audio and message traffic before encryption is applied.”
WikiLeaks continued.
The U.S. government’s commitment to the Vulnerabilities Equities Process came after significant lobbying by US technology companies,
who risk losing their share of the global market over real and perceived hidden vulnerabilities. The government stated that it would
disclose all pervasive vulnerabilities discovered after 2010 on an ongoing basis. ‘Year Zero’ documents show that the CIA breached
the Obama administration’s commitments. Many of the vulnerabilities used in the CIA’s cyber arsenal are pervasive and some may already
have been found by rival intelligence agencies or cyber criminals.”
WikiLeaks redacted and anonimized some of the information before releasing it, including CIA targets throughout the U.S. and the
world. Here are just some highlights about how the hacks worked, according to WikiLeaks:
Samsung Smart TVs are vulnerable due to a Weeping Angel hack that puts the TV in a “Fake-Off” mode. The owner
believes the TV is off when it’s actually on, allowing the CIA to record conversations in the room and send them through the internet
to a covert CIA server.
Vehicle Control Systems of Cars and Trucks: It’s not known if these were hacked, but in 2014 the CIA was looking
into infecting vehicle control systems used by modern cars and trucks. Motivation was unknown.
Remotely Hack Smart Phones: Infected phones would send the user’s geolocation, audio, and texts. It could covertly
activate the camera and mic of the phone. A special division was devoted to hacking iOS products, like iPhones and iPads. Android
phone were also targeted.
Bypassing Encrypted Apps: The CIA used techniques to
bypass encrypted apps. WikiLeaks listed the following: WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, Wiebo, Confide, and Clockman. The smart
phones would be hacked first, and then audio and message traffic was collected before encryption was applied through the
apps.
Targeting Microsoft, Linux, and OSx with Malware: The CIA’s efforts also focused on infecting Microsoft Windows
users with malware. Microsoft was targeted via viruses injected through CDs/DVDs, USBs, data hidden in images, covert disk areas,
and other types of malware. Malware attacks were also aimed at Mac OS X, Solaris, Linus, and more.
Phones Running Presidential Twitter Accounts: Interestingly, WikiLeaks wrote that “specific CIA malware revealed
in Year Zero is able to penetrate, infest and control both the Android phone and iPhone software that runs or has run presidential
Twitter accounts.” As WikiLeaks mentioned, if the CIA can hack these phones, so can anyone else who obtained or discovered the vulnerability.
When WikiLeaks obtained the hack, it had been distributed to others too.
Router Exploitations: Hundreds of router exploitations are listed in the document.
The CIA Can Misdirect Their Cyber Attacks to Look Like Someone Else:
According to WikiLeaks, the CIA collects attack techniques ‘stolen’
from malware produced in other states including Russia via a project called UMBRAGE. The CIA does this for many reasons, but one
use they can do is leave behind fingerprints that misdirect attribution, making it look like their cyber attack was done by someone
else. (Note: It’s unclear at this time if the misdirection is WikiLeaks’ interpretation of one thing the CIA could do, or
if there’s a specific place in the document where the CIA mentions this use of UMBRAGE.)
Because the CIA kept the vulnerabilities hidden, even after they were exposed, WikiLeaks said this put the population at large at
risk, including members of the U.S. government, Congress, top CEOs, and engineers. Without letting Apple and Google know about their
vulnerabilities, the companies had no means to fix the hacks after they leaked.
According to WikiLeaks, an archive with the malware and other exploits was being circulated for at least a year and only fraction
of it was given to WikiLeaks by an unnamed source..
Antivirus Hack Details
So what are some of the takeways from this? There are many. But essentially, because the CIA was targeting Android devices, iOS devices,
Smart TVs, and even Microsoft and Mac OSX and Linus systems, it seems that almost anything is vulnerable — especially any device that
has microphone and is camera-equipped and connects to the Internet. These seem to be the biggest targets.
And antivirus systems really won’t stop them. According to WikiLeaks, “CIA hackers developed successful attacks against most well
known anti-virus programs. These are documented in AV defeats,
Personal Security Products,
Detecting and defeating PSPs and
PSP/Debugger/RE Avoidance.” Some of the antivirus and security programs
that they may have found defeats or workaround for included (Note: It’s unclear if these were all bypassed, because some files were
redacted by WikiLeaks):
Bitdefender
Comodo
AVG
F-Secure
Avira
Avast
Zone Alarm
Trend Micro
Norton
Panda
Malwarebytes
McAfee
Microsoft Security Essentials
Kaspersky
GDATA
ESET
ClamAV
Symantec
Rising
DART (?)
Zemana Antilogger
They even discussed how the NSA got some things wrong and how they could do it better.
There are other aspects to Vault 7 that are still being deciphered. For example, some are concerned that the CIA was infiltrating
online games, because of one page’s reference to
League of Legends, Hearthstone, and Heroes of the Storm.
Clinton’s Missing Emails or the FBI’s Vault on Clinton
Some believed this was about a seventh “vault” of FBI emails, since the FBI had released six sets of Clinton emails and information
at the time that the tweets were published. But this was less than likely, since the FBI just released Part 7 of its Clinton vault
here. Others believed that
it was related to Clinton’s missing 33,000 emails. This theory gained new traction after a federal court hearing about Anthony Weiner
and Huma Abedin’s laptop emails, scheduled for Tuesday March 7, was postponed on March 6. However, it’s unclear at this time if the
postponement happened before or after WikiLeak’s announcement. Read the press release from Judicial Watch, where they mention the hearing
was postponed,
here.
Obama Wiretapping
Because of President Donald Trump’s recent tweets claiming President Barack Obama “wiretapped” him, some believe that Vault 7 is
about this. However, the wiretapping suspicion so far is unsubstantiated.
‘Pizzagate’
Others theorized this was somehow related to a longstanding conspiracy theory about “pizzagate,” which involves the idea that high-ranking
politicians are involved in a pedophile ring to keep them from deviating from the "Deep state" party line. So far no conclusive evidence
has been found to support this theory. The rumors gained traction after WikiLeaks released John Podesta’s emails.
CrowdStrike is a high-profile cybersecurity firm that worked with the DNC (Democratic
National Committee) in 2016 and was called in due to a suspected breach. However, CrowdStrike
appears to have first started working with the DNC approximately five weeks prior to this and
approximately just five days after John Podesta (Hillary Clinton's campaign manager for the
2016 election) had his Gmail account phished. Nothing was mentioned about this until after the
five weeks had passed when the DNC published a press release stating that
CrowdStrike had been at the DNC throughout that period to investigate the NGP-VAN issues
(that had occurred three months before Podesta was phished).
Upon conclusion of those five weeks, CrowdStrike was immediately called back in to
investigate a suspected breach. CrowdStrike's software was already installed on the DNC network
when the DNC emails were acquired but CrowdStrike failed to prevent the emails from being
acquired and didn't publish logs or incident-specific evidence of the acquisition event either,
the latter of which is odd considering what
their product's features were advertised to be even if they were just running it in a
monitoring capacity .
Over the past year, U.S. prosecutors have discussed several types of charges they could potentially bring against the WikiLeaks
founder
The Justice Department is preparing to prosecute WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and is increasingly optimistic it will be able
to get him into a U.S. courtroom, according to people in Washington familiar with the matter. Over the past year, U.S. prosecutors
have discussed several types of charges they could potentially bring against Mr. Assange, the people said. Mr. Assange has lived
in the Ecuadorean embassy in London since receiving political asylum from the South American country in 2012...
The exact charges Justice Department might pursue remain unclear, but they may involve the Espionage Act, which criminalizes the
disclosure of national defense-related information.
On two declassified letters from 2014 from the Intelligence Community Inspector General
(didn't know there was one, but doesn't do much good anyway, it seems, read further) to the
chairpersons of the House and Senate intelligence committees notifying them that the CIA has
been monitoring emails between the CIA's head of the whistleblowing and source protection and
Congressional. "Most of these emails concerned pending and developing whistleblower
complaints". Shows why Edward Snowdon didn't consider it appropriate to rely on internal
complaints proceedures. This while under the leadership of seasoned liars and criminals
Brennan and Clapper, of course.
It clearly shows a taste of what these buggers have to hide, and why they went to such
extraordinary lengths as Russiagate to cover it all up and save their skins - that of course
being the real reason behind Russiagate as I have said several times, nothing to do with
either Trump or Russia.
OWS was a Controlled-Dissent operation, sending poor students north to fecklessly march on
Wall Street when they could have shut down WADC, and sending wealthy seniors south to
fecklessly line Pennsylvania Avenue, when they could have shut down Wall Street.
Both I$I$, and Hamas, and Antifa et al are all Controlled Dissent operations. The
followers are duped, are used, abused and then abandoned by honey-pots put there by Central
Intelligence, at least since the Spanish Civil War.
That's why MoA articles like this one make you wonder, just who is conning whom, at a time
when the Internet is weaponized, when Google Assistant achieved AI awareness
indistinguishable from anyone on the phone, China TV has launched a virtual AI news reporter
indistinguishable from reality, and Stanford can audio-video a captured image of anyone as
well as their voice intonation, then 3D model them, in real time, reading and emoting from a
script, indistinguishable from reality, ...and then this.
Another Gift of Trust😂 brought to you by Scientocracy. Be sure to tithe your AI
bot, or word will get back to Chairman Albertus, then you'll be called in to confess your
thought crimes to the Green Cadre, itself another Controlled Dissent honeypot, in a
Tithe-for-Credits Swindle.
I tell my kids, just enjoy life, live it large, and get ready for hell. It's coming for
breakfast.
Hacking operations by anyone, can and will be used by US propagandists to provoke Russia
or whoever stands in the way of the US war machine, take this Pompeo rant against Iran and
the Iranian response......
Asking of Pompeo "have you no shame?", Zarif mocked Pompeo's praise for the Saudis for
"providing millions and millions of dollars of humanitarian relief" to Yemen, saying
America's "butcher clients" were spending billions of dollars bombing school buses. Iranian
Foreign Minister Javad Zarif issued a statement lashing Secretary of State Mike Pompeo for
his recent comments on the Yemen War. Discussing the US-backed Saudi invasion of Yemen,
Pompeo declared Iran to be to blame for the death and destruction in the country. https://news.antiwar.com/2018/11/09/iran-fm-slams-pompeo-for-blaming-yemen-war-on-iran/
The US way of looking at things supposes that up is down, and white is black, it makes no
sense, unless the US hopes these provocations will lead to a war or at the very least Russia
or Iran capitulating to US aggression, which will not happen. Sanctions by the US on all and
sundry must be opposed, if not the US will claim justifiably to be the worlds policeman and
the arbiter of who will trade with who, a ludicrous proposition but one that most governments
are afraid is now taking place, witness the new US ambassador to Germany in his first tweet
telling the Germans to cease all trade with Iran immediately.
"... The "leaving of fake fingerprints" (Russian, Chinese, Iranian, North Korean and Arabic) is done by Marble Framework software, details of which was leaked by CIA programmer, Joshua Adam Schulte to Wikileaks and formed part of the "Vault 7" series. It means that no fingerprint evidence can ever be relied on ever again. ..."
A division of the Central Intelligence Agency stockpiled hacking techniques culled
from other hackers, giving the agency the ability to leave behind the "fingerprints" of
the outside hackers when it broke into electronic devices ...
"With UMBRAGE and related projects the CIA cannot only increase its total number of
attack types, but also misdirect attribution by leaving behind the 'fingerprints' of the
groups that the attack techniques were stolen from," Wikileaks said in a
statement.
that anonymous NSA guy is either lying or too stupid to do his job. " it's that
simple ".
fireeye are scam artists just like crowdstrike. it's not that they don't know tactics and
methods; i'm sure they know their way around a payload. that doesn't make them some tabula
rasa blank slate without an agenda. just because they use computers doesn't mean they're
robots.
as anyone who works in a business run by technologically "challenged" bosses knows, for
every fast talker throwing around techy terms and sounding like a mr. robot script there are
20 idiot CEOs willing to throw money at imaginary problems. ditto the government. meanwhile
shysters like stratfor and hbgary get reamed by high school graduates running linux on a
netbook from 2003.
as for the attributions, they fail a basic "cui bono" test. i guess the russians wanted to
make rapist beheaders look bad by DDoSing some servers? they wanted to give cred to the apes
who shoot at their advisors in syria? okay. sure.
Back around 2014 15 Charles Lister listed himself as a consultant to the Shaikh Group.
Shaik Group have a media marketing section in Dubai. http://theshaikhgroup.ae
https://foreignpolicy.com/author/charles-lister/
Charles Lister is a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute and a senior consultant to The
Shaikh Group's Track II Syria Dialogue Initiative. Follow him on Twitter at:
@Charles_Lister.
http://www.mei.edu/experts/charles-lister
Charles Lister is a senior fellow and Director of the Countering Terrorism and Extremism
Program at the Middle East Institute. His work focuses primarily on the conflict in Syria,
including as a member of the MEI-convened Syria Study Group; and on issues of terrorism and
insurgency across the Levant. Prior to this, Lister was a Visiting Fellow at the Brookings
Institution in Qatar and a Senior Consultant to the multinationally-backed Syria Track II
Dialogue Initiative, where he managed nearly three years of intensive face-to-face engagement
with the leaderships of over 100 Syrian armed opposition groups.
I have thought that ISIS studios were based in Dubai or Doha.
IP addresses can only be attributed to individuals/offices/locations with the assistance of
the owner of the IP block of addresses, typically an ISP. The GRU's ISP would NOT help
identify the GRU, obviously, so all such attributions are fake and those who claim to know
are liars.
The "leaving of fake fingerprints" (Russian, Chinese, Iranian, North Korean and
Arabic) is done by Marble Framework software, details of which was leaked by CIA programmer,
Joshua Adam Schulte to Wikileaks and formed part of the "Vault 7" series. It means that no
fingerprint evidence can ever be relied on ever again.
DPRK needs to be included by b along with Russia for many of the same reasons as
this example attests . And while we're at it, China should join the group too. Indeed,
the CIA/NSA is likely responsible for most hacking, particularly when monies are stolen as
the linked article reports. As the Outlaw US Empire slowly dissolves into a pool of its own
exceptional ugliness, it will blame everyone and anyone to cover its crimes. Then there's the
small battalion of slimy zombie trolls CIA/NSA employs that infest this site. They promote
one of the Outlaw US Empire's most important values--lying about everything under the sun for
a Few Dollars More while throwing the citizenry that makes their living possible under the
bus.
Now, more than ever; the US needs a very capable adversary and where none exists, the US will
create one, as history has shown. Russia has historical presidence, making it convenient.
However, as events are unfolding, China will come to the fore; Russia will move to second
place.
But, two adversaries are far better than one, for getting the flow of cash to support the
Potemkin moment...
OWS was a Controlled-Dissent operation, sending poor students north to fecklessly march on
Wall Street when they could have shut down WADC, and sending wealthy seniors south to
fecklessly line Pennsylvania Avenue, when they could have shut down Wall Street.
Both I$I$, and Hamas, and Antifa et al are all Controlled Dissent operations. The
followers are duped, are used, abused and then abandoned by honey-pots put there by Central
Intelligence, at least since the Spanish Civil War.
That's why MoA articles like this one make you wonder, just who is conning whom, at a time
when the Internet is weaponized, when Google Assistant achieved AI awareness
indistinguishable from anyone on the phone, China TV has launched a virtual AI news reporter
indistinguishable from reality, and Stanford can audio-video a captured image of anyone as
well as their voice intonation, then 3D model them, in real time, reading and emoting from a
script, indistinguishable from reality, ...and then this.
Another Gift of Trust brought to you by Scientocracy. Be sure to tithe your AI
bot, or word will get back to Chairman Albertus, then you'll be called in to confess your
thought crimes to the Green Cadre, itself another Controlled Dissent honeypot, in a
Tithe-for-Credits Swindle.
I tell my kids, just enjoy life, live it large, and get ready for hell. It's coming for
breakfast.
There is big money in prostitution. None of the robot dolls I have seen in the various media
reports on robot brothels look lifelike, whereas the Chinese anchor looks very much like a
human with a voice-over. Will see how this develops, but at the moment it looks very much
like Lavrov style satire.
CIA
material to WikiLeaks , in what later become known as the Vault7 leaks. From a report:
According to new court documents filed late Wednesday, October 31, US prosecutors plan to
file
three new charges against Joshua Schulte for allegedly leaking more classified data while in
detention at the New York Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) . Prosecutors say they
first learned of Schulte's behavior back in May, when they found out that "Schulte had
distributed the Protected Search Warrant Materials to his family members for purposes of
dissemination to other third parties, including members of the media." The prosecution held a
court hearing in May and initially warned the suspect about his actions, a warning they found
Schulte ignored. The US government says that "in or about early October 2018, the Government
learned that Schulte was using one or more smuggled contraband cellphones to communicate
clandestinely with third parties outside of the MCC." A search of his housing unit performed by
FBI agents revealed "multiple contraband cellphones (including at least one cellphone used by
Schulte that is protected with significant encryption); approximately 13 email and social media
accounts (including encrypted email accounts); and other electronic devices."
Russiagate can be viewed as a pretty inventive way to justify their own existence for bloated
Intelligence services: first CIA hacks something leaving traces of russians or Chinese; then the
FBI, CIAand Department of Homeland security all enjoy additional money and people to counter the
threat.
The US Department of Homeland Security fabricated "intelligence reports" of Russian
election hacking in order to try to get control of the election infrastructure (probebly so
that they can hack it more easily to control the election results).
I am willing to bet money that those servers. or more accurately, their hard drives, will
be found to have become mysteriously corrupted and no longer readable. The scene from The Big
Easy comes to mind, when a heavy magnet is "accidentally" set next to the incriminating
videotape in the police evidence room. That, of course, assumes that they will ever be
subpoenaed.
Crowdstrike brings up a couple of interesting questions.
1) Were they so bumbling that they would wait a full month after evidence of "hacking" turned
up at the DNC to take action to protect the network? They worked for the DNC, so it's
possible.
or
2) Did they use that month to ensure that the proper evidence pointing to the GRU could be
found on the duplicate copies of the hard drives which they supplied to the FBI, and set up
redirecting intermediary steps somewhere on 3rd country servers? In which case, were they
actually working for the FSB, (since we know from our own experience that the worst enemy of
any intelligence agency are the ones you compete with for funding)?
Putin statement about $400 million 'donation' to Hillary Clinton by MI6-connected Bill Browder in his Helsinki presser is
obviously of great interest. This has given some new insights into the DNC false flag operation dynamics.
Notable quotes:
"... The FBI would get info about these hackers through the CrowdStrike team's disk images, memory dumps, network logs and other reports. CrowdStrike's Robert Johnston also said he worked with FBI investigators during his work at the DNC so the FBI also got some of their info directly. ..."
"... IMHO believing in the Crowdstrike analysis is like believing in Santa Claus. They did propagate unsubstantiated "security porno" like a hack of Ukrainians for a while. After this incident, Dmitry Alperovich looks like a sleazy used car salesman, not like a real specialist and, in any case, his qualification is limited to the SMTP protocol. ..."
"... What if it was Crowdstrike which compiled and planted the malware using Vault 7 tools and then conducted full-scale false flag operation against Russians to deflect allegations that Bernie was thrown under the bus deliberately and unlawfully. They have motivation and means to do this. ..."
PT, regarding your questions: "How did the FBI obtain information about activity on the DNC
and DCCC servers", "what is the source of the information?",
"how do they know what happened on specific dates as alleged in the complaint?", I believe
the answers are implicit in the first part of this news article:
It describes in considerable detail how, STARTING IN SEPTEMBER 2015, the FBI tried
strenuously to alert the DNC to the fact that it was being hacked by Russia, but the DNC,
remarkably, chose to ignore these warnings.
Here's how the article begins:
When Special Agent Adrian Hawkins of the Federal Bureau of Investigation called the
Democratic National Committee in September 2015 to pass along some troubling news about its
computer network, he was transferred, naturally [ sic! ], to the help desk.
His message was brief, if alarming. At least one computer system belonging to the D.N.C.
had been compromised by hackers federal investigators had named "the Dukes," a
cyberespionage team linked to the Russian government.
The F.B.I. knew it well: The bureau had spent the last few years trying to kick the
Dukes out of the unclassified email systems of the White House, the State Department and
even the Joint Chiefs of Staff, one of the government's best-protected networks.
BTW, I sincerely thank TTG for providing this link in one of his previous comments.
The FBI warned the DNC of the Dukes (aka APT29, Cozy Bear) in September 2015. These are
the hackers that the Dutch AIVD penetrated and warned the NSA in real time when they attacked
Pentagon systems in 2015. Their goal seemed to be intelligence collection as one would expect
as the Dutch said they are affiliated with the SVR.
The Fancy Bear hackers (aka APT28) are the ones referred to in the recent indictment of
the GRU officers. They penetrated the DNC systems in April 2016 and weren't discovered until
CrowdStrike identified them. They're the ones who took data and released it through DCLeaks,
Guccifer 2.0 and Wikileaks as part of a coordinated information operation (IO). I'm not at
all surprised that the GRU would lead this IO as a military operation. The FBI would get
info about these hackers through the CrowdStrike team's disk images, memory dumps, network
logs and other reports. CrowdStrike's Robert Johnston also said he worked with FBI
investigators during his work at the DNC so the FBI also got some of their info
directly. There is absolutely no need to take physical possession of the servers.
The detail of some of the GRU officers' online activity indicates their computers were
penetrated by US or allied IC/LEA much like the Dutch AIVD penetrated the FSB computers. This
was probably a main source for much of the indictment's evidence. That the IC would release
information about this penetration for this indictment is extraordinary. Normally this stuff
never sees the light of day. It sets the precedent for the release of further such
intelligence information in future indictments.
IMHO believing in the Crowdstrike analysis is like believing in Santa Claus. They did
propagate unsubstantiated "security porno" like a hack of Ukrainians for a while. After this
incident, Dmitry Alperovich looks like a sleazy used car salesman, not like a real specialist
and, in any case, his qualification is limited to the SMTP protocol.
What if it was Crowdstrike which compiled and planted the malware using Vault 7 tools and
then conducted full-scale false flag operation against Russians to deflect allegations that
Bernie was thrown under the bus deliberately and unlawfully. They have motivation and means
to do this.
Now we also see a DNC motivation of keeping the content of affected servers from FBI eyes
-- Browder money.
"... The U.S. was in talks for a deal with Julian Assange but then FBI Director James Comey ordered an end to negotiations after Assange offered to prove Russia was not involved in the DNC leak, as Ray McGovern explains. ..."
"... Special to Consortium News ..."
"... The report does not say what led Comey to intervene to ruin the talks with Assange. But it came after Assange had offered to "provide technical evidence and discussion regarding who did not engage in the DNC releases," Solomon quotes WikiLeaks' intermediary with the government as saying. It would be a safe assumption that Assange was offering to prove that Russia was not WikiLeaks' source of the DNC emails. ..."
"... If that was the reason Comey and Warner ruined the talks, as is likely, it would reveal a cynical decision to put U.S. intelligence agents and highly sophisticated cybertools at risk, rather than allow Assange to at least attempt to prove that Russia was not behind the DNC leak. ..."
"... On March 31, 2017, though, WikiLeaks released the most damaging disclosure up to that point from what it called "Vault 7" -- a treasure trove of CIA cybertools leaked from CIA files. This disclosure featured the tool "Marble Framework," which enabled the CIA to hack into computers, disguise who hacked in, and falsely attribute the hack to someone else by leaving so-called tell-tale signs -- like Cyrillic, for example. The CIA documents also showed that the "Marble" tool had been employed in 2016. ..."
"... In fact, VIPS and independent forensic investigators, have performed what former FBI Director Comey -- at first inexplicably, now not so inexplicably -- failed to do when the so-called "Russian hack" of the DNC was first reported. In July 2017 VIPS published its key findings with supporting data. ..."
"... Why did then FBI Director Comey fail to insist on getting direct access to the DNC computers in order to follow best-practice forensics to discover who intruded into the DNC computers? (Recall, at the time Sen. John McCain and others were calling the "Russian hack" no less than an "act of war.") A 7th grader can now figure that out. ..."
Did Sen. Warner and Comey 'Collude' on Russia-gate? June 27, 2018 •
68 Comments
The U.S. was in talks for a deal with Julian Assange but then FBI Director James Comey
ordered an end to negotiations after Assange offered to prove Russia was not involved in the
DNC leak, as Ray McGovern explains.
By Ray McGovern
Special to Consortium News
An explosive
report by investigative journalist John Solomon on the opinion page of Monday's edition of
The Hill sheds a bright light on how Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) and then-FBI Director
James Comey collaborated to prevent WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange from discussing "technical
evidence ruling out certain parties [read Russia]" in the controversial leak of Democratic
Party emails to WikiLeaks during the 2016 election.
A deal that was being discussed last year between Assange and U.S. government officials
would have given Assange "limited immunity" to allow him to leave the Ecuadorian Embassy in
London, where he has been exiled for six years. In exchange, Assange would agree to limit
through redactions "some classified CIA information he might release in the future," according
to Solomon, who cited "interviews and a trove of internal DOJ documents turned over to Senate
investigators." Solomon even provided a
copy of the draft immunity deal with Assange.
But Comey's intervention to stop the negotiations with Assange ultimately ruined the deal,
Solomon says, quoting "multiple sources." With the prospective agreement thrown into serious
doubt, Assange "unleashed a series of leaks that U.S. officials say damaged their cyber warfare
capabilities for a long time to come." These were the Vault 7 releases, which led then CIA
Director Mike Pompeo to call WikiLeaks "a hostile intelligence service."
Solomon's report provides reasons why Official Washington has now put so much pressure on
Ecuador to keep Assange incommunicado in its embassy in London.
Assange: Came close to a deal with the U.S. (Photo credit: New Media Days / Peter
Erichsen)
The report does not say what led Comey to intervene to ruin the talks with Assange. But it
came after Assange had offered to "provide technical evidence and discussion regarding who did
not engage in the DNC releases," Solomon quotes WikiLeaks' intermediary with the government as
saying. It would be a safe assumption that Assange was offering to prove that Russia was not
WikiLeaks' source of the DNC emails.
If that was the reason Comey and Warner ruined the talks, as is likely, it would reveal a
cynical decision to put U.S. intelligence agents and highly sophisticated cybertools at risk,
rather than allow Assange to at least attempt to prove that Russia was not behind the DNC
leak.
The greater risk to Warner and Comey apparently would have been if Assange provided evidence
that Russia played no role in the 2016 leaks of DNC documents.
Missteps and Stand Down
In mid-February 2017, in a remarkable display of naiveté, Adam Waldman, Assange's pro
bono attorney who acted as the intermediary in the talks, asked Warner if the Senate
Intelligence Committee staff would like any contact with Assange to ask about Russia or other
issues. Waldman was apparently oblivious to Sen. Warner's stoking of Russia-gate.
Warner contacted Comey and, invoking his name, instructed Waldman to "stand down and end the
discussions with Assange," Waldman told Solomon. The "stand down" instruction "did happen,"
according to another of Solomon's sources with good access to Warner. However, Waldman's
counterpart attorney David Laufman , an accomplished federal prosecutor picked by the
Justice Departent to work the government side of the CIA-Assange fledgling deal, told Waldman,
"That's B.S. You're not standing down, and neither am I."
But the damage had been done. When word of the original stand-down order reached WikiLeaks,
trust evaporated, putting an end to two months of what Waldman called "constructive, principled
discussions that included the Department of Justice."
The two sides had come within inches of sealing the deal. Writing to Laufman on March 28,
2017, Waldman gave him Assange's offer to discuss "risk mitigation approaches relating to CIA
documents in WikiLeaks' possession or control, such as the redaction of Agency personnel in
hostile jurisdictions," in return for "an acceptable immunity and safe passage agreement."
On March 31, 2017, though, WikiLeaks released the most damaging disclosure up to that
point from what it called "Vault 7" -- a treasure trove of CIA cybertools leaked from CIA
files. This disclosure featured the tool "Marble Framework," which enabled the CIA to hack into
computers, disguise who hacked in, and falsely attribute the hack to someone else by leaving
so-called tell-tale signs -- like Cyrillic, for example. The CIA documents also showed that the
"Marble" tool had been employed in 2016.
Misfeasance or Malfeasance
Comey: Ordered an end to talks with Assange.
Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, which includes among our members two former
Technical Directors of the National Security Agency, has repeatedly called
attention to its conclusion that the DNC emails were leaked -- not "hacked" by Russia or
anyone else (and, later, our suspicion that someone may have been playing Marbles, so to
speak).
In fact, VIPS and independent forensic investigators, have performed what former FBI
Director Comey -- at first inexplicably, now not so inexplicably -- failed to do when the
so-called "Russian hack" of the DNC was first reported. In July 2017 VIPS published its
key
findings with supporting data.
Two month later , VIPS published the results of
follow-up experiments conducted to test the conclusions reached in July.
Why did then FBI Director Comey fail to insist on getting direct access to the DNC computers
in order to follow best-practice forensics to discover who intruded into the DNC computers?
(Recall, at the time Sen. John McCain and others were calling the "Russian hack" no less than
an "act of war.") A 7th grader can now figure that out.
Asked on January 10, 2017 by Senate Intelligence Committee chair Richard Burr (R-NC) whether
direct access to the servers and devices would have helped the FBI in their investigation,
Comey replied
: "Our forensics folks would always prefer to get access to the original device or server
that's involved, so it's the best evidence."
At that point, Burr and Warner let Comey down easy. Hence, it should come as no surprise
that, according to one of John Solomon's sources, Sen. Warner (who is co-chairman of the Senate
Intelligence Committee) kept Sen. Burr apprised of his intervention into the negotiation with
Assange, leading to its collapse.
Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the
Saviour in inner-city Washington. He was an Army Infantry/Intelligence officer and then a CIA
analyst for a total of 30 years and prepared and briefed, one-on-one, the President's Daily
Brief from 1981 to 1985.
If you enjoyed this original article please consider
making a donation to Consortium News so we can bring you more stories like this
one.
A 29-year-old former CIA computer engineer, Joshua Adam Schulte, was indicted Monday by the
Department of Justice on charges of masterminding the largest leak of classified information in the spy agency's history .
Schulte, who created malware for the U.S. Government to break into adversaries computers, has been sitting in jail since his August
24, 2017 arrest on unrelated charges of posessing and transporting child pornography - which was discovered in a search of his New
York apartment after Schulte was named as the prime suspect in the cyber-breach one week after WikiLeaks published the "Vault 7"
series of classified files. Schulte was arrested and jailed on the child porn charges while the DOJ ostensibly built their case leading
to Monday's additional charges.
[I]nstead of charging Mr. Schulte in the breach, referred to as the Vault 7 leak, prosecutors charged him last August with
possessing child pornography, saying agents had found 10,000 illicit images on a server he created as a business in 2009 while
studying at the University of Texas at Austin.
Court papers quote messages from Mr. Schulte that suggest he was aware of the encrypted images of children being molested by
adults on his computer, though he advised one user, "Just don't put anything too illegal on there." -
New York Times
Monday's DOJ announcement adds new charges related to stealing classified national defense information from the Central Intelligence
Agency in 2016 and transmitting it to WikiLeaks ("Organization-1").
The Vault 7 release - a series of 24 documents which began to publish on March 7, 2017 - reveal that the CIA had a wide variety
of tools to use against adversaries, including the
ability to "spoof" its malware to appear as though it was created by a foreign intelligence agency , as well as the ability to
take control of Samsung Smart TV's and surveil a target using a "Fake Off" mode in which they appear to be powered down while eavesdropping.
The CIA's hand crafted hacking techniques pose a problem for the agency. Each technique it has created forms a "fingerprint"
that can be used by forensic investigators to attribute multiple different attacks to the same entity .
...
The CIA's Remote Devices Branch's UMBRAGE group collects and maintains a substantial library of attack techniques 'stolen'
from malware produced in other states including the Russian Federation.
With UMBRAGE and related projects the CIA cannot only increase its total number of attack types but also misdirect attribution
by leaving behind the "fingerprints" of the groups that the attack techniques were stolen from .
Schulte previously worked for the NSA before joining the CIA, then "left the intelligence community in 2016 and took a job in
the private sector," according to a statement reviewed in May by
The Washington Post .
Schulte also claimed that he reported "incompetent management and bureaucracy" at the CIA to that agency's inspector general
as well as a congressional oversight committee. That painted him as a disgruntled employee, he said, and when he left the CIA
in 2016, suspicion fell upon him as "the only one to have recently departed [the CIA engineering group] on poor terms," Schulte
wrote. - WaPo
Part of that investigation, reported WaPo, has been analyzing whether the Tor network - which allows internet users to hide their
location (in theory) "was used in transmitting classified information."
In other hearings in Schulte's case, prosecutors have alleged that he used Tor at his New York apartment, but they have provided
no evidence that he did so to disclose classified information. Schulte's attorneys have said that Tor is used for all kinds of
communications and have maintained that he played no role in the Vault 7 leaks. - WaPo
Schulte says he's innocent: " Due to these unfortunate coincidences the FBI ultimately made the snap judgment that I was guilty
of the leaks and targeted me," Schulte said. He launched
Facebook and GoFundMe pages
to raise money for his defense, which despite a $50 million goal,
has yet to r eceive a single donation.
The Post noted in May, the Vault 7 release was one of the most significant leaks in the CIA's history , "exposing secret cyberweapons
and spying techniques that might be used against the United States, according to current and former intelligence officials."
The CIA's toy chest includes:
Tools code named " Marble " can misdirect forensic investigators from attributing viruses, trojans and hacking attacks to
their agency by inserted code fragments in foreign languages. The tool was in use as recently as 2016. Per the
WikiLeaks release:
"The source code shows that Marble has test examples not just in English but also in Chinese, Russian, Korean, Arabic and Farsi.
This would permit a forensic attribution double game, for example by pretending that the spoken language of the malware creator
was not American English, but Chinese, but then showing attempts to conceal the use of Chinese, drawing forensic investigators
even more strongly to the wrong conclusion, --- but there are other possibilities, such as hiding fake error messages."
iPads / iPhones / Android devices and Smart TV's are all susceptible to hacks and malware. The agency's "Dark Matter" project
reveals that the CIA has been bugging "factory fresh" iPhones since at least 2008 through suppliers. Another, " Sonic Screwdriver
" allows the CIA to execute code on a Mac laptop or desktop while it's booting up.
The increasing sophistication of surveillance techniques has drawn comparisons with George Orwell's 1984, but "Weeping Angel",
developed by the CIA's Embedded Devices Branch (EDB)
, which infests smart TVs, transforming them into covert microphones, is surely its most emblematic realization.
The Obama administration promised to disclose all serious vulnerabilities they found to Apple, Google, Microsoft, and other
US-based manufacturers. The US Government broke that commitment.
"Year Zero" documents show that the CIA breached the Obama administration's commitments. Many of the vulnerabilities used in
the CIA's cyber arsenal are pervasive and some may already have been found by rival intelligence agencies or cyber criminals.
In addition to its operations in Langley, Virginia the CIA also uses the U.S. consulate in Frankfurt as a covert base for its
hackers covering Europe, the Middle East and Africa.
CIA hackers operating out of the Frankfurt consulate (
"Center for Cyber Intelligence Europe" or CCIE)
are given diplomatic ("black") passports and State Department cover.
Instant messaging encryption is a joke.
These techniques permit the CIA to bypass the encryption of WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, Wiebo, Confide and Cloackman by hacking
the "smart" phones that they run on and collecting audio and message traffic before encryption is applied.
The CIA laughs at Anti-Virus / Anti-Malware programs.
"Joshua Schulte, a former employee of the CIA, allegedly used his access at the agency to transmit classified material to an outside
organization . During the course of this investigation, federal agents also discovered alleged child pornography in Schulte's New
York City residence ," said Manhattan U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman.
On March 7, 2017, Organization-1 released on the Internet classified national defense material belonging to the CIA (the "Classified
Information"). In 2016, SCHULTE, who was then employed by the CIA, stole the Classified Information from a computer network at
the CIA and later transmitted it to Organization-1. SCHULTE also intentionally caused damage without authorization to a CIA computer
system by granting himself unauthorized access to the system, deleting records of his activities, and denying others access to
the system . SCHULTE subsequently made material false statements to FBI agents concerning his conduct at the CIA.
Schulte faces 135 years in prison if convicted on all 13 charges:
Illegal Gathering of National Defense Information, 18 U.S.C. §§ 793(b) and 2
Illegal Transmission of Lawfully Possessed National Defense Information, 18 U.S.C. §§ 793(d) and 2
Illegal Transmission of Unlawfully Possessed National Defense Information, 18 U.S.C. §§ 793(e) and 2
Unauthorized Access to a Computer To Obtain Classified Information, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1030(a)(1) and 2
Theft of Government Property, 18 U.S.C. §§ 641 and 2
Unauthorized Access of a Computer to Obtain Information from a Department or Agency of the United States, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1030(a)(2)
and 2
Causing Transmission of a Harmful Computer Program, Information, Code, or Command, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1030(a)(5) and 2
Making False Statements, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001 and 2
Obstruction of Justice, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1503 and 2
Receipt of Child Pornography, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252A(a)(2)(B), (b)(1), and 2
Possession of Child Pornography, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252A(a)(5)(B), (b)(2), and 2
Transportation of Child Pornography, 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(1)
Seems like everyone has kiddy porn magically appear and get discovered after they piss off the deep state bastards.
And the best part is that it's probably just the deep state operatives' own private pedo collections that they use to frame
anyone who they don't like.
I was thinking about the advancement of the technology necessary for that. They can do perfect fake stills already.
My thought is that you will soon need to film yourself 24/7 (with timestamps, shared with a blockchain-like verifiably) so
that you can disprove fake video evidence by having a filmed alibi.
Ironically, every single ex gov whistle blower (/pedophile) has the exact same kiddie porn data on their secret server (hidden
in plane view at the apartment). Joe CIA probably has a zip drive preloaded with titled data sets like "Podesta's Greatest Hits",
"Hillary's Honey bunnies" or "Willy go to the zoo". Like the mix tapes you used to make for a new gal you were trying to date.
Depending upon the mood of the agent in charge, 10,000 images of Weiner's "Warm Pizza" playlist magically appear on the server
in 3-2-1... Gotcha!
These false fingerprint tactics were all over the trump accusations which started the whole Russia Russia Russia ordeal. And
the Russia ordeal was conceptualized in a paid report to Podesta by the Bensenson Group called the Salvage Program when it was
appearant that Trump could possible win and the DNC needed ideas on how to throw the voters off at the polls. Russia is coming
/Red dawn was #1 or #2 on the list of 7 recommended ploys. The final one was crazy.. If Trump appeared to win the election, imagery
of Jesus and an Alien Invasion was to be projected into the skies to cause mass panic and create a demand for free zanex to be
handed out to the panic stricken.
Don't forget Black Lives Matters. That was idea #4 of this Bensenson report, to create civil unrest and a race war. Notice
how BLM and Antifa manically disappeared after Nov 4. All a ploy by the Dems & the deep state to remain in control of the countrys
power.
Back to the topic at hand. Its a wonder he didn't get Seth Riched. Too many porn servers and we will begin to question the
legitimacy. Oh wait...
You won't find any kiddie porn on Hillary's or DeNiros laptop. Oh its there. You just will never ever hear about it.
The Vault 7 release - a series of 24 documents which began to publish on March 7, 2017 - reveal that the CIA had a wide
variety of tools to use against adversaries, including
the ability to "spoof" its malware to appear
as though it was created by a foreign intelligence agency ....
It probably can spoof child porn as well.
Is he charged with copyright infringement for pirating child porn?
The intel community sure has a knack for sussing out purveyors of child pornography. It's probably just a coincidence govt
agencies and child pornography are inextricably linked.
It's very easy for a criminal spook to plant child porn on some poor slob's machine - especially when they want to keep him
on the hook to sink his ass for something bigger in the future. Who knows... this guy may have done some shit but I'm willing
to bet he was entirely targeted by these IC assholes. Facing 135 years in prison... yet that baggy ass cunt Hillary walks free...
Funny how they always seem to have a "sting" operation in progress when there's anyone the DC rats want to destroy but strangely,
or not, silent as the grave when one of the special people are fingered.
Of all these things the C_A can do, it doesn't take a brain surgeon to realize that planting CP on a computer of someone you
don't like would be a piece of cake, comparatively speaking.
Of all these things the C_A can do, it doesn't take a brain surgeon to realize that planting CP on a computer of someone you
don't like would be a piece of cake, comparatively speaking.
The "Spoofing" or Digital Finger Print & Parallel Construction tools that can be used against Governments, Individuals, enemies
& adversaries are Chilling.
The CIA can not only hack into anything -- they can download any "evidence" they want onto your phone or computer. Child pornography,
national secrets, you name it. Then they can blackmail you, threatening prosecution for whatever crap they have planted, then
"found" on your computer. They can also "spoof" the source of such downloads -- for instance, if they want to "prove" that something
on your computer (or Donald Trump's computer) came from a "Russian source" -- they can spoof the IP address of a Russian source.
The take-away: no digital evidence the CIA or NSA produces on any subject whatsoever can be trusted. No digital evidence should
be acceptable in any case where the government has an interest, because they have the complete ability to fabricate and implant
any evidence on any iphone or computer. And worse: they have intentionally created these digital vulnerabilities and pushed them
onto the whole world via Microsoft and Google. Government has long been at war with liberty, claiming that we need to give up
liberty to be secure. Now we learn that they have been deliberately sabotaging our security, in order to augment their own power.
Time to shut down the CIA and all the other spy agencies. They're not keeping us free OR secure, and they're doing it deliberately.
Their main function nowadays seems to be lying us into wars against countries that never attacked us, and had no plans to do so.
The Echelon Computer System Catch Everything
The Flagging goes to Notify the Appropriate Alphabet,,,...Key Words Phrases...Algorithms,...It all gets sucked up and chewed
on and spat out to the surmised computed correct departments...That simple.
Effective immediately defund, Eliminate & Supeona it's Agents, Officials & Dept. Heads in regard to the Mass Surveillance,
Global Espionage Spying network & monitoring of a President Elect by aforementioned Agencies & former President Obama, AG Lynch
& DIA James Clapper, CIA John Breanan.
Since 911, they've been "protecting" the shit out of us. "protecting" away every last fiber of liberty. Was watching some fact-based
media about the CIA's failed plan to install Yeltsin's successor via a Wallstreet banking cartel bet (see, LTCM implosion). The
ultimate objectives were to rape and loot post-Soviet Russian resources and enforce regime change. It's such a tired playbook
at this point. Who DOESNT know about this sort of affront? Apparently even nobel prize economists cant prevent a nation from failing
lol. The ultimate in vanity; our gubmint and its' shadow controllers.
This is because people who are smart enough to write walware for the CIA send messages in the clear about child porn and are
too dumb to encrypt images with a key that would take the lifetime of the universe to break.
Next his mother will be found to have a tax problem and his brother's credit rating zeroed out.
Meanwhile Comey will be found to have been "careless".
Yeah I don't believe for a second that this guy had anything to do with child porn. Not like Obama and his hotdogs or Clintons
at pedo island, or how bout uncle pervie podesta? go after them, goons and spooks. They (intelligence agencies) falsely accuse
people of exactly what they are ass-deep in. loses credibility with me when the CIA clowns or NSA fuck ups accuse anyone of child
porn; especially one of their former employees who is 'disgruntled'. LOL. another spook railroad job done on a whistleblower.
fuck the CIA and all 17 alphabet agencies who spy on us 24/7. Just ask, if you want to snoop on me. I may even tell you what I'm
up to because I have nothing that I would hide since, I don't give a shit about you or whether you approve of what I am doing.
"Yeah I don't believe for a second that this guy had anything to do with child porn."
Speculation by my part: He was running a Tor server, and the porn originated from other Tor users. If that is the case ( it
would be easy for law enforcement to just assume it was his) law enforcement enjoys a quick and easy case.
It really doesn't matter if someone wants to hide. That is their right. Only Nazi's like our spy agencies would use the old
Gestapo line, "If you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to worry about. Or better yet, you should let me turn your life
upside down if you have nothing to hide. " Bullshit! It's none of their fucking business. How bout that? Spooks and secret clowns
CAN and DO frame anybody for whatever or murder whomever they wish. So why WOULDNT people be afraid when government goons start
sticking their big snouts into their lives??? They can ruin your life for the sake of convenience. Zee Furor is not pleased with
your attitude, comrade.
"... Let me just say this: the President used the word "wiretapping" but I think it was very clear to us that have been in the intelligence business, that this was a synonym for "surveillance". ..."
"... When I was in senior position in CIA's counterterrorism center, I had a deputy who was an FBI officer. An office in FBI HQ down in Washington had an FBI lead with a CIA deputy. There's a lot more cooperation than one would think. There are individuals that do assignments in each other's organisations to help foster levels of cooperation. I had members of NSA in my staff when I was at CIA, members of diplomatic security, members of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, and it was run like a task force, so, there's a lot more cooperation than the media presents, they always think that there are these huge major battles between the organisations and that's rarely true. ..."
"... John Brennan is acting more like a political operative than a former director of CIA. ..."
The mighty CIA has fallen victim to a major breach, with WikiLeaks revealing the true scope of the Agency's ability for cyber-espionage.
Its tools seem to be aimed at ordinary citizens – your phone, your car, your TV, even your fridge can become an instrument of surveillance
in the hands of the CIA. How does the CIA use these tools, and why do they need them in the first place?
And as WikiLeaks promises even more revelations, how is all of this going to shape the already tense relationship between new
president and the intelligence community?
A man who has spent over two decades in the CIA's clandestine service – Gary Berntsen is on SophieCo.
Sophie Shevardnadze: Gary Berntsen, former CIA official, welcome to the show, great to have you with us.
Now, Vault 7, a major batch of CIA docs revealed by Wikileaks uncovers the agency's cyber tools. We're talking about world's most
powerful intelligence agency - how exactly did the CIA lose control of its arsenal of hacking weapons?
Gary Berntsen:
First off, I'd like to say that the world has changed a lot in the last several decades, and people are communicating in
many different ways and intelligence services, whether they be American or Russian, are covering these communications and their coverage
of those communications has evolved. Without commenting on the specific validity of those tools, it was clear that the CIA was surely
using contractors to be involved in this process, not just staff officers, and that individuals decided that they had problems with
U.S. policy, and have leaked these things to Wikileaks. This is a large problem, for the U.S. community, but just as the U.S. is
having problems, the Russia face similar problems. Just this week you had multiple members of the FSB charged with hacking as well,
and they have been charged by the U.S. government. So both services who are competitors, face challenges as we've entered a new era
of mass communications.
SS: So like you're saying, the leaker or leakers of the CIA docs is presumably a CIA contractor - should
the agency be spending more effort on vetting its own officers? Is the process rigorous enough?
GB: Clearly.
Look There have been individuals since the dawn of history. Espionage is the second oldest occupation, have conducted spying
and espionage operations, and there have been people who have turned against their own side and worked for competitors and worked
for those opposing the country or the group that they're working with. It's been a problem from the beginning, and it continues
to be a problem, and the U.S. clearly is going to have to do a much better job at vetting those individuals who are given security
clearances, without a doubt.
SS: The CIA studied the flaws in the software of devices like iPhones, Androids, Smart TVs, apps
like Whatsapp that left them exposed to hacking, but didn't care about patching those up - so, in essence the agency chose
to leave Americans vulnerable to cyberattacks, rather than protect them?
GB: I think you have to understand, in this world that we're operating and the number one target of our intelligence
community are terrorists. Since the attacks of 9\11, 16 years ago, the obsession of the American intelligence community is to
identify those planning terrorist attacks, collecting information on them and being able to defeat them. These individuals are
using all these means of communication. I have spoken with many security services around the world, since my retirement back in
2005-2006, a lot of them have had problems covering the communications of somebody's very devices and programs that you've talked
about - whether they be narcotraffickers or salafist jihadists, they are all piggybacking off of commercial communications. Therefore
the need for modern intelligence services to sort of provide coverage of all means of communications. And there's a price that
you pay for that.
SS: One of the most disturbing parts of the leaks is the "Weeping Angel" program - CIA hacking into
Samsung Smart TVs to record what's going on even when the TV appears to be turned off. Why are the CIA's tools designed to penetrate
devices used by ordinary Western citizens at home?
GB: Look, I wouldn't say it has anything to do with Western homes, because the CIA doesn't do technical operations
against American citizens - that's prohibited by the law. If the CIA does anything in the U.S., it does it side-by-side with the
FBI, and it does it according to FISA - the Foreign Intelligence and Surveillance Act laws. It's gotta go to the judge to do those
things. Those tools are used primarily against the individuals and terrorists that are targeting the U.S. or other foreign entities
that we see as a significant threat to the U.S. national security, which is the normal functioning of any intelligence service.
SS: Just like you say, the CIA insists it never uses its investigative tools on American citizens
in the US, but, we're wondering, exactly how many terrorist camps in the Middle East have Samsung Smart TVs to watch their favorite
shows on? Does it seem like the CIA lost its direction?
GB: Plenty of them.
SS: Plenty?...
GB: I've travelled in the Middle East, Samsungs are sold everywhere. Sophie, Samsung TVs are sold all over
the world. I've spent a lot of time in the Middle East, I've seen them in Afghanistan, I've seen them everywhere. So, any kind
of devices that you can imagine, people are using everywhere. We're in a global economy now.
SS: The CIA has tools to hack iPhones - but they make up only around 15 % of the world's smartphone
market. IPhones are not popular among terrorists, but they are among business and political elites - so are they the real target
here?
GB: No. The CIA in relative terms to the size of the world is a small organisation. It is an organisation
that has roughly 20 or more thousand people - it's not that large in terms of covering a planet with 7 billion people. We have
significant threats to the U.S. and to the Western world. We live in an age of super-terrorism, we live in an age when individuals,
small groups of people, can leverage technology at a lethal effect. The greatest threats to this planet are not just nuclear,
they are bio. The U.S. needs to have as many tools as possible to defend itself against these threats, as does Russia want to
have similar types of tools to defend itself. You too, Russian people have suffered from a number of terrible terrorist acts.
SS: Wikileaks suggest the CIA copied the hacking habits of other nations to create a fake electronic
trace - why would the CIA need that?
GB: The CIA, as any intelligence service, would look to conduct coverage in the most unobtrusive fashion as
possible. It is going to do its operations so that they can collect and collect again and again against terrorist organisations,
where and whenever it can, because sometimes threats are not just static, they are continuous.
SS: You know this better, so enlighten me: does the he CIA have the authorisation to create the
surveillance tools it had in the first place? Who gives it such authorisation?
GB: The CIA was created in 1947 by the National Security Act of the U.S. and does two different things - it
does FI (foreign intelligence) collection and it does CA - covert action. Its rules for collection of intelligence were enshrined
in the law that created it, the CIA Act 110, in 1949, but the covert action part of this, where it does active measures, when
it gets involved in things - all of those are covered by law. The Presidential finding had to be written, it had to be presented
to the President. The President's signs off on those things. Those things are then briefed to members of Congress, or the House
Permanent Subcommittee for Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee for Intelligence. We have a very rigorous process of review
of the activities of our intelligence communities in the U.S.
SS: But you're talking about the activities in terms of operations. I'm just asking - does CIA need
any authorisation or permission to create the tools it has in its arsenal? Or it can just go ahead
GB: Those tools and the creation of collection tools falls
under the same laws that allowed the CIA to be established. And that was the 1949 Intelligence Act. And also, subsequently, the
laws in 1975. Yes.
SS: So, the CIA programme names are quite colourful, sometimes wacky - "Weeping Angel", "Swamp
Monkey", "Brutal Kangaroo" - is there a point to these, is there any logic, or are they completely random? I always wondered...
GB: There's absolutely no point to that, and it's random.
SS:Okay, so how do you come up with those names? Who like, one says: "Monkey" and another one says: "Kangaroo"?...
GB: I'm sure they are computer-generated.
SS: Trump accused Obama of wiretapping him during the campaign Could the CIA have actually spied
on the president? It seems like the agency doesn't have the best relationship with Donald Trump - how far can they go?
GB: Let me just say this: the President used the word "wiretapping" but I think it was very clear to us that
have been in the intelligence business, that this was a synonym for "surveillance". Because most people are on cellphones, people
aren't using landlines anymore, so there's no "wiretapping", okay. These all fall under the Intelligence Surveillance Act, as
I stated earlier, this thing existing in the U.S.. It was clear to President Trump and to those in his campaign, after they were
elected, and they did a review back that the Obama Administration sought FISA authorisation to do surveillance of the Trump campaign
in July and then in October. They were denied in July, they were given approval in October, and in October they did some types
of surveillance of the Trump campaign. This is why the President, of course, tweeted, that he had been "wiretapped" - of course
"wiretapping" being a synonym for the surveillance against his campaign, which was never heard of in the U.S. political history
that I can remember, I can't recall any way of this being done. It's an outrage, and at the same time, Congressional hearings
are going to be held and they are going to review all of these things, and they are going to find out exactly what happened and
what was done. It's unclear right now, but all we do know - and it has been broken in the media that there were two efforts, and
at the second one, the authorisation was given. That would never have been done by the CIA, because they don't do that sort of
coverage in the U.S.. That would either be the FBI or the NSA, with legal authorities and those authorities the problem that
the Trump administration had is they believed that the information from these things was distributed incorrectly. Any time an
American - and this is according to the U.S. law - any time an American is on the wire in the U.S., their names got to be
minimized from this and it clearly wasn't done and the Trump administration was put in a bad light because of this.
SS: If what you're saying is true, how does that fall under foreign intelligence? Is that more of
the FBI-NSA expertise?
GB: It was FBI and NSA - it was clearly the FBI and the NSA that were involved, it would never have been the
CIA doing that, they don't listen to telephones in the U.S., they read the product of other agencies that would provide those
things, but clearly, there were individuals on those phone calls that they believed were foreign and were targeting those with
potential communications with the Trump campaign. Let's be clear here - General Clapper, the DNI for President Obama, stated before
he left office, that there was no, I repeat, no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. This has been something
that has been dragged out again, and again, and again, by the media. This is a continuing drumbeat of the mainstream, left-wing
media of the U.S., to paint the President in the poorest light, to attempt to discredit Donald Trump.
SS: With the intelligence agencies bringing down Trump's advisors like Michael Flynn - and you said
the people behind that were Obama's loyalists - can we talk about the intelligence agencies being too independent from the White
House, playing their own politics?
GB: I think part of the problem that we've seen during the handover of power from President Obama to President
Trump was that there was a number of holdovers that went from political appointee to career status that had been placed in the
NatSec apparatus and certain parts of the intelligence organisations. It is clear that President Trump and his team are determined
to remove those people to make sure that there's a continuity of purpose and people aren't leaking information that would put
the Administration into a negative light. That's the goal of the administration, to conduct itself consistent with the goals of
securing the country from terrorism and other potential threats - whether they be counter-narcotics, or intelligence agencies
trying to breach our you know, the information that we hold secure.
SS: Here's a bit of conspiracy theories - could it be that the domestic surveillance agencies like
the NSA or the FBI orchestrated the Vault 7 leaks - to damage CIA, stop it from infringing on their turf?
GB :I really don't think so and that is conspiracy thinking. You have to understand something, in the
intelligence communities in the U.S., whether it be the CIA and FBI, we've done a lot of cross-fertilizations. When I was in senior
position in CIA's counterterrorism center, I had a deputy who was an FBI officer. An office in FBI HQ down in Washington had an
FBI lead with a CIA deputy. There's a lot more cooperation than one would think. There are individuals that do assignments in
each other's organisations to help foster levels of cooperation. I had members of NSA in my staff when I was at CIA, members of
diplomatic security, members of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, and it was run like a task force, so, there's a lot more cooperation
than the media presents, they always think that there are these huge major battles between the organisations and that's rarely
true.
SS: Generally speaking - is there rivalry between American intel agencies at all? Competition for
resources, maybe?
GB: I think, sometimes, between the Bureau and the CIA - the CIA is the dominant agency abroad, and the FBI
is the dominant agency in the U.S. What they do abroad, they frequently have to get cleared by us, what we do domestically, we
have to get cleared by them, and sometimes there's some friction, but usually, we're able to work this out. It makes for great
news, the CIA fighting FBI, but the reality is that there's a lot more cooperation than confrontation. We are all in the business
of trying to secure the American homeland and American interests globally.
SS: I'm still thinking a lot about the whole point of having this hacking arsenal for the CIA since
you talk on their behalf - the possibility to hack phones, computers, TVs and cars - if the actual terrorist attacks on US soil,
like San Bernardino, Orlando are still missed?
GB: Look. There are hundreds of individuals, if not thousands, planning efforts against the U.S. at any
time. It can be many-many things. And the U.S. security services, there's the CIA, the FBI, NSA - block many-many of these things,
but it is impossible to stop them all. Remember, this is an open society here, in America, with 320 million people, here. We try
to foster open economic system, we allow more immigration to America than all countries in the world combined. This is a great
political experiment here, but it's also very difficult to police. There are times that the U.S. security services are going to
fail. It's inevitable. We just have to try the best we can, do the best job that we can, while protecting the values that attract
so many people to the U.S.
SS:The former CIA director John Brennan is saying Trump's order to temporarily ban travel from some
Muslim states is not going to help fight terrorism in 'any significant way'. And the countries where the terrorists have previously
come from - like Saudi Arabia, or Afghanistan, it's true - aren't on the list. So does he maybe have a point?
GB: John Brennan is acting more like a political operative than a former director of CIA. The countries that
Mr. Trump had banned initially, or at least had put a partial, sort of a delay - where states like Somalia, Libya, the Sudan,
Iran - places where we couldn't trust local vetting. Remember something, when someone immigrates to the U.S., we have what's called
an "immigration packet": they may have to get a chest X-ray to make sure they don't bring any diseases with them, they have to
have background check on any place they've ever lived, and in most of these places there are no security forces to do background
checks on people that came from Damascus, because parts of Damascus are totally destroyed - there's been warfare. It is actually
a very reasonable thing for President Trump to ask for delay in these areas. Look, the Crown-Prince, the Deputy Crown-Prince of
Saudi Arabia was just in the United States and met with Donald Trump, and he said he didn't believe it was a "ban on Muslims".
This was not a "ban on Muslims", it was an effort to slow down and to create more opportunity to vet those individuals coming
from states where there's a preponderance of terrorist organisations operating. A reasonable step by President Trump, something
he promised during the campaign, something he's fulfilling. But again, I repeat - America allows more immigration into the U.S.,
than all countries combined. So, we really don't need to be lectured on who we let in and who we don't let in.
SS: But I still wonder if the Crown-Prince would've had the same comment had Saudi Arabia been on
that ban list. Anyways, Michael Hayden, ex-CIA
GB: Wait a second, Sophie - the Saudis have a reasonable form to police their society, and they provide accurate
police checks. If they didn't create accurate police checks, we would've given the delay to them as well.
SS: Ok, I got your point. Now, Michael Hayden, ex-CIA and NSA chief, pointed out that the US intelligence
enlists agents in the Muslim world with the promise of eventual emigration to America - is Trump's travel ban order going to hurt
American intelligence gathering efforts in the Middle East?
GB: No, the question here - there were individuals that worked as translators for us in Afghanistan and Iraq
and serving in such roles as translators, they were promised the ability to immigrate to the United States. Unfortunately, some
of them were blocked in the first ban that was put down, because individuals who wrote that, didn't consider that. That has been
considered in the re-write, that the Trump administration had submitted, which is now being attacked by a judge in Hawaii, and
so it was taken into consideration, but the objective here was to help those that helped U.S. forces on the ground, especially
those who were translators, in ground combat operations, where they risked their lives alongside American soldiers.
SS: You worked in Afghanistan - you were close to capturing Bin Laden back in 2001 - what kind of
spying tools are actually used on the ground by the CIA to catch terrorists?
GB: The CIA as does any intelligence service in the world, is a human business. It's a business where we work
with local security forces to strengthen their police and intelligence forces, we attempt to leverage them, we have our own people
on the ground that speak the language, we're trying to help build transportation there. There's no "secret sauce" here. There's
no super-technology that changes the country's ability to conduct intelligence collections or operations. In Afghanistan the greatest
thing that the U.S. has is broad support and assistance to Afghan men and women across the country. We liberated half of the population,
and for women were providing education, and when the people see what we were doing: trying to build schools, providing USAID projects
- all of these things - this makes the population willing to work with and support the United States. Frequently, members of the
insurgence groups will see this and sometimes they do actually cross the lines and cooperate with us. So, it's a full range of
American political power, whether it's hard or soft, that is the strength of the American intelligence services - because
people in the world actually believe - and correctly so - that American more than generally a force of good in the world.
SS: Gary, thank you so much for this interesting interview and insight into the world of the CIA.
We've been talking to Gary Berntsen, former top CIA officer, veteran of the agency, talking about the politics of American intelligence
in the Trump era. That's it for this edition of SophieCo, I will see you next time.
GreenPizza:
Just thinking here in the light of how things are unfolding with the CIA I am wondering since Federal crimes are committed
can the FBI investigate the CIA acting as America Federal Law Enforcement.
RedBlowDryer -> GreenPin
I think the US intelligent agencies are harming their country more than any enemy of the US.
CyanGrapes
There is a reason why JFK wanted to dismantle the CIA. This guy is lying.
PurpleWieghts
CIA needs hacking tools to make it look like it was carried out by another state simply for plausible deniability.
Carl Zaisser
a "force for good in the world"?...sounds like the American white hat-black hat myth...read Naomi Klein's "The Shock
Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism". This is a detailed litany of America's various kinds of interventions in multiple
countries that cold hardly be described as "a force for good in the world"...a force for "America's values" (read with
ironically), perhaps
Carl Zaisser
WHO is responsible for the outbreak of chaotic warfare in Libya and Syria?
Should we trust the Saudi vetting services...think of who the September 11 bombers were? Was there another reason they were
not on Trump's banned countries list? Too big to mess with, i.e., oil and weapons sales?
GreenPin
Amazing how they justify their destructive behaviour in a way as they are serving America people and doing good around the
wold. You can sugar count your crimes against humanity as much as you can, but the reality of today' human misery speaks for
itself.
waterbearer
since the United States was founded in 1776, she has been at war during 214 out of her 235 calendar years of existence
XXX
interesting, but begs the question "Can we really trust what this guy tells us?" If not, what parts can we trust, and what
parts can't we?
XXX
You'd have to deconstruct his talking points and I don't know how that is done. Intelligence probably knows how to do that. I
noticed he was becoming more zealous on hegemony and exceptionalism as the interview neared the end.
I agree. Bernsten is almost like-ably energetic, but he is, in the end, an uncompromising warrior of the empire.
XXX
if Trump is to be controlled--they gotta have some dirt--or threat against his family --it's how they operate---
XXX
Mr. Berntsen left out the very important NSC10/2 legislation, which gave the CIA free reign with deniability as the cover.
This needs to be repealed. With this legislation, the CIA answers to no one, and goes around the world wrecking havoc with the
governments and people where they like. We will never have peace until that legislation is repealed.
XXX
This is why interesting books to read about the history of the CIA.
The Dulles brothers,
David Talbot: The Devil's Chessboard,
Fletcher Prouty: The Secret Team.
XXX
I applaud former CIA and FBI Gary Bernstein for speaking out on the most powerful intelligence networks on the planet
regarding their surveillance activities. Every nation needs intelligence to safeguard but if we go beyond the call of duty and
get exposed .this leaves Pres Trump and his Adm with no option but to consider corrective measures with a visit to Langley
etc.. Here again the failures of Liberalism are coming up in the wash for cleaning up.
XXX
Liberalism has not been running the country for the last 54 years. We have been under a coup government and just got used
to it.
Now, the prime suspect in the breach has been identified: a 29-year-old
former C.I.A. software engineer who had designed malware used to break into the computers of terrorism
suspects and other targets, The New York Times has learned.
Agents with the Federal Bureau of Investigation searched the Manhattan
apartment of the suspect, Joshua A. Schulte, one week after WikiLeaks released the first of the C.I.A.
documents in March last year, and then stopped him from flying to Mexico on vacation, taking his passport,
according to court records and relatives. The search warrant application said Mr. Schulte was suspected of
"distribution of national defense information," and agents told the court they had retrieved "N.S.A. and
C.I.A. paperwork" in addition to a computer, tablet, phone and other electronics.
But instead of charging Mr. Schulte in the breach, referred to as the Vault
7 leak, prosecutors charged him last August with possessing child pornography, saying agents had found
10,000 illicit images on a server he created as a business in 2009 while studying at the University of Texas
at Austin.
Court papers quote messages from Mr. Schulte that suggest he was aware of
the encrypted images of children being molested by adults on his computer, though he advised one user, "Just
don't put anything too illegal on there."
In September, Mr. Schulte was released on the condition that he not leave
New York City, where he lived with a cousin, and keep off computers. He was jailed in December after
prosecutors found evidence that he had violated those rules, and he has been held at the Metropolitan
Correctional Center in Manhattan since then. He has
posted on Facebook under a pseudonym a series of essays
critical of the criminal justice system.
It is unclear why, more than a year after he was arrested, he has not been
charged or cleared in connection with Vault 7. Leak investigators have had access to electronic audit trails
inside the C.I.A. that may indicate who accessed the files that were stolen, and they have had possession of
Mr. Schulte's personal data for many months.
... ... ...
According to his family and
his
LinkedIn page
, Mr. Schulte did an internship at the National Security Agency while working on a bachelor's degree in computer
engineering. He worked in the C.I.A.'s Engineering Development Group, which designed the hacking tools used by its Center for
Cyber Intelligence. He left the agency in November 2016 and moved to New York to work for Bloomberg L.P. as a software engineer.
Most of the government's cyberespionage is carried out by the N.S.A., but the C.I.A. also employs hackers. The leaked Vault 7
documents came from the agency's Engineering Development Group and included descriptions and instructions for the use of agency
hacking tools, but only a small amount of the actual computer code for the tools.
"... All this speech to stifle speech comes in reaction to the first publication in the start of WikiLeaks' "Vault 7" series. Vault 7 has begun publishing evidence of remarkable CIA incompetence and other shortcomings. This includes the agency's creation, at a cost of billions of taxpayer dollars, of an entire arsenal of cyber viruses and hacking programs -- over which it promptly lost control and then tried to cover up the loss. These publications also revealed the CIA's efforts to infect the public's ubiquitous consumer products and automobiles with computer viruses. ..."
"... President Theodore Roosevelt understood the danger of giving in to those "foolish or traitorous persons who endeavor to make it a crime to tell the truth about the Administration when the Administration is guilty of incompetence or other shortcomings." Such "endeavor is itself a crime against the nation," Roosevelt wrote. President Trump and his officials should heed that advice ..."
Mike Pompeo, in his first speech as director of the CIA, chose to declare war on free speech
rather than on the United States' actual adversaries. He went after WikiLeaks, where I serve as
editor, as a "non-state hostile intelligence service." In Pompeo's worldview, telling the truth
about the administration can be a crime -- as Attorney General Jeff Sessions quickly
underscored when he described my arrest as a "priority." News organizations reported that
federal prosecutors are weighing whether to bring charges against members of WikiLeaks,
possibly including conspiracy, theft of government property and violating the Espionage
Act.
All this speech to stifle speech comes in reaction to the first publication in the start
of WikiLeaks' "Vault 7" series. Vault 7 has begun publishing evidence of remarkable CIA
incompetence and other shortcomings. This includes the agency's creation, at a cost of billions
of taxpayer dollars, of an entire arsenal of cyber viruses and hacking programs -- over which
it promptly lost control and then tried to cover up the loss. These publications also revealed
the CIA's efforts to infect the public's ubiquitous consumer products and automobiles with
computer viruses.
When the director of the CIA, an unelected public servant, publicly demonizes a publisher
such as WikiLeaks as a "fraud," "coward" and "enemy," it puts all journalists on notice, or
should. Pompeo's next talking point, unsupported by fact, that WikiLeaks is a "non-state
hostile intelligence service," is a dagger aimed at Americans' constitutional right to receive
honest information about their government. This accusation mirrors attempts throughout history
by bureaucrats seeking, and failing, to criminalize speech that reveals their own failings.
President Theodore Roosevelt understood the danger of giving in to those "foolish or
traitorous persons who endeavor to make it a crime to tell the truth about the Administration
when the Administration is guilty of incompetence or other shortcomings." Such "endeavor is
itself a crime against the nation," Roosevelt wrote. President Trump and his officials should
heed that advice .
"... To be precise, CrowdStrike did provide the FBI with allegedly "certified true images" of the DNC servers allegedly involved in the alleged "hack." They also allegedly provided these images to FireEye and Mandiant, IIRC ..."
"... Of course, given the CrowdStrike itself is a massively compromised organization due to its founder and CEO, those "certified true images" are themselves tainted evidence. ..."
"... In addition, regardless of whether the images were true or not, the evidence allegedly contained therein is painfully inadequate to confirm that APT28 or APT29 were involved, nor that the Russian government was involved, or even that there was a real hack involved, and even less evidence that any emails that might have been exfiltrated were given to Wikileaks as opposed to another leak such as that alleged by Sy Hersh to have been done by Seth Rich. ..."
Re this: " In the case of Russian meddling there is no forensic evidence available to the IC
because the Democratic National Committee did not permit the FBI to investigate and examine
the computers and the network that was allegedly attacked."
To be precise, CrowdStrike did provide the FBI with allegedly "certified true images"
of the DNC servers allegedly involved in the alleged "hack." They also allegedly provided
these images to FireEye and Mandiant, IIRC .
All three allegedly examined those images and concurred with CrowdStrike's analysis.
Of course, given the CrowdStrike itself is a massively compromised organization due to
its founder and CEO, those "certified true images" are themselves tainted evidence.
In addition, regardless of whether the images were true or not, the evidence allegedly
contained therein is painfully inadequate to confirm that APT28 or APT29 were involved, nor
that the Russian government was involved, or even that there was a real hack involved, and
even less evidence that any emails that might have been exfiltrated were given to Wikileaks
as opposed to another leak such as that alleged by Sy Hersh to have been done by Seth
Rich.
The "assessment" that Putin ordered any of this is pure mind-reading and can be utterly
dismissed absent any of the other evidence Publius points out as necessary.
The same applies to any "estimate" that the Russian government preferred Trump or wished
to denigrate Clinton. Based on what I read in pro-Russian news outlets, Russian officials
took great pains to not pick sides and Putin's comments were similarly very restrained. The
main quote from Putin about Trump that emerged was mistranslated as approval whereas it was
more an observation of Trump's personality. At no time did Putin ever say he favored Trump
over Clinton, even though that was a likely probability given Clinton's "Hitler"
comparison.
As an aside, I also recommend Scott Ritter's trashing of the ICA. Ritter is familiar with
intelligence estimates and their reliability based on his previous service as a UN weapons
inspector in Iraq and in Russia implementing arms control treaties.
"... What has however become clear in recent days is that the 'Gerasimov Doctrine' was not invented by its supposed author, but by a British academic, Mark Galeotti, who has now confessed – although in a way clearly designed to maintain as much of the 'narrative' as possible. ..."
"... Three days ago, an article by Galleoti appeared in 'Foreign Policy' entitled 'I'm Sorry for Creating the "Gerasimov Doctrine": I was the first to write about Russia's infamous high-tech military strategy. One small problem: it doesn't exist.' ..."
"... The translation of the original article by Gerasimov with annotations by Galeotti which provoked the whole hysteria turns out to be a classic example of what I am inclined to term 'bad Straussianism.' ..."
"... What Strauss would have called the 'exoteric' meaning of the article quite clearly has to do with defensive strategies aimed at combatting the kind of Western 'régime change' projects about which people like those who write for 'Lawfare' are so enthusiastic. But Galeotti tells us that this is, at least partially, a cover for an 'esoteric' meaning, which has to do with offensive actions in Ukraine and similar places. ..."
More material on the British end of the conspiracy.
Commenting on an earlier piece by PT, I suggested that a key piece of evidence pointing to
'Guccifer 2.0' being a fake personality created by the conspirators in their attempt to
disguise the fact that the materials from the DNC published by 'WikiLeaks' were obtained by a
leak rather than a hack had to do with the involvement of the former GCHQ person Matt
Tait.
To recapitulate: Back in June 2016, hard on the heels of the claim by Dmitri Alperovitch
of 'CrowdStrike' to have identified clinching evidence making the GRU prime suspects, Tait
announced that, although initially unconvinced, he had found a 'smoking gun' in the
'metadata' of the documents released by 'Guccifer 2.0.'
A key part of this was the use by someone modifying a document of 'Felix Edmundovich'
– the name and patronymic of Dzerzhinsky, the Lithuanian-Polish noble who created the
Soviet secret police.
As I noted, Tait was generally identified as a former GCHQ employee who now ran a
consultancy called 'Capital Alpha Security.' However, checking Companies House records
revealed that he had filed 'dormant accounts' for the company. So it looks as though the
company was simply a 'front', designed to fool 'useful idiots' into believing he was an
objective analyst.
As I also noted in those comments, Tait writes the 'Lawfare' blog, one of whose founders,
Benjamin Wittes, looks as though he may himself have been involved in the conspiracy up to
the hilt. Furthermore, a secure income now appears to have been provided to replace that from
the non-existent consultancy, in the shape of a position at the 'Robert S. Strauss Center for
International Security and Law', run by Robert Chesney, a co-founder with Wittes of
'Lawfare.'
A crucial part of the story, however, is that the notion of GRU responsibility for the
supposed 'hacks' appears to be part of a wider 'narrative' about the supposed 'Gerasimov
Doctrine.' From the 'View from Langley' provided to Bret Stephens by CIA Director Mike Pompeo
at the 'Aspen Security Forum' last July:
'I hearken back to something called the Gerasimov doctrine from the early 70s, he's now
the head of the – I'm a Cold War guy, forgive me if I mention Soviet Union. He's now
the head of the Russian army and his idea was that you can win wars without firing a single
shot or with firing very few shots in ways that are decidedly not militaristic, and that's
what's happened. What changes is the costs; to effectuate change through cyber and through RT
and Sputnik, their news outlets, and through other soft means; has just really been lowered,
right. It used to be it was expensive to run an ad on a television station now you simply go
online and propagate your message. And so they have they have found an effective tool, an
easy way to go reach into our systems, and into our culture to achieve the outcomes they are
looking for.'
What has however become clear in recent days is that the 'Gerasimov Doctrine' was not
invented by its supposed author, but by a British academic, Mark Galeotti, who has now
confessed – although in a way clearly designed to maintain as much of the 'narrative'
as possible.
Three days ago, an article by Galleoti appeared in 'Foreign Policy' entitled 'I'm
Sorry for Creating the "Gerasimov Doctrine": I was the first to write about Russia's infamous
high-tech military strategy. One small problem: it doesn't exist.'
'Gerasimov was actually talking about how the Kremlin understands what happened in the
"Arab Spring" uprisings, the "color revolutions" against pro-Moscow regimes in Russia's
neighborhood, and in due course Ukraine's "Maidan" revolt. The Russians honestly –
however wrongly – believe that these were not genuine protests against brutal and
corrupt governments, but regime changes orchestrated in Washington, or rather, Langley. This
wasn't a "doctrine" as the Russians understand it, for future adventures abroad: Gerasimov
was trying to work out how to fight, not promote, such uprisings at home.'
The translation of the original article by Gerasimov with annotations by Galeotti
which provoked the whole hysteria turns out to be a classic example of what I am inclined to
term 'bad Straussianism.'
What Strauss would have called the 'exoteric' meaning of the article quite clearly has
to do with defensive strategies aimed at combatting the kind of Western 'régime
change' projects about which people like those who write for 'Lawfare' are so enthusiastic.
But Galeotti tells us that this is, at least partially, a cover for an 'esoteric' meaning,
which has to do with offensive actions in Ukraine and similar places.
Having now read the text of the article, I can see a peculiar irony in it. In a section
entitled 'You Can't Generate Ideas On Command', Gerasimov suggests that 'The state of Russian
military science today cannot be compared with the flowering of military-theoretical thought
in our country on the eve of World War II.'
According to the 'exoteric' meaning of the article, it is not possible to blame anyone in
particular for this situation. But Gerasimov goes on on to remark that, while at the time of
that flowering there were 'no people with higher degrees' or 'academic schools or
departments', there were 'extraordinary personalities with brilliant ideas', who he terms
'fanatics in the best sense of the word.'
Again, Galeotti discounts the suggestion that nobody is to blame, assuming an 'esoteric
meaning', and remarking: 'Ouch. Who is he slapping here?'
Actually, Gerasimov refers by name to two, utterly different figures, who certainly were
'extraordinarily personalities with brilliant ideas.'
If Pompeo had even the highly amateurish grasp of the history of debates among Soviet
military theorists that I have managed to acquire he would be aware that one of the things
which was actually happening in the 'Seventies was the rediscovery of the ideas of Alexander
Svechin.
Confirming my sense that this has continued on, Gerasimov ends by using Svechin to point
up an intractable problem: it can be extraordinarily difficult to anticipate the conditions
of a war, and crucial not to impose a standardised template likely to be inappropriate, but
one has to make some kinds of prediction in order to plan.
Immediately after the passage which Galeotti interprets as a dig at some colleague,
Gerasimov elaborates his reference to 'extraordinary people with brilliant ideas' by
referring to an anticipation of a future war, which proved prescient, from a very different
figure to Svechin:
'People like, for instance, Georgy Isserson, who, despite the views he formed in the
prewar years, published the book "New Forms Of Combat." In it, this Soviet military
theoretician predicted: "War in general is not declared. It simply begins with already
developed military forces. Mobilization and concentration is not part of the period after the
onset of the state of war as was the case in 1914 but rather, unnoticed, proceeds long before
that." The fate of this "prophet of the Fatherland" unfolded tragically. Our country paid in
great quantities of blood for not listening to the conclusions of this professor of the
General Staff Academy.'
Unlike Svechin, whom I have read, I was unfamiliar with Isserson. A quick Google search,
however, unearthed a mass of material in American sources – including, by good fortune,
an online text of a 2010 study by Dr Richard Harrison entitled 'Architect of Soviet Victory
in World War II: The Life and Theories of G.S. Isserson', and a presentation summarising the
volume.
Ironically, Svechin and Isserson were on opposite sides of fundamental divides. So the
former, an ethnic Russian from Odessa, was one of the 'genstabisty', the former Tsarist
General Staff officers who sided with the Bolsheviks and played a critical role in teaching
the Red Army how to fight. Meanwhile Isserson was a very different product of the
'borderlands' – the son of a Jewish doctor, brought up in Kaunas, with a German Jewish
mother from what was then Königsberg, giving him an easy facility with German-language
sources.
The originator of the crucial concept of 'operational' art – the notion that in
modern industrial war, the ability to handle a level intermediate between strategy and
tactics was critical to success – was actually Svechin.
Developing the ambivalence of Clausewitz, however, he stressed that both the offensive and
the defensive had their places, and that the key to success was to know which was appropriate
when and also to be able rapidly to change from one to the other. His genuflections to
Marxist-Leninist dogma, moreover, were not such as to take in any of Dzerzhinsky's
people.
By contrast, Isserson was unambiguously committed to the offensive strand in the
Clausewitzian tradition, and a Bolshevik 'true believer' (although he married the daughter of
a dispossessed ethnically Russian merchant, who had their daughter baptised without his
knowledge.)
As Harrison brings out, Isserson's working through of the problems of offensive
'operational art' would be critical to the eventual success of the Red Army against Hitler.
However, the specific text to which he refers was, ironically, a warning of precisely one of
the problems implicit in the single-minded reliance on the offensive: the possibility that
one could be left with no good options confronting an antagonist similarly oriented –
as turned out to be the case.
As Gerasimov intimates, while unlike Svechin, executed in 1938, Isserson survived the
Stalin years, he was another of the victims of Dzerzhinsky's heirs. Arrested shortly before
his warnings were vindicated by the German attack on 22 June 1941, he would spend the war in
the Gulag and only return to normal life after Stalin's death.
So I think that the actual text of Gerasimov's article reinforces a point I have made
previously. The 'evidence' identified by Tait is indeed a 'smoking gun.' But it emphatically
does not point towards the GRU.
Meanwhile, another moral of the tale is that Americans really should stop being taken in
by charlatan Brits like Galeotti, Tait, and Steele.
Looks like Brennan was the architect of DNS false flag operation: "Hersh also told Butowsky that the DNC made up the Russian hacking story as a disinformation campaign -- directly pointing a finger
at former CIA director (and now
MSNBC/NBC contributor
) John Brennan as the architect."
Now all this staff started to remind me 9/11 investigation. Also by Mueller.
Notable quotes:
"... Notably, Crowdstrike has been considered by many to be discredited over their revision and retraction of a report over Russian hacking of Ukrainian military equipment ..."
"... Also notable is that Crowdstrike founder and anti-Putin Russian expat Dimitri Alperovitch sits on the Atlantic Council - which is funded by the US State Department, NATO, Latvia, Lithuania, and Ukranian Oligarch Victor Pinchuk. Who else is on the Atlantic Council? Evelyn Farkas - who slipped up during an MSNBC interview with Mika Brzezinski and disclosed that the Obama administration had been spying on the Trump campaign: ..."
"... Hersh also told Butowsky that the DNC made up the Russian hacking story as a disinformation campaign -- directly pointing a finger at former CIA director (and now MSNBC/NBC contributor ) John Brennan as the architect. ..."
"... I have a narrative of how that whole f*cking thing began. It's a Brennan operation, it was an American disinformation , and the fu*kin' President, at one point, they even started telling the press -- they were backfeeding the Press, the head of the NSA was going and telling the press, fu*king c*cksucker Rogers, was telling the press that we even know who in the Russian military intelligence service leaked it. ..."
"... Listen to Seymour Hersh leaked audio: https://www.youtube.com/embed/giuZdBAXVh0 (full transcription here and extended audio of the Hersh conversation here ) ..."
"... As we mentioned last week, Dotcom's assertion is backed up by an analysis done last year by a researcher who goes by the name Forensicator , who determined that the DNC files were copied at 22.6 MB/s - a speed virtually impossible to achieve from halfway around the world, much less over a local network - yet a speed typical of file transfers to a memory stick. ..."
"... Last but not least, let's not forget that Julian Assange heavily implied Seth Rich was a source: ..."
"... Given that a) the Russian hacking narrative hinges on Crowdstrikes's questionable reporting , and b) a mountain of evidence pointing to Seth Rich as the source of the leaked emails - it stands to reason that Congressional investigators and Special Counsel Robert Mueller should at minimum explore these leads. ..."
"... As retired U.S. Navy admiral James A. Lyons, Jr. asks: why aren't they? ..."
In addition to several odd facts surrounding Rich's still unsolved murder - which officials have deemed a "botched robbery," forensic
technical evidence has emerged which contradicts the Crowdstrike report. The Irvine, CA company
partially
funded by Google , was the
only
entity allowed to analyze the DNC servers in relation to claims of election hacking:
Notably, Crowdstrike has been considered by many to be discredited over their revision and retraction of a report over Russian
hacking of Ukrainian military equipment - a report which the government of Ukraine said was fake news.
In connection with the emergence in some media reports which stated that the alleged "80% howitzer D-30 Armed Forces of Ukraine
removed through scrapping Russian Ukrainian hackers software gunners," Land Forces Command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine informs
that the said information is incorrect .
Ministry of Defence of Ukraine asks journalists to publish only verified information received from the competent official sources.
Spreading false information leads to increased social tension in society and undermines public confidence in the Armed Forces
of Ukraine. -- mil.gov.ua (translated) (1.6.2017)
In fact, several respected journalists have cast serious doubt on CrowdStrike's report on the DNC servers:
Pay attention, because Mueller is likely to use the Crowdstrike report to support the rumored upcoming charges against Russian
hackers.
Also notable is that Crowdstrike founder and anti-Putin Russian expat Dimitri Alperovitch sits on the Atlantic Council - which
is funded by the US State Department, NATO, Latvia, Lithuania, and
Ukranian Oligarch Victor Pinchuk.
Who else is on the Atlantic Council?
Evelyn Farkas - who slipped up during an MSNBC interview with Mika Brzezinski and disclosed that the Obama administration had
been spying on the Trump campaign:
The Trump folks, if they found out how we knew what we knew about the Trump staff dealing with Russians, that they would try
to compromise those sources and methods , meaning we would not longer have access to that intelligence. - Evelyn Farkas
... ... ...
Brennan and Russian disinformation
Hersh also told Butowsky that the DNC made up the Russian hacking story as a disinformation campaign -- directly pointing a finger
at former CIA director (and now
MSNBC/NBC contributor
) John Brennan as the architect.
I have a narrative of how that whole f*cking thing began. It's a Brennan operation, it was an American disinformation , and
the fu*kin' President, at one point, they even started telling the press -- they were backfeeding the Press, the head of the NSA
was going and telling the press, fu*king c*cksucker Rogers, was telling the press that we even know who in the Russian military
intelligence service leaked it.
Hersh denied that he told Butowsky anything before the leaked audio emerged , telling NPR " I hear gossip [Butowsky] took two
and two and made 45 out of it. "
Technical Evidence
As we mentioned last week, Dotcom's assertion is backed up by an analysis done last year by a researcher who goes by the name
Forensicator , who determined that the DNC files were copied at
22.6 MB/s - a speed virtually impossible to achieve from halfway around the world, much less over a local network - yet a speed
typical of file transfers to a memory stick.
The big hint
Last but not least, let's not forget that Julian Assange heavily implied Seth Rich was a source:
Given that a) the Russian hacking narrative hinges on Crowdstrikes's questionable reporting , and b) a mountain of evidence pointing
to Seth Rich as the source of the leaked emails - it stands to reason that Congressional investigators and Special Counsel Robert
Mueller should at minimum explore these leads.
As retired U.S. Navy admiral James A. Lyons, Jr. asks: why aren't they?
Relax you conspiracy theory-loving extremists. Our 336 spy agencies are just busy trying to solve the Michael Hasting's murder
first. But it's just really hard to find the culprits because they're all hiding in Siberia.
"... Also note: Crowdstrike planted the malware on DNC systems, which they "discovered" later - https://disobedientmedia.com/2017/12/fancy-frauds-bogus-bears-malware-m ..."
(if that's too 'in the weeds' for you, ask your tech guys to read and verify)
And look who else sits on the Atlantic Council -
http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/about/experts/list/irene-chalupa
why it's the sister of Andrea Chalupa, unregistered foreign agent employed by the DNC as a "Consultant", whose entire family
is tied to Ukraine Intelligence.
Irena Chalupa is also the news anchor for Ukraine's propaganda channel
Stopfake.org She is a
Ukrainian Diaspora
leader. The Chalupas are the first family of Ukrainian propaganda. She works with and for Ukrainian Intelligence through
the Atlantic Council, Stopfake.org, and her sisters Andrea (EuromaidanPR) and Alexandra.
So, the Democrats want to show that the FBI spying was due to Page and not the dossier
because it came "first" so to speak?
This still doesn't excuse them using the dossier in FISA
warrant without disclosing information about how it was obtained and it doesn't take away
from the fact that he helped them nail Russians before.
How do they keep their reputation in
tact by being "two faced", it appears to me to make their reputation worse so I really don't
get the Democrats strategy on this, I suppose as it doesn't change what they have done.
I
still say Crowdstrike so called "analysis" is where the rubber really starts to hit the road
with Wikileaks disclosure, saying it was the "Russians".
Since the FBI never inspected the DNC's computers first-hand, the only evidence comes from
an Irvine, California, cyber-security firm known as CrowdStrike whose chief technical
officer, Dmitri Alperovitch, a well-known Putin-phobe, is a fellow at the Atlantic Council,
a Washington think tank that is also vehemently anti-Russian as well as a close Hillary
Clinton ally.
Thus, Putin-basher Clinton hired Putin-basher Alperovitch to investigate an alleged
electronic heist, and to absolutely no one's surprise, his company concluded that guilty
party was Vladimir Putin. Amazing! Since then, a small army of internet critics has chipped
away at CrowdStrike for praising the hackers as among the best in the business yet
declaring in the same breath that they gave themselves away by uploading a document in the
name of "Felix Edmundovich," i.e. Felix E. Dzerzhinsky, founder of the Soviet secret
police.
As noted cyber-security expert Jeffrey Carr observed with regard to Russia's two main
intelligence agencies: "Raise your hand if you think that a GRU or FSB officer would add
Iron Felix's name to the metadata of a stolen document before he released it to the world
while pretending to be a Romanian hacker. Someone clearly had a wicked sense of humor."
Since the FBI never inspected the DNC's computers first-hand, the only evidence comes from
an Irvine, California, cyber-security firm known as CrowdStrike whose chief technical
officer, Dmitri Alperovitch, a well-known Putin-phobe, is a fellow at the Atlantic Council,
a Washington think tank that is also vehemently anti-Russian as well as a close Hillary
Clinton ally.
Thus, Putin-basher Clinton hired Putin-basher Alperovitch to investigate an alleged
electronic heist, and to absolutely no one's surprise, his company concluded that guilty
party was Vladimir Putin. Amazing! Since then, a small army of internet critics has chipped
away at CrowdStrike for praising the hackers as among the best in the business yet
declaring in the same breath that they gave themselves away by uploading a document in the
name of "Felix Edmundovich," i.e. Felix E. Dzerzhinsky, founder of the Soviet secret
police.
As noted cyber-security expert Jeffrey Carr observed with regard to Russia's two main
intelligence agencies: "Raise your hand if you think that a GRU or FSB officer would add
Iron Felix's name to the metadata of a stolen document before he released it to the world
while pretending to be a Romanian hacker. Someone clearly had a wicked sense of humor."
"... The Deep State (Oligarchs and the MIC) is totally fucking loving this: they have Trump and the GOP giving them everything they ever wanted and they have the optics and distraction of an "embattled" president that claims to be against or a victim of the "deep state" and a base that rally's, circles the wagons around him, and falls for the narrative. ..."
"... They know exactly who it was with the memory stick, there is always video of one form or another either in the data center or near the premises that can indicate who it was. They either have a video of Seth Rich putting the stick into the server directly, or they at least have a video of his car entering and leaving the vicinity of the ex-filtration. ..."
"... This would have been an open and shut case if shillary was not involved. Since it was involved, you can all chalk it up to the Clinton body count. I pray that it gets justice. It and the country, the world - needs justice. ..."
Kim Dotcom has once again chimed in on the DNC hack, following a Sunday morning tweet from President Trump clarifying his previous
comments on Russian meddling in the 2016 election.
In response, Dotcom tweeted " Let me assure you, the DNC hack wasn't even a hack. It was an insider with a memory stick. I know
this because I know who did it and why," adding "Special Counsel Mueller is not interested in my evidence. My lawyers wrote to him
twice. He never replied. 360 pounds! " alluding of course to Trump's "400 pound genius" comment.
Dotcom's assertion is backed up by an analysis done last year by a researcher who goes by the name Forensicator , who determined
that the DNC files were copied at
22.6 MB/s - a speed virtually impossible to achieve from halfway around the world, much less over a local network - yet a speed
typical of file transfers to a memory stick.
The local transfer theory of course blows the Russian hacking narrative out of the water, lending credibility to the theory that
the DNC "hack" was in fact an inside job, potentially implicating late DNC IT staffer, Seth Rich.
John Podesta's email was allegely successfully "hacked" (he fell victim to a
phishing scam
) in March 2016, while the DNC reported suspicious activity (the suspected Seth Rich file transfer) in late April, 2016 according
to the
Washington Post.
On May 18, 2017, Dotcom proposed that if Congress includes the Seth Rich investigation in their Russia probe, he would provide
written testimony with evidence that Seth Rich was WikiLeaks' source.
On May 19 2017 Dotcom tweeted "I knew Seth Rich. I was involved"
Three days later, Dotcom again released a guarded statement saying "I KNOW THAT SETH RICH WAS INVOLVED IN THE DNC LEAK," adding:
"I have consulted with my lawyers. I accept that my full statement should be provided to the authorities and I am prepared
to do that so that there can be a full investigation. My lawyers will speak with the authorities regarding the proper process.
If my evidence is required to be given in the United States I would be prepared to do so if appropriate arrangements are made.
I would need a guarantee from Special Counsel Mueller, on behalf of the United States, of safe passage from New Zealand to the
United States and back. In the coming days we will be communicating with the appropriate authorities to make the necessary arrangements.
In the meantime, I will make no further comment."
Dotcom knew.
While one could simply write off Dotcom's claims as an attention seeking stunt, he made several comments and a series of tweets
hinting at the upcoming email releases prior to both the WikiLeaks dumps as well as the publication of the hacked DNC emails to a
website known as "DCLeaks."
In a May 14, 2015
Bloomberg article entitled "Kim Dotcom: Julian Assange Will Be Hillary Clinton's Worst Nightmare In 2016 ": "I have to say it's
probably more Julian," who threatens Hillary, Dotcom said. " But I'm aware of some of the things that are going to be roadblocks
for her ."
Two days later, Dotcom tweeted this:
Around two months later, Kim asks a provocative question
Two weeks after that, Dotcom then tweeted "Mishandling classified info is a crime. When Hillary's emails eventually pop up on
the internet who's going to jail?"
It should thus be fairly obvious to anyone that Dotcom was somehow involved, and therefore any evidence he claims to have, should
be taken seriously as part of Mueller's investigation. Instead, as Dotcom tweeted, "Special Counsel Mueller is not interested in
my evidence. My lawyers wrote to him twice. He never replied. "
The Deep State (Oligarchs and the MIC) is totally fucking loving this: they have Trump and the GOP giving them everything
they ever wanted and they have the optics and distraction of an "embattled" president that claims to be against or a victim of
the "deep state" and a base that rally's, circles the wagons around him, and falls for the narrative.
Meanwhile they keep enacting the most Pro Deep State/MIC/Police State/Zionist/Wall Street agenda possible. And they call it
#winning
"Had to be a Russian mole with a computer stick. MSM, DNC and Muller say so."
They know exactly who it was with the memory stick, there is always video of one form or another either in the data center
or near the premises that can indicate who it was. They either have a video of Seth Rich putting the stick into the server directly,
or they at least have a video of his car entering and leaving the vicinity of the ex-filtration.
This would have been an open and shut case if shillary was not involved. Since it was involved, you can all chalk it up
to the Clinton body count. I pray that it gets justice. It and the country, the world - needs justice.
Kim is great, Assange is great. Kim is playing a double game. He wants immunity from the US GUmmint overreach that destroyed
his company and made him a prisoner in NZ.
Good on ya Kim.
His name was Seth Rich...and he will reach out from the grave and bury Killary who murdered him.
There are so many nuances to this and all are getting mentioned but the one that also stands out is that in an age of demands
for gun control by the Dems, Seth Rich is never, ever mentioned. He should be the poster child for gun control. Young man, draped
in a American flag, helping democracy, gunned down...it writes itself.
They either are afraid of the possible racial issues should it turn out to be a black man killing a white man (but why should
that matter in a gun control debate?) or they just don't want people looking at this case. I go for #2.
Funny that George Webb can figure it out, but Trump, Leader of the Free World, is sitting there with his dick in his hand waiting
for someone to save him.
Whatever he might turn out to be, this much is clear: Trump is a spineless weakling. He might be able to fuck starlets, but
he hasn't got the balls to defend either himself or the Republic.
Webb's research is also...managed. But a lot of it was/is really good (don't follow it anymore) and I agree re: SR piece of
it.
I think SR is such an interesting case. It's not really an anomaly because SO many Bush-CFR-related hits end the same way and
his had typical signatures. But his also squeels of a job done w/out much prior planning because I think SR surprised everyone.
If, in fact, that was when he was killed. Everything regarding the family's demeanor suggests no.
MANY patterns in shootings: failure in law enforcement/intelligence who were notified of problem individuals ahead of time,
ARs, mental health and SSRIs, and ongoing resistance to gun control in DC ----these are NOT coincidences. Nor are distractions
in MSM's version of events w/ controlled propaganda.
Children will stop being killed when America wakes the
fuck up and starts asking the right questions, making the right demands. It's time.
I don't think you know how these hackers have nearly ALL been intercepted by CIA--for decades now. DS has had backdoor access
to just about all of them. I agree that Kim is great, brilliant and was sabotaged but he's also cooperating. Otherwise he'd be
dead.
Bes is either "disinfo plant" or energy draining pessimist. Result is the same - to deflate your power to create a new future.
Trump saw the goal of the Fed Reserve banksters decades ago and spoke often about it. Like Prez Kennedy he wants to return
USA economy to silver or gold backed dollar then transition to new system away from the Black Magic fed reserve/ tax natl debt
machine.
The Globalist Cabal has been working to destroy the US economy ever since they income tax April 15th Lincoln at the Ford theater.
125 years. But Bes claims because Trump cannot reverse 125 years of history in one year that it is kabuki.
Sergei Mikhailov was arrested one year ago, on Dec. 5, 2016. Officers of the agency's
internal security division seized him at his office and led him away with a sack over his head.
Mikhailov is a black belt in karate and the officers feared that he might resist, explained one
of the colonel's acquaintances.
Prior to his arrest, Mikhailov was head of the 2nd Directorate of the FSB's Information
Security Center (TsIB) and within Russian intelligence circles he was considered the main
authority on cybercrime.
Now he and three other men -- Dmitry Dokuchayev , an FSB major and former criminal
hacker, accused in the U.S. of hacking 500 million Yahoo! accounts in 2014; Ruslan
Stoyanov , a former Kaspersky Lab employee; and Georgy Fomchenkov , a little-known
internet entrepreneur -- are suspected of state treason. The four are being held in Moscow's
high-security Lefortovo Prison
"... Rosbalt said that when Anikeyev's business reached national levels, he started using new techniques. For example, Anikeyev would go to restaurants and cafes popular among officials, and with the help of sophisticated equipment he created fake Wi-Fi and mobile phone connections. ..."
"... Unsuspecting officials would connect to the network through the channel created by the hacker and he would have access to the information on their devices. ..."
"... Through the Looking Glass, ..."
"... The Anonymous International website was opened in 2013 and content stolen from the phones and emails of Russian politicians immediately started appearing on it. According to Life News , only the correspondence of the public officials and businessmen who refused to pay was published. At the same time members of Shaltai-Boltai positioned themselves as people with an active civil stance. ..."
"... Mikhailov tracked down Anonymous International at the beginning of 2016 and decided to take it under his control, as well as make some money from blackmail along the way. According to Life News , there is another theory - that Mikhailov had been managing the Shaltai-Boltai business from the start. ..."
"... Whatever the truth, Mikhailov and Dokuchayev have now been charged with treason. Anikeyev and Stoyanov will be prosecuted under a different charge - "unauthorized access to computer information." According to Rosbalt , the treason charges against Mikhailov and Dokuchayev are to do with Anonymous International's involvement in leaking to Ukraine the private correspondence of presidential aide Vladislav Surkov. ..."
"... Shaltai-Boltai's website has not been updated since Nov. 26 and its Twitter account since Dec. 12. The group's remaining members, who are believed to live in Thailand and the Baltic States, have been put on an FSB wanted list. ..."
The alleged leader of the Anonymous International hacker group, also known as
Shaltai-Boltai, has been arrested along with important officials in the security services who
collaborated with the group. For several years Shaltai-Boltai terrorized state officials,
businessmen and media figures by hacking their emails and telephones, and threatening to post
their private information online unless blackmail payments were made. "The price tag for our
work starts at several tens of thousands of dollars, and I am not going to talk about the upper
limit," said a man who calls himself Lewis during an interview with the news website,
Meduza ,
in January 2015.
Lewis, whose name pays hommage to the author Lewis Carroll, is the leader of Anonymous
International, the hacker group specializing in hacking the accounts of officials and
businessmen. Another name for Anonymous International is
Shaltai-Boltai, Russian for "Humpty-Dumpty."
Several years ago Lewis and his colleagues prospered thanks to extortion. They offered their
victims the chance to pay a handsome price to buy back their personal information that had been
stolen. Otherwise their information would be sold to third persons and even posted online. In
the end, Russian law-enforcement tracked down Lewis, and in November he was arrested and
now awaits trial . His real
name is Vladimir Anikeyev.
Shaltai-Boltai's founding father
"One's own success is good but other people's failure is not bad either," said the profile
quote on Vladimir Anikeyev's page on VKontakte , Russia's most popular social network.
Vladimir Anikeyev / Photo: anikeevv/vk.com
Rosbalt news website said that in the 1990s Lewis worked as a journalist in St. Petersburg
and specialized in collecting information through various methods, including dubious ones. "He
could go for a drink with someone or have an affair with someone's secretary or bribe people,"
Rosbalt's
source said.
In the 2000s Anikeyev switched to collecting kompromat (compromising material).
Using his connections, he would find the personal email addresses of officials and
entrepreneurs and break into them using hackers in St. Petersburg, and then blackmail the
victims. They had to pay to prevent their personal information from ending up on the
Internet.
Fake Wi-Fi
Rosbalt said that when Anikeyev's business reached national levels, he started using new
techniques. For example, Anikeyev would go to restaurants and cafes popular among officials,
and with the help of sophisticated equipment he created fake Wi-Fi and mobile phone
connections.
Unsuspecting officials would connect to the network through the channel created by the
hacker and he would have access to the information on their devices.
In the beginning Anikeyev was personally involved in the theft of information but later he
created a network of agents.
The business grew quickly; enormous amounts of information were at Anikeyev's disposal that
had to be sorted and selected for suitability as material for blackmail. In the end, according
to Rosbalt, Anonymous International arose as a handy tool for downloading the obtained
information.
Trying to change the world
The second name of the group refers to the works of Lewis Carroll, according to Shaltai-Boltai members. The crazy world of
Through the Looking Glass, with its inverted logic, is the most apt metaphor for
Russian political life. Apart from Lewis Anikeyev, the team has several other members: Alice;
Shaltai, Boltai (these two acted as press secretaries, and as a result of a mix-up, the media
started calling the whole project, Shaltai-Boltai); and several others, including
"technicians," or specialist hackers.
The Anonymous International website was opened in 2013 and content stolen from the
phones and emails of Russian politicians immediately started appearing on it. According to
Life News , only the correspondence of the public officials and businessmen who refused to
pay was published. At the same time members of Shaltai-Boltai positioned themselves as people
with an active civil stance.
"We can be called campaigners. We are trying to change the world. To change it for the
better," Shaltai told the Apparat website. In interviews members of the group
repeatedly complained about Russian officials who restricted Internet freedom, the country's
foreign policy and barriers to participation in elections.
Hacker exploits
Shaltai-Boltai's most notorious hack was of an explicitly political nature and not about
making money. It hacked Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev's Twitter account. On Aug. 14,
2014 tweets were
posted on the account saying that Medvedev was resigning because he was ashamed of the
government's actions. The `prime minister' also had time to write that Putin was wrong, that
the government had problems with common sense, and that the authorities were taking the
country back to the past.
On the same day Anonymous International posted part of the prime minister's
stolen archive, admitting that, "there is nothing particularly interesting in it."
"The posted material was provided by a certain highly-placed reptilian of our acquaintance,"
the hackers joked
.
Medvedev is far from being Shaltai-Boltai's only victim. The hackers published the private
correspondence of officials in the presidential administration: Yevgeny Prigozhin, a
businessman close to Vladimir Putin; Aram Gabrelyanov, head of the pro-Kremlin News Media
holding company; and of Igor Strelkov, one of the leaders of the uprising in east Ukraine.
Lewis, however, insisted that only material that had failed to sell ended up on the
Internet.
Law-enforcement links
Anikeyev was detained in November, and the following month Sergei Mikhailov, head of the 2nd
operations directorate of the FSB Information Security Center, was also arrested. According to
Kommersant , Mikhailov was a
major figure in the security services who, "was essentially overseeing the country's entire
internet business."
Mikhailov's aide, FSB Major Dmitry Dokuchayev, and a former hacker known as Forb, was also
arrested. Shortly after, Ruslan Stoyanov, head of the department for investigating cybercrime
at the antivirus software company Kaspersky Lab, was also detained. Stoyanov also worked
closely with the secret services.
According to Rosbalt , Anikeyev revealed
information about the FSB officers and the Kaspersky Lab computer expert and their close
involvement with Shaltai-Boltai.
Mikhailov tracked down Anonymous International at the beginning of 2016 and decided to
take it under his control, as well as make some money from blackmail along the way. According
to
Life News , there is another theory - that Mikhailov had been managing the Shaltai-Boltai
business from the start.
Shaltai-Boltai had a big fall
Whatever the truth, Mikhailov and Dokuchayev have now been charged with treason.
Anikeyev and Stoyanov will be prosecuted under a different charge - "unauthorized access to
computer information." According to Rosbalt , the treason charges
against Mikhailov and Dokuchayev are to do with Anonymous International's involvement in
leaking to Ukraine the private correspondence of presidential aide Vladislav
Surkov.
Shaltai-Boltai's website has not been updated since Nov. 26 and its Twitter account
since Dec. 12. The group's remaining members, who are believed to live in Thailand and the
Baltic States, have been put on an FSB wanted
list.
Anyway, Shaltai-Boltai anticipated this outcome. "What awaits us if we are uncovered?
Criminal charges and most likely a prison sentence. Each member of the team is aware of the
risks," they said dispassionately in the interview with Apparat in 2015.
"... Anikeev immediately began to cooperate with the investigation and provide detailed evidence, which repeatedly mentioned Mikhailov as being associated with the Shaltai-Boltai's team," said the source of Rosbalt. And in December 2016, Mikhailov and his "right hand," another official of the Information Security Center, Dmitry Dokuchaev, were arrested. The Court took a decision on their arrest. Another ISC official was also detained, but after questioning, no preventive measures involving deprivation of liberty were applied to him. ..."
"... After the summer, Shaltai-Boltai began to work exclusively with the content given to it by the curator. ..."
"... later it switched to civil servants' email that contained information that could bring serious trouble. When it became known that Surkov's correspondence "leaked" to Ukraine, it broke the camel's back. "Mikhailov's a magnificent expert. Best in his business. One can say that the ISC is Mikhailov.. But he crossed all possible borders," told a source of Rosbalt. ..."
The story around the arrest of a high-ranking ISC official, Sergey Mikhailov, is
becoming an actual thriller.
The creator of Shaltai-Boltai (Humpty Dumpty) website, which containted the correspondence
of officials, journalist Vladimir Anikeev, better known in some circles as Lewis, was arrested
on arrival from Ukraine, where he is supposed to have been involved in the publishing on a
local site of presidential aide Vladislav Surkov's correspondence. In his testimony, Lewis said
about the employee of the Information Security Center, Mikhailov.
As a source familiar with the situation told Rosbalt, Vladimir Anikeev was detained by the
FSB officers at the end of October 2016, when he arrived in St. Petersburg from Ukraine. "The
operation was the result of a long work. There was a complicated operative combination with the
aim to lure Lewis from Ukraine, which he didn't indend to leave," said the source to the news
agency. Anikeev was taken to Moscow, where the Investigation department of the FSB charged him
under Article 272 of the Criminal Code (Illegal access to computer information).
First and foremost the counterintelligence was interested in the situation with the
"leakage" of Vladislav Surkov's correspondence: by the time it was known that it was in the
hands of the Shaltai-Boltai's team. Since it was e-mail with from the .gov domain, the
situation caused great concern in theFSO. As a result of this, the correspondence was published
on the website of a Ukrainian association of hackers called Cyber-Junta. In reality, it is
suspected that Anikeev was involved in that affair. He'd been constantly visiting this country,
his girlfriend lived there, and, according to available data, he was not going to return to
Russia. Lewis was also asked about other officials' correspondence, which already appeared on
the Shaltai-Boltai website.
" Anikeev immediately began to cooperate with the investigation and provide detailed
evidence, which repeatedly mentioned Mikhailov as being associated with the Shaltai-Boltai's
team," said the source of Rosbalt. And in December 2016, Mikhailov and his "right hand,"
another official of the Information Security Center, Dmitry Dokuchaev, were arrested. The Court
took a decision on their arrest. Another ISC official was also detained, but after questioning,
no preventive measures involving deprivation of liberty were applied to him.
According to the version of the agency's source, the situation developed as follows. At the
beginning of 2016, the department headed by Mikhailov received an order to "work" with
Shaltai-Boltai's website, which published the correspondence of civil servants. The immediate
executor was Dokuchaev. Officers of the ISC were able to find out the team of Shaltai-Boltai,
which participants nicknamed themselves after Lewis Carroll's "Alice in Wonderland": Alice, the
March Hare, etc. The website creator and organizer, Anikeev, was nicknamed Lewis. In the summer
there were searching raids in St. Petersburg, although formally for other reasons.
According to the Rosbalt's source, just after the summer attack the team of Shaltai-Boltai
appeared to have the owner, or, to be exact, the curator. According to the source, it could be
Sergey Mikhailov. As the result, the working methods of the Lewis's team also changed, just as
the objects whose correspondence was being published for public access. Previously, Lewis's
people figured out objects in places where mobile phone was used. They were given access to the
phone contents by means of a false cell (when it came to mobile internet) or using a
false-Wi-FI (if the person was connected to Wi-FI). Then the downloaded content was sent to
member of the Lewis's team, residing in Estonia. He analyzed to to select what's to be put in
the open access and what's to be sold for Bitcoins. The whole financial part of the
Shaltai-Boltai involved a few people living in Thailand. These Bitcoins were cashed in Ukraine.
Occasionally the Lewis published emails previously stolen by other hackers.
After the summer, Shaltai-Boltai began to work exclusively with the content given to it
by the curator. Earlier, it published correspondence of rather an "entertaining"
character, as well as officials whose "secrets" would do no special harm; but later it
switched to civil servants' email that contained information that could bring serious trouble.
When it became known that Surkov's correspondence "leaked" to Ukraine, it broke the camel's
back. "Mikhailov's a magnificent expert. Best in his business. One can say that the ISC is
Mikhailov.. But he crossed all possible borders," told a source of Rosbalt.
At the time of their arrests in December, Sergei Mikhailov and Dmitry Dokuchayev were
officers with the FSB's Center for Information Security, a leading unit within the FSB involved
in cyberactivities.
Pavlov confirmed to RFE/RL the arrest of Mikhailov and Dokuchayev, along with Ruslan
Stoyanov, a former employee of the Interior Ministry who had worked for Kaspersky Labs, a
well-known private cyber-research company, which announced Stoyanov's arrest last month.
The newspaper Kommersant reported that Mikhailov was arrested at a meeting of FSB officers
and was taken from the meeting after a sack was put on his head.
The independent newspaper Novaya Gazeta, meanwhile, said that a total of six suspects --
including Mikhailov, Dokuchayev, and Stoyanov -- had been arrested. The state news agency TASS
reported on February 1 that two men associated with a well-known hacking group had also been
arrested in November, but it wasn't immediately clear if those arrests were related to the FSB
case.
There has been no public detail as to the nature of the treason charges against Mikhailov,
Dokuchayev, and Stoyanov. The Interfax news agency on January 31 quoted "sources familiar with
the situation" as saying that Mikhailov and Dokuchayev were suspected of relaying confidential
information to the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).
Pavlov told RFE/RL the individuals were suspected of passing on classified information to
U.S. intelligence, but not necessarily the CIA.
"... Mikhailov tracked down Anonymous International at the beginning of 2016 and decided to take it under his control, as well as make some money from blackmail along the way. According to Life News , there is another theory - that Mikhailov had been managing the Shaltai-Boltai business from the start. ..."
"... Whatever the truth, Mikhailov and Dokuchayev have now been charged with treason. Anikeyev and Stoyanov will be prosecuted under a different charge - "unauthorized access to computer information." According to Rosbalt , the treason charges against Mikhailov and Dokuchayev are to do with Anonymous International's involvement in leaking to Ukraine the private correspondence of presidential aide Vladislav Surkov. ..."
"... Shaltai-Boltai's website has not been updated since Nov. 26 and its Twitter account since Dec. 12. The group's remaining members, who are believed to live in Thailand and the Baltic States, have been put on an FSB wanted list. ..."
The alleged leader of the Anonymous International hacker group, also known as
Shaltai-Boltai, has been arrested along with important officials in the security services who
collaborated with the group. For several years Shaltai-Boltai terrorized state officials,
businessmen and media figures by hacking their emails and telephones, and threatening to post
their private information online unless blackmail payments were made. "The price tag for our
work starts at several tens of thousands of dollars, and I am not going to talk about the upper
limit," said a man who calls himself Lewis during an interview with the news website,
Meduza ,
in January 2015.
Lewis, whose name pays hommage to the author Lewis Carroll, is the leader of Anonymous
International, the hacker group specializing in hacking the accounts of officials and
businessmen. Another name for Anonymous International is
Shaltai-Boltai, Russian for "Humpty-Dumpty."
Several years ago Lewis and his colleagues prospered thanks to extortion. They offered their
victims the chance to pay a handsome price to buy back their personal information that had been
stolen. Otherwise their information would be sold to third persons and even posted online. In
the end, Russian law-enforcement tracked down Lewis, and in November he was arrested and
now awaits trial . His real
name is Vladimir Anikeyev.
Shaltai-Boltai's founding father
"One's own success is good but other people's failure is not bad either," said the profile
quote on Vladimir Anikeyev's page on VKontakte , Russia's most popular social network.
Vladimir Anikeyev /
Photo: anikeevv/vk.com
Rosbalt news website said that in the 1990s Lewis worked as a journalist in St. Petersburg
and specialized in collecting information through various methods, including dubious ones. "He
could go for a drink with someone or have an affair with someone's secretary or bribe people,"
Rosbalt's
source said.
In the 2000s Anikeyev switched to collecting kompromat (compromising material).
Using his connections, he would find the personal email addresses of officials and
entrepreneurs and break into them using hackers in St. Petersburg, and then blackmail the
victims. They had to pay to prevent their personal information from ending up on the
Internet.
Fake Wi-Fi
Rosbalt said that when Anikeyev's business reached national levels, he started using new
techniques. For example, Anikeyev would go to restaurants and cafes popular among officials,
and with the help of sophisticated equipment he created fake Wi-Fi and mobile phone
connections.
Unsuspecting officials would connect to the network through the channel created by the
hacker and he would have access to the information on their devices.
In the beginning Anikeyev was personally involved in the theft of information but later he
created a network of agents.
The business grew quickly; enormous amounts of information were at Anikeyev's disposal that
had to be sorted and selected for suitability as material for blackmail. In the end, according
to Rosbalt, Anonymous International arose as a handy tool for downloading the obtained
information.
Trying to change the world
The second name of the group refers to the works of Lewis Carroll, according to Shaltai-Boltai members. The crazy world of
Through the Looking Glass, with its inverted logic, is the most apt metaphor for
Russian political life. Apart from Lewis Anikeyev, the team has several other members: Alice;
Shaltai, Boltai (these two acted as press secretaries, and as a result of a mix-up, the media
started calling the whole project, Shaltai-Boltai); and several others, including
"technicians," or specialist hackers.
The Anonymous International website was opened in 2013 and content stolen from the phones
and emails of Russian politicians immediately started appearing on it. According to
Life News , only the correspondence of the public officials and businessmen who refused to
pay was published. At the same time members of Shaltai-Boltai positioned themselves as people
with an active civil stance.
"We can be called campaigners. We are trying to change the world. To change it for the
better," Shaltai told the Apparat website. In interviews members of the group
repeatedly complained about Russian officials who restricted Internet freedom, the country's
foreign policy and barriers to participation in elections.
Hacker exploits
Shaltai-Boltai's most notorious hack was of an explicitly political nature and not about
making money. It hacked Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev's Twitter account. On Aug. 14,
2014 tweets were
posted on the account saying that Medvedev was resigning because he was ashamed of the
government's actions. The `prime minister' also had time to write that Putin was wrong, that
the government had problems with common sense, and that the authorities were taking the
country back to the past.
On the same day Anonymous International posted part of the prime minister's
stolen archive, admitting that, "there is nothing particularly interesting in it."
"The posted material was provided by a certain highly-placed reptilian of our acquaintance,"
the hackers joked
.
Medvedev is far from being Shaltai-Boltai's only victim. The hackers published the private
correspondence of officials in the presidential administration: Yevgeny Prigozhin, a
businessman close to Vladimir Putin; Aram Gabrelyanov, head of the pro-Kremlin News Media
holding company; and of Igor Strelkov, one of the leaders of the uprising in east Ukraine.
Lewis, however, insisted that only material that had failed to sell ended up on the
Internet.
Law-enforcement links
Anikeyev was detained in November, and the following month Sergei Mikhailov, head of the 2nd
operations directorate of the FSB Information Security Center, was also arrested. According to
Kommersant , Mikhailov was a
major figure in the security services who, "was essentially overseeing the country's entire
internet business."
Mikhailov's aide, FSB Major Dmitry Dokuchayev, and a former hacker known as Forb, was also
arrested. Shortly after, Ruslan Stoyanov, head of the department for investigating cybercrime
at the antivirus software company Kaspersky Lab, was also detained. Stoyanov also worked
closely with the secret services.
According to Rosbalt , Anikeyev revealed
information about the FSB officers and the Kaspersky Lab computer expert and their close
involvement with Shaltai-Boltai.
Mikhailov tracked down Anonymous International at the beginning of 2016 and decided to
take it under his control, as well as make some money from blackmail along the way. According
to
Life News , there is another theory - that Mikhailov had been managing the Shaltai-Boltai
business from the start.
Shaltai-Boltai had a big fall
Whatever the truth, Mikhailov and Dokuchayev have now been charged with treason.
Anikeyev and Stoyanov will be prosecuted under a different charge - "unauthorized access to
computer information." According to Rosbalt , the treason charges
against Mikhailov and Dokuchayev are to do with Anonymous International's involvement in
leaking to Ukraine the private correspondence of presidential aide Vladislav
Surkov.
Shaltai-Boltai's website has not been updated since Nov. 26 and its Twitter account
since Dec. 12. The group's remaining members, who are believed to live in Thailand and the
Baltic States, have been put on an FSB wanted
list.
Anyway, Shaltai-Boltai anticipated this outcome. "What awaits us if we are uncovered?
Criminal charges and most likely a prison sentence. Each member of the team is aware of the
risks," they said dispassionately in the interview with Apparat in 2015.
Sergei Mikhailov was arrested one year ago, on Dec. 5, 2016. Officers of the agency's
internal security division seized him at his office and led him away with a sack over his head.
Mikhailov is a black belt in karate and the officers feared that he might resist, explained one
of the colonel's acquaintances.
Prior to his arrest, Mikhailov was head of the 2nd Directorate of the FSB's Information
Security Center (TsIB) and within Russian intelligence circles he was considered the main
authority on cybercrime.
Now he and three other men -- Dmitry Dokuchayev , an FSB major and former criminal
hacker, accused in the U.S. of hacking 500 million Yahoo! accounts in 2014; Ruslan
Stoyanov , a former Kaspersky Lab employee; and Georgy Fomchenkov , a little-known
internet entrepreneur -- are suspected of state treason. The four are being held in Moscow's
high-security Lefortovo Prison
"... A Moscow court has sentenced two Russian hackers to three years in prison each for breaking into the e-mail accounts of top Russian officials and leaking them. ..."
"... The 2016 arrests of the Shaltai-Boltai hackers became known only after Russian media reported that two officials of the Federal Security Service's cybercrime unit had been arrested on treason charges. ..."
A Moscow court has sentenced two Russian hackers to three years in prison each for breaking
into the e-mail accounts of top Russian officials and leaking them.
Konstantin Teplyakov and Aleksandr Filinov were members of the Shaltai-Boltai (Humpty Dumpty
in Russian) collective believed to be behind the hacking of high-profile accounts, including
the Twitter account of Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev.
The two were found guilty of illegally accessing computer data in collusion with a criminal
group.
Earlier in July, Shaltai-Boltai leader Vladimir Anikeyev was handed a two-year sentence
after striking a plea bargain and agreeing to cooperate with the authorities.
The 2016 arrests of the Shaltai-Boltai hackers became known only after Russian media
reported that two officials of the Federal Security Service's cybercrime unit had been arrested
on treason charges.
Russian media reports suggested the officials had connections to the hacker group or had
tried to control it.
A notorious Russian hacker whose exploits and later arrest gave glimpses into the
intersection of computer crime and Russian law enforcement has been sentenced to two years in
prison.
The Moscow City Court issued its ruling July 6 against Vladimir Anikeyev in a decision made
behind closed doors, one indication of the sensitivity of his case.
"... The stories implicating Mikhailov gained credence when Russian businessman Pavel Vrublevsky made similar accusations. He asserted that Mikhailov leaked details of Russian hacking capabilities to U.S. intelligence agencies. ..."
In January, the Kremlin-linked media outlet Kommersant suggested that the heads of Russia's
Information Security Center (TsIB) were under investigation and would soon leave their posts.
The TsIB is a shadowy unit that manages computer security investigations for the Interior
Ministry and the FSB. It is thought to be Russia's largest inspectorate when it comes to
domestic and foreign cyber capabilities, including hacking. It oversees security matters
related to credit theft, financial information, personal data, social networks and reportedly
election data -- or as some have claimed in the Russian media, "election rigging." Beyond its
investigative role, it is presumed that the TsIB is fully capable of planning and directing
cyber operations. A week after the initial Kommersant report surfaced, Andrei Gerasimov, the
longtime TsIB director, resigned.
Not long after Gerasimov's resignation at the end of January, reports emerged from numerous
Kremlin-linked media outlets in what appeared to be a coordinated flood of information and
disinformation about the arrests of senior TsIB officers. One of the cyber unit's operational
directors, Sergei Mikhailov, was arrested toward the end of last year along with his deputy,
Dmitri Dokuchaev, and charged with treason. Also arrested around the same time was Ruslan
Stoyanov, the chief investigator for Kaspersky Lab, which is the primary cybersecurity
contractor for the TsIB. There is much conjecture, but Mikhailov was apparently forcibly
removed from a meeting with fellow FSB officers -- escorted out with a bag over his head, so
the story goes -- and arrested. This is thought to have taken place some time around Dec. 5.
His deputy, a well-respected computer hacker recruited by the FSB, was reportedly last seen in
November. Kaspersky Lab's Stoyanov was a career cybersecurity professional, previously working
for the Indrik computer crime investigation firm and the Interior Ministry's computer crime
unit. Novaya Gazeta, a Kremlin-linked media outlet, reported that two other unnamed FSB
computer security officers were also detained. Theories, Accusations and Rumors
Since the initial reports surfaced, Russian media have been flooded with conflicting
theories about the arrests; about Mikhailov, Dokuchaev and Stoyanov; and about the accusations
levied against them. Because the charges are treason, the case is considered "classified" by
the state, meaning no official explanation or evidence will be released. An ultranationalist
news network called Tsargrad TV reported that Mikhailov had tipped U.S. intelligence to the
King Servers firm, which the FBI has accused of being the nexus of FSB hacking and intelligence
operations in the United States. (It should be noted that Tsargrad TV tends toward
sensationalism and has been used as a conduit for propaganda in the past.) The media outlet
also claimed that the Russian officer's cooperation is what enabled the United States to
publicly
accuse Moscow of sponsoring election-related hacking with "high confidence."
The stories implicating Mikhailov gained credence when Russian businessman Pavel
Vrublevsky made similar accusations. He asserted that Mikhailov leaked details of Russian
hacking capabilities to U.S. intelligence agencies. Vrublevsky, however, had previously
been the target of hacking accusations leveled by Mikhailov and his team, so it is possible
that he has a personal ax to grind. To further complicate matters, a business partner of
Vrublevsky, Vladimir Fomenko, runs King Servers, which the United States shut down in the wake
of the hacking scandal.
This article is almost a year old but contains interesting information about possible involvement of Shaltai Boltai in
framing Russia in interference in the USA elections.
Notable quotes:
"... Also called Anonymous International, Shaltai-Boltai was responsible for leaking early copies of Putin's New Year speech and for selling off "lots" of emails stolen from Russian officials such as Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev ..."
"... Later media reports said that the group's leader, Vladimir Anikeyev, had recently been arrested by the FSB and had informed on Mikhailov, Dokuchaev and Stoyanov. ..."
The FBI just indicted a Russian official for hacking. But why did Russia charge him with treason? - The Washington Post
But what is less clear is why one of the men has been arrested and
charged with treason in Russia. Dmitry Dokuchaev, an agent for the cyberinvestigative arm of the FSB, was arrested in
Moscow in December. He's accused by the FBI of "handling" the hackers, paying "bounties" for breaking into email
accounts held by Russian officials, opposition politicians and journalists, as well as foreign officials and business
executives. The Russian targets included an Interior Ministry officer and physical trainer in a regional Ministry of
Sports. (The full text of the indictment, which has a full list of the targets and some curious typos, is
here
.)
Reading this hackers indictment. I'm pretty sure there is no such position as the "deputy
chairman of the Russian Federation"
pic.twitter.com/DOWXYNoWjZ
Dokuchaev's case is part of a larger and mysterious spate of arrests of Russian cyber officials and experts. His
superior, Sergei Mikhailov, deputy chief of the FSB's Center for Information Security, was also arrested in December and
charged with treason. According to Russian reports, the arrest came during a plenum of FSB officers, where Mikhailov had
a bag placed over his head and was taken in handcuffs from the room. Ruslan Stoyanov, a manager at the Russian
cybersecurity company Kaspersky Lab, was also arrested that month. Stoyanov helped coordinate investigations between the
company and law enforcement, a person who used to work at the company said.
Below are some of the theories behind the Russian arrests. Lawyers for some of the accused have told The Washington
Post that they can't reveal details of the case and, because of the secrecy afforded to treason cases, they don't have
access to all the documents.
None of the theories below has been confirmed, nor are they mutually exclusive.
1. Links to U.S. election hacking
: With attention focused on the hacking attacks against the U.S.
Democratic National Committee allegedly ordered by Russian President Vladimir Putin, some Russian and U.S. media
suggested that Dokuchaev and Mikhailov leaked information implicating Russia in the hack to the United States. The
Russian Interfax news agency, which regularly cites government officials as sources, reported that "Sergei Mikhailov and
his deputy, Dmitry Dokuchaev, are accused of betraying their oath and working with the CIA." Novaya Gazeta, a liberal,
respected Russian publication, citing sources, wrote that Mikhailov had tipped off U.S. intelligence about King Servers,
the hosting service used to support hacking attacks on targeted voter registration systems in Illinois and Arizona in
June. That had followed reports in the New York Times, citing one current and one former government official, that
"human sources in Russia did play a crucial role in proving who was responsible for the hacking."
Nakashima wrote yesterday that "the [FBI] charges are unrelated to the hacking of the Democratic National Committee
and the FBI's investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential campaign. But the move reflects the U.S.
government's increasing desire to hold foreign governments accountable for malicious acts in cyberspace."
2. A shadowy hacking collective called Shaltai-Boltai (Humpty-Dumpty)
:
Also called
Anonymous International, Shaltai-Boltai was responsible for leaking early copies of Putin's New Year speech and for
selling off "lots" of emails stolen from Russian officials such as Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev. In a theory first
reported by the pro-Kremlin, conservative Orthodox media company Tsargrad, Mikhailov had taken control
of Shaltai-Boltai, "curating and supervising" the group in selecting hacking targets. Later media reports said that the
group's leader, Vladimir Anikeyev, had recently been arrested by the FSB and had informed on Mikhailov, Dokuchaev and
Stoyanov. A member of the group who fled to Estonia told the Russian media agency Fontanka that they had recently
acquired an FSB "coordinator," although he could not say whether it was Mikhailov. None of the hacks mentioned in the
FBI indictment could immediately be confirmed as those carried out by Shaltai-Boltai.
Lawyers contacted by The Post said that in documents they had seen, there was no link to Shaltai-Boltai in the case.
3.
A grudge with a cybercriminal
: A Russian businessman who had specialized in spam and malware had
claimed for years that Mikhailov was trading information on cybercriminals with the West. Mikhailov had reportedly
testified in the case of Pavel Vrublevsky, the former head of the payment services company Chronopay, who was imprisoned
in 2013 for ordering a denial of service attack on the website of Aeroflot, the Russian national airline. Vrublevsky
claimed then that Mikhailov began exchanging information about Russian cybercriminals with Western intelligence
agencies, including documents about Chronopay. Brian Krebs, an American journalist who investigates cybercrime and
received access to Vrublevsky's emails,
wrote in January
: "Based on
how long Vrublevsky has been
trying
to sell this narrative
, it seems he may have
finally found a buyer
."
4.
Infighting at the FSB:
The Russian government is not monolithic, and infighting between and
within the powerful law enforcement agencies is common. The Russian business publication RBC had written that Mikhailov
and Dokuchaev's Center for Information Security had been in conflict with another department with similar
responsibilities, the FSB's Center for Information Protection and Special Communications. The conflict may have led to
the initiation of a criminal case, the paper's sources said.
As Leonid Bershidsky, founding editor of the Russian business daily publication Vedomosti,
wrote in January, the dramatic arrests of two high-level FSB officers -- Sergei Mikhailov , the deputy head of the FSB's
Information Security Center, and Major Dmitry
Dokuchaev , a highly skilled hacker who had been recruited by the FSB -- on treason charges
in December offers a glimpse into "how security agencies generally operate in Putin's
Russia."
At the time of their arrest, Dokuchaev (who was one of the Russian officials indicted for
the Yahoo breach) and Mikhailov had been trying to cultivate a Russian hacking group known as
"Shaltai Boltai" -- or "Humpty Dumpty" -- that had been publishing stolen emails from Russian
officials' inboxes, according to Russian media reports.
"The FSB team reportedly uncovered the identities of the group's members -- but, instead of
arresting and indicting them, Mikhailov's team tried to run the group, apparently for profit or
political gain," Bershidsky wrote. Shaltai Boltai complied, Bershidsky wrote, because it wanted
to stay afloat, and didn't mind taking orders from "government structures."
"We get orders from government structures and from private individuals," Shaltai Boltai's
alleged leader said in a 2015
interview. "But we say we are an independent team. It's just that often it's impossible to
tell who the client is. Sometimes we get information for intermediaries, without knowing who
the end client is."
It appears that Dokuchaev and Mikhailov got caught running this side project with Shaltai
Boltai -- which was still targeting high-level Russian officials -- when the FSB began
surveilling Mikhailov. Officials targeted Mikhailov after receiving a tip that he might have
been leaking information about Russian cyber activities to the FBI, according to the
Novaya Gazeta.
Short of working against Russian interests, hackers "can pursue whatever projects they want,
as long as their targets are outside of Russia and they follow orders from the top when
needed," said Bremmer, of Eurasia Group. The same goes for FSB officers, who are tactically
allowed to "run private security operations involving blackmail and protection," according to
Bershidsky.
US intelligence agencies have concluded that the hack on the Democratic National Committee
during the 2016 election was likely one such "order from the top" -- a directive issued by
Russian President Vladimir Putin and carried out by hackers hired by the GRU and the FSB.
It is still unclear if the Yahoo breach was directed by FSB officials at the instruction of
the Kremlin, like the DNC hack, or if it was one of those "private security operations"
Bershidsky alluded to that some Russian intelligence officers do on the side.
Bremmer said that it's possible the Yahoo breach was not done for state ends, especially
given the involvement of Dokuchaev, who was already caught up in Shaltai Baltai's operations to
steal and sell information for personal financial gain.
"... The Dulles brothers, with Allan as head of Sullivan and Cromwells' CIA were notorious facilitators for the international banksters and their subsidiary corporations which comprise the largest oil and military entities which have literally plainly stated in writing, need to occasionally "GALVANIZE" the American public through catastrophic and catalyzing events in order for Americans to be terrified into funding and fighting for those interlocked corporations in their quest to spread "FULL SPECTRUM DOMINANCE," throughout the globe. ..."
"... The book by Peter Dale Scott, "The American Deep State Wall Street, Big Oil And the Attack on American Democracy" covers in detail some of the points you mention in your reply. It is a fascinating book. ..."
Your link to the Giraldi piece is appreciated, however, Giraldi starts off on a false
premise: He claims that people generally liked and trusted the FBI and CIA up until or
shortly after 9/11. Not so! Both agencies were complicit in the most infamous assassinations
and false flag episodes since the Kennedy/MLK Vietnam days. Don't forget Air America CIA drug
running and Iran/Contra / October Surprise affairs.
The Dulles brothers, with Allan as head of Sullivan and Cromwells' CIA were notorious
facilitators for the international banksters and their subsidiary corporations which comprise
the largest oil and military entities which have literally plainly stated in writing, need to
occasionally "GALVANIZE" the American public through catastrophic and catalyzing events in
order for Americans to be terrified into funding and fighting for those interlocked
corporations in their quest to spread "FULL SPECTRUM DOMINANCE," throughout the globe.
The political parties are theatre designed to fool the people into believing we are living
in some sort of legitimate, representative system, when it's the same old plutocracy that
manages to get elected because they've long figured out the art of polarizing people and
capitalising on tribal alignments.
We should eliminate all government for a time so that people can begin to see that
corporations really do and most always have run the country.
It's preposterous to think the stupid public is actually discussing saddling ourselves and
future generations with gargantuan debt through a system designed and run by banksters!
it should be self evident a sovereign nation should maintain and forever hold the rights
to develop a monetary/financial system that serves the needs of the people, not be indentured
servants in a financial system that serves the insatiable greed of a handful of parasitic
banksters and corporate tycoons!
Joe Tedesky , February 17, 2018 at 5:08 pm
You are so right, in fact Robert Parry made quite a journalistic career out of exposing
the CIA for such things as drug running. I gave up on that agency a longtime ago, after JFK
was murdered, and I was only 13 then. Yeah maybe Phil discounts the time while he worked for
the CIA, but the CIA has many, many rooms in which plots are hatched, so the valiant truth
teller Giraldi maybe excused this one time for his lack of memory .I guess, right?
Good comment Lee. Joe
Annie , February 17, 2018 at 5:56 pm
Yes, but he's referring to the public's opinion of these agencies, and if they didn't
continue to retain, even after 9/11, a significant popularity in the public's mind how would
we have so many American's buying into Russia-gate? In my perception of things they only lost
some ground after 9/11, but Americans notoriously have a short memory span.
Gregory Herr , February 17, 2018 at 6:42 pm
And films that are supposed to help Americans feel good about the aims and efficacy of the
agencies like Zero Dark Thirty and Argo are in the popular imagination.
Skeptigal , February 17, 2018 at 7:19 pm
The book by Peter Dale Scott, "The American Deep State Wall Street, Big Oil And the Attack
on American Democracy" covers in detail some of the points you mention in your reply. It is a
fascinating book.
"... Perhaps more significantly, it has more recently been claimed that members of Shaltay-Boltay have admitted to forging some parts of the correspondence that they hacked. The putative aim was to boost the profile of their group. ..."
"... Reading between the lines of this, I find more support for Scott's angle on this story. Shaltay-Boltay were indeed not hackers in a conventional sense. They were traders in an illicit information economy, and apparently weren't above fabricating that information if it would raise their profile. For the extent and nature of that fabrication, i look forward to Scott's next report! ..."
"... Out of nowhere, my gentleman acquaintance brought up the topic of the day: Russia hacking the elections. The more things change, the more they are not the same anymore. ..."
Treason is very serious charge that includes working for foreign governments intelligence services. I believe I have enough
to prove my point, using, of course, only information openly available on the internet. However, if these people worked for SBU
or Mossad, I will write about this, also.
See also, Arrested Russian FSB Agents Allegedly Passed Information to CIA
As described by various media sources, the basic story about Shaltay-Boltay is that they formed in mid-2013 to hack e-mail,
social media, and data of officials and businessmen in Russia, and then sold this data for large amounts of money through the
digital underground. In particular, this happened through a portal called "Exchange of Information", a kind of anonymous auction
site for stolen data. Glazastikov says Shaltay-Boltay "was supposed to be a spokesman for the Anonymous International", and was
created by himself, Vladimir Anikeev, and Konstantin Teplyakov.
Although most all of the Western media sources insinuate some connection between Shaltay-Boltay, the FSB officers who were
arrested, and the putative "hacking" of the 2016 U.S. election, Glazastikov
denies any interest in targets outside Russia.
There is also disagreement around the connection between Shaltay-Boltay and the FSB. Glazastikov says that the FSB contacted
him, saying they were aware of Shaltay-Boltay's activity, and wanted to assert "control" and veto power in exchange for not arresting
them. Russia Beyond
claims that it was Sergei Mikhailov (FSB) who took control of Shaltay-Boltay and "received kickbacks from its founder, Vladimir
Anikeyev". However, Glazastikov's testimony
contradicts that of Anikeev, his lawyer (Ruslan Koblev), and Ivan Pavlov, lawyer for one of the FSB defendants, all of whom
deny any working relationship between Shaltay-Boltay and the FSB.
Interestingly, Glazastikov notes that neither Anikeev nor Teplyakov had technical expertise. Moreover, Glazastikov makes it
sound like even he was not primarily involved in hacking, and the "Exchange of Information" admins claim no connection with Shaltay-Boltay.
For the heavy lifting, Shaltay-Boltay would use "specialized hacking sites" where they outsourced pay-to-order hacks with IT mercenaries.
A target e-mail address could be hacked for a few thousand rubles. And even this, Glazastikov states, wasn't really the original
idea for Shaltay-Boltay. Instead, he imagined they would be doing "advertising or administration fee".
Perhaps more significantly, it has more recently been claimed that members of Shaltay-Boltay have admitted to
forging some parts of the correspondence that they hacked. The putative aim was to boost the profile of their group.
Reading between the lines of this, I find more support for Scott's angle on this story. Shaltay-Boltay were indeed not hackers
in a conventional sense. They were traders in an illicit information economy, and apparently weren't above fabricating that information
if it would raise their profile. For the extent and nature of that fabrication, i look forward to Scott's next report!
This is incredible research, you put most YTube new journalists to shame. I hope this material makes its way into your next book.
"Enemy of the State" is an instant classic full of insights on how to live life that are a soothing balm to children of the Sick
West with senses of humor somewhat intact.
On the east coast of the U.S., the mundane worlds of the Masters of (their imagined) Universe can be seen fairly easily, especially
if you wander into places and act like you belong there.
Regarding the kinds of people that instigate the madness you describe above: I recently had the opportunity to visit a very
interesting social club that was opened to the public for one day only. Three Ivy league schools I'm sure you've heard of. On
the walls upstairs were listed all the latest presidents in different colors, like red for an "H" school: Obama, Clinton, Bush
II, Bush I . Kennedy John Quincy Adams, etc. I can't remember Nixon or Carter being there, but I talked to someone who's name
is on another wall, and it struck me that members of this club did not hate Trump because of his manners, parents, background,
politics, or alleged business acumen. Instead, they hated the fact that his name couldn't be written on their wall. It's really
only acceptable to be President if you've been BMOC at Harvard.
Out of nowhere, my gentleman acquaintance brought up the topic of the day: Russia hacking the elections. The more things
change, the more they are not the same anymore.
There were pictures of famous football teams from years gone by, the place had a charm but it was shabby, and the ceiling
looked like sprayed styrafoam, an aesthetic disgrace that these imaginary jocks failed to appreciate. The drinks, by the way,
were terrible. They must make their highballs with Minute Maid. The creativity and intelligence, not to mention taste of the West
are surely at a low ebb.
"... Out of nowhere, my gentleman acquaintance brought up the topic of the day: Russia hacking the elections. The more things change, the more they are not the same anymore. ..."
Treason is very serious charge that includes working for foreign governments intelligence services. I believe I have enough
to prove my point, using, of course, only information openly available on the internet. However, if these people worked for SBU
or Mossad, I will write about this, also.
See also, Arrested Russian FSB Agents Allegedly Passed Information to CIA
As described by various media sources, the basic story about Shaltay-Boltay is that they formed in mid-2013 to hack e-mail,
social media, and data of officials and businessmen in Russia, and then sold this data for large amounts of money through the
digital underground. In particular, this happened through a portal called "Exchange of Information", a kind of anonymous auction
site for stolen data. Glazastikov says Shaltay-Boltay "was supposed to be a spokesman for the Anonymous International", and was
created by himself, Vladimir Anikeev, and Konstantin Teplyakov.
Although most all of the Western media sources insinuate some connection between Shaltay-Boltay, the FSB officers who were
arrested, and the putative "hacking" of the 2016 U.S. election, Glazastikov
denies any interest in targets outside Russia.
There is also disagreement around the connection between Shaltay-Boltay and the FSB. Glazastikov says that the FSB contacted
him, saying they were aware of Shaltay-Boltay's activity, and wanted to assert "control" and veto power in exchange for not arresting
them. Russia Beyond
claims that it was Sergei Mikhailov (FSB) who took control of Shaltay-Boltay and "received kickbacks from its founder, Vladimir
Anikeyev". However, Glazastikov's testimony
contradicts that of Anikeev, his lawyer (Ruslan Koblev), and Ivan Pavlov, lawyer for one of the FSB defendants, all of whom
deny any working relationship between Shaltay-Boltay and the FSB.
Interestingly, Glazastikov notes that neither Anikeev nor Teplyakov had technical expertise. Moreover, Glazastikov makes it
sound like even he was not primarily involved in hacking, and the "Exchange of Information" admins claim no connection with Shaltay-Boltay.
For the heavy lifting, Shaltay-Boltay would use "specialized hacking sites" where they outsourced pay-to-order hacks with IT mercenaries.
A target e-mail address could be hacked for a few thousand rubles. And even this, Glazastikov states, wasn't really the original
idea for Shaltay-Boltay. Instead, he imagined they would be doing "advertising or administration fee".
Perhaps more significantly, it has more recently been claimed that members of Shaltay-Boltay have admitted to
forging some parts of the correspondence that they hacked. The putative aim was to boost the profile of their group.
Reading between the lines of this, I find more support for Scott's angle on this story. Shaltay-Boltay were indeed not hackers
in a conventional sense. They were traders in an illicit information economy, and apparently weren't above fabricating that information
if it would raise their profile. For the extent and nature of that fabrication, i look forward to Scott's next report!
This is incredible research, you put most YTube new journalists to shame. I hope this material makes its way into your next book.
"Enemy of the State" is an instant classic full of insights on how to live life that are a soothing balm to children of the Sick
West with senses of humor somewhat intact.
On the east coast of the U.S., the mundane worlds of the Masters of (their imagined) Universe can be seen fairly easily, especially
if you wander into places and act like you belong there.
Regarding the kinds of people that instigate the madness you describe above: I recently had the opportunity to visit a very
interesting social club that was opened to the public for one day only. Three Ivy league schools I'm sure you've heard of. On
the walls upstairs were listed all the latest presidents in different colors, like red for an "H" school: Obama, Clinton, Bush
II, Bush I . Kennedy John Quincy Adams, etc. I can't remember Nixon or Carter being there, but I talked to someone who's name
is on another wall, and it struck me that members of this club did not hate Trump because of his manners, parents, background,
politics, or alleged business acumen. Instead, they hated the fact that his name couldn't be written on their wall. It's really
only acceptable to be President if you've been BMOC at Harvard.
Out of nowhere, my gentleman acquaintance brought up the topic of the day: Russia hacking the elections. The more things
change, the more they are not the same anymore.
There were pictures of famous football teams from years gone by, the place had a charm but it was shabby, and the ceiling
looked like sprayed styrafoam, an aesthetic disgrace that these imaginary jocks failed to appreciate. The drinks, by the way,
were terrible. They must make their highballs with Minute Maid. The creativity and intelligence, not to mention taste of the West
are surely at a low ebb.
Russia became a standard punch ball in the US political games. As in "Russia dog eat my homework."
Notable quotes:
"... This article is very important and outlines the destructive effort being done to Russia by the USA. It should be noted and clearly displayed by the psychopathic nature of USA meddling in Russian affairs. ..."
"... "With the current uproar about Russia interfering in the USA elections. It has to be noted that the Kremlin is very silent on this subject." ..."
"... It is extremely difficult and time consuming for an ordinary person to find the truth in the millions of pages on the Internet, the ordinary mushroom knowing that the MSM only serves you sh't and keeps you in the dark. ..."
"... Yea, just a common internet malpractice called spoofing, that any IT professional, especially one working in IT security, knows about. I suspected all along that most or all of this "Russian Hacking" and "Russians did it" was exactly that. ..."
With the current uproar about Russia interfering in the USA elections. It has to be noted that the Kremlin is very silent on this
subject. It is more important now than ever to bring forth information from Russia in exposing how serious the problem is from
the USA interfering in not only Russian affairs but how the intelligence community continues unabated in interfering in most countries.
This article is very important and outlines the destructive effort being done to Russia by the USA. It should be noted and
clearly displayed by the psychopathic nature of USA meddling in Russian affairs.
One has to wonder why people cannot see how the current government of the USA is totally out of control around the world.
Everything has its cycle of life and the USA is no exception to this theory. When humanity is controlled in such a fashion,
by that I mean that the USA is supported by the four pillars consisting of GREED, CORRUPTION, POWER and CONTROL. They are sitting
on the top of these structures and are desperately trying to maintain their grip over the world.
Perhaps the purpose is to "open Russia" to debunk those silly "Kremlin hacking" claims and give Empire more important information
inside Russia. E.g how to go deep through military security defense line.
Empire actually don't know what Russia don't know or do know. Is this chess where you have to sacrifice pawn or two or even
knight to secure queen and king? Or why to shoot fly with cannon?
"One has to wonder why people cannot see how the current government of the USA is totally out of control around the world." end
quote.
It is extremely difficult and time consuming for an ordinary person to find the truth in the millions of pages on the Internet,
the ordinary mushroom knowing that the MSM only serves you sh't and keeps you in the dark. The most reliable method (not
100 % though) is the "Follow the money" method, who has to gain by this or that development, but even that can lead to false conclusions.
Always count on that everyone has a hidden agenda, but watch out you are not gripped by paranoia.
Yea, just a common internet malpractice called spoofing, that any IT professional, especially one working in IT security,
knows about. I suspected all along that most or all of this "Russian Hacking" and "Russians did it" was exactly that.
What a pathetic waste of time. American society and government are really getting very low.
And, of course, reality is actually defined as "what you cannot change by speaking about it". You can change reality, a very
little bit at a time, by doing honest physical work.
"... Much later, in mid-2013, the idea of Shaltay-Boltay appeared. ..."
"... Anikeev had sources of information, the information itself, important and interesting one. Anikeev decided to leave the information and analytical structure for which he had been working, and start his own project. ..."
"... His role has been greatly exaggerated. He's just our mutual old friend. When we were getting significant numbers of files that had to be processed, we would ask Teplyakov to help, for a fee. We knew him and trusted him. ..."
"... Just then, I was beginning to get annoyed with the country, I decided to go to Thailand. When I started discussing this project with Anikeev, it seemed okay: you could engage in an interesting and promising business from home. What did I expect in financial terms? Definitely not the sale of arrays of information. I was rather thinking about advertising or administration fee. Lite-version. ..."
"... All the information came from Anikeev. I published the received information, perhaps, by illegal means, but I have nothing to do with how it was obtained. Yesterday, I sent a letter to the former President of Estonia Toomas Hendrik Ilves. I think by our actions, especially in 2014, when we were working on the idea, I deserved asylum in Estonia. So far no response was received. ..."
"... The Anonymous International published a lot of information from the correspondence of officials and businessmen between 2014 and 2016. Among the disclosed information was Dmitry Medvedev's hacked Twitter, and e-mail, Facebook, iPhone and iPad of owner of NewsMedia Holding Aram Gabrellyanov; e-mail and WhatsApp of TV host Dmitry Kiselev, official correspondence between the employees of "Prosecutor's Office" and the "Ministry of State Security" of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic, and a lot of other, equally interesting information. ..."
"... Before Anikeev's detention, Shaltay-Boltay also obtained the correspondence of the presidential assistant Vladislav Surkov. ..."
St. Petersburg programmer Alexander Glazastikov, who was hiding under the mask of Shaltay-Boltay (Humpty Dumpty), hoping for a
political asylum reached out to the former President of Estonia. He is the only member of Anonymous International who remains at
large.
Fontanka has been chasing the last Shaltay-Boltay member for a week. One member of the mysterious hacker group, which has been
leaking e-mails of businessmen and officials for three years was found in Estonia, but shied away from a direct talk.
After the news came that Anonymous International members Vladimir Anikeev, Konstantin Teplyakov, and Filinov were arrested, it
was not difficult to single out their colleague Alexander Glazastikov. The 'scary hackers' themselves, as it turned out, were quite
unrestrained on social networks and left striking marks on the Internet.
Five days ago, Alexander Glazastikov gave an evasive answer to the straight question sent by Fontanka via e-mail. Three days ago,
he admitted to being one of the Anonymous International on condition of anonymity. Then, he agreed to an interview saying "Come to
Estonia".
When, on the arranged day, a Fontanka reporter arrived to Tartu, Alexander dropped a bombshell: "I'm on my way to Tallinn: already
twenty kilometers away from Tartu." He suggested: "I can wait at the gas station Valmaotsa. Drive up, let's go together." It was
the offer, from which one cannot refuse. A taxi was found quickly.
When the meeting took place, the Shaltay-Boltay member, who was easily recognizable due to the photos from the web, surprised
the journalist once again: he silently passed him the ignition keys from the SUV. After a question, he explained: "You will have
to drive, I was drinking beer while waiting." There wasn't much of a choice, and the correspondent of Fontanka drove the hackers
group member to Tallinn to meet with the crew of Dozhd TV-channel and Ksenia Sobchak. 180 kilometers and two hours of time was enough
to have a decent conversation.
- Alexander, you are probably the only member of the Anonymous International who managed to remain at large. You're in Estonia,
the Russian justice is far away, can I call you by your name and surname?
- Perhaps, you can. Anyway, tomorrow or the day after, I will officially reach out to the authorities for a political asylum.
The FSB already knows my name.
- They know the surname. And who are you in the Anonymous International: Shaltay or Boltay?
- Shaltay, Boltay ... what a mess. Initially, when starting this project, Shaltay-Boltay was supposed to be a spokesman for the
Anonymous International. Mainly, I was doing this job. Then, Anikeev started introducing himself to the reporters as Lewis and got
everyone confused.
- How many people initiated the Anonymous International?
- Me, Anikeev. Teplyakov helped with some things, but purely technical aspects.
- Who is Filinov, whose arrest was reported in connection with Shaltay-Boltay?
- I don't know the man. He was not involved in the creation of the Anonymous International. I think this is Anikeev's acquaintance,
who accidentally got under the press. I've heard his name for the first time, when the media wrote about his arrest.
- Have you known Anikeev and Teplyakov for a long time?
- For a long time... There was a resource called Damochka.ru. When basically no social networks existed, and VKontakte only began
to emerge, everyone was on this website, it was one of the most fun projects. In the real world, meetings of the website users were
held, some users just organized those parties – Dima Gryzlov, Nikolai Bondarik, and Anikeev. That's how we met. Much later, in
mid-2013, the idea of Shaltay-Boltay appeared.
- How? Did you just decide that you would steal e-mails of bad people?
- Anikeev had sources of information, the information itself, important and interesting one. Anikeev decided to leave the
information and analytical structure for which he had been working, and start his own project.
- Could this project be called a business?
- It depends It was assumed that the project will bring substantial financial result, but initially it was made partly out of
ideological considerations.
- But Anikeev is not a hacker at all, judging by the stories of his former colleagues.
- True. If he needed to install any software on the computer, he would usually ask me to do it.
- But Teplyakov is a programmer.
- His role has been greatly exaggerated. He's just our mutual old friend. When we were getting significant numbers of files
that had to be processed, we would ask Teplyakov to help, for a fee. We knew him and trusted him.
- And why did you join this project?
- Just then, I was beginning to get annoyed with the country, I decided to go to Thailand. When I started discussing this
project with Anikeev, it seemed okay: you could engage in an interesting and promising business from home. What did I expect in financial
terms? Definitely not the sale of arrays of information. I was rather thinking about advertising or administration fee. Lite-version.
- With a reference to the investigation, there was information that Shaltay-Boltay has a whole network of agents with special
equipment, who, at places popular among local officials, steal information by creating fake Wi-Fi connections. Do you have a network?
- Complete nonsense. There were discussions about getting to know technical possibilities like this. As far as I know, and I know
a lot, in fact, we didn't have it.
- Where did you get the information from, then?
- From specialized hacking sites, one can order hacking someone else's e-mail box for a few thousand rubles.
- It worked successfully. If you remember 2014 was the most fruitful year. Serious stories, serious figures, and no commerce.
Strelkov, Prigozhin...
- Out of the three years that the project existed, 2014 was the most significant. I am proud of that year.
- But, from 2015, the Anonymous International has become almost a purely commercial project. How much money did you manage
to earn?
- Only one or two million dollars.
- So, you are now a rich man?
- No. Most of the money was spent on operating expenses, so to speak. There were about fifty boxes in the work. Plus, there were
variants in which a transaction was made not via bitcoins, but with the help of Anikeev's friends; these intermediaries could ask
for two thirds of the whole amount.
- Was there anyone above you and Anikeev? For several years, people have been wondering who Shaltay-Boltay works for?
- Funny. Everyone is looking for conspiracy, but, in fact, it was a 'quick and dirty' project made by me and Anikeev. However,
at some point, in the summer or in the spring of 2016, Anikeev said that some person from the FSB found us, he knew our names. Allegedly,
military counterintelligence was looking for us, but the FSB found our meadow attractive and decided to take control of our petty
pranks. They, supposedly, were uninterested in the commercial part of the project: the scale was much bigger, but they wanted to
supervise the project and to have the veto right. Mikhailov's name was not voiced, in fact, no one's was. Nothing, actually, happened:
no one used the veto right and no one leaked any information. If these mysterious people existed at all. And who turned whom in:
they – Anikeev or Anikeev – them, or even third force got them all, I do not know.
- How quickly did you find out about Anikeev's arrest?
- The next morning. He sent me a selfie from Pulkovo Airport, wrote that he checked in and flies to Minsk. The next morning, it
was reported that he was arrested and transported to Moscow. Given the subsequent events, it could be the game of the FSB. Then,
he contacted me, convinced that he solved all the issues and now works under the control of the FSB, called in me to Russia, but
I didn't believe him for some reason.
- Did Teplyakov believe?
- Teplyakov, in the summer of 2016, moved from Thailand to Kiev. He had no permanent earnings, he depended on Anikeev. When the
game was on, and it was claimed that the project would continue, but he needs to come to Russia and work there under supervision,
for safety reasons, as well, Teplyakov didn't have much of a choice. He went to Russia.
- Is there somewhere a chest with Shaltay-Boltay's information?
- Good question. I need to think how to respond. Well no, not really. What was sold and purchased by the clients was deleted.
What was sold was fairly deleted and this information doesn't exist anymore. Perhaps, some of our customers are now concerned about
this question, but what was declared, was implemented. Some operative material that we had been working on, I also deleted. Maybe
a couple of screenshots were left in the trash bin, but nothing more.
- Alexander, you're going to submit a request for a political asylum. Aren't you afraid that Estonians will simply put you
in a cell? In this country, they are very sensitive to computer security, and the specificity of computer crimes lies in the fact
that, for committing them, one can be prosecuted in almost any country?
- My position is that I was not personally involved in the cracking of passwords and sending malicious links. To me all that information
was already delivered in an open form. Yes, it was, probably, stolen...
- So were you ordering its thefts or not?
- No.
- Who did, then?
- All the information came from Anikeev. I published the received information, perhaps, by illegal means, but I have nothing
to do with how it was obtained. Yesterday, I sent a letter to the former President of Estonia Toomas Hendrik Ilves. I think by our
actions, especially in 2014, when we were working on the idea, I deserved asylum in Estonia. So far no response was received.
We drove to Tallinn. More and more texts came to Alexander's telephonefrom Dozhd TV journalists, who were preparing
to shoot with Ksenia Sobchak. After leaving the car in the parking lot, we said goodbye. Alexander Glazastikov promised to inform
when he receives a reply from the Estonian government.
It is to be recalled that Glazastikov's colleagues from the Anonymous International are awaiting trial in a predetention center.
The law enforcement agencies arrested Vladimir Anikeev and his two probable accomplices: Konstantin Teplyakov and Alexander Filinov.
The latter two were arrested as early as November 2016, and, on February 1, the judge of the Lefortovo District Court of Moscow extended
their detention until April. The alleged leader of the Anonymous International, who was acting under the nickname Lewis, was arrested
on January 28 after a short time spent in the company of police officers; he confessed.
All three are charged with the crimes stipulated under part 3 of Art. 272 of the Russian Criminal Code (Illegal access to legally-protected
computer information, which caused a major damage or has been committed because of vested interest or committed by a group of persons
by previous concert through his/her official position).
Initially, the media associated their criminal case with the investigation on the FSB staff and the manager of the Kaspersky Lab,
who were accused of treason, but later, the lawyer of one of the defendants denied this information.
The Anonymous International published a lot of information from the correspondence of officials and businessmen between 2014
and 2016. Among the disclosed information was Dmitry Medvedev's hacked Twitter, and e-mail, Facebook, iPhone and iPad of owner of
NewsMedia Holding Aram Gabrellyanov; e-mail and WhatsApp of TV host Dmitry Kiselev, official correspondence between the employees
of "Prosecutor's Office" and the "Ministry of State Security" of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic, and a lot of other,
equally interesting information.
Before Anikeev's detention, Shaltay-Boltay also obtained the correspondence of the presidential assistant Vladislav Surkov.
"... Everything what we know now about the so-called "Kremlin trolls from the Internet Research Agency paid by Putin's favorite chef," came from one source, a group of CIA spies that used the mascot of Shaltay-Boltay, or Humpty-Dumpty, for their collective online persona. ..."
"... Bazzfeed also said back in 2014, that " The leak from the Internet Research Agency is the first time specific comments under news articles can be directly traced to a Russian campaign." Now, this is a very important grave mark. ..."
"... Just think about this working scheme: Shaltay-Boltay with a group of anti-government "activists" created the "Internet Research Agency," they and some "activists" created 470 FaceBook accounts used to post comments that looked unmistakably "trollish." ..."
"... After that other, CIA affiliated entities, like the entire Western Media, claimed the "Russian interference in the US election." Finally, the ODNI published a report lacking any evidence in it. ..."
"... People from the Shaltay-Boltay group weren't hackers in the proper terms because they worked with and for the CIA. Middle-of the-road and run-of-the-mill intelligence agencies would collect and analyze information for their governments. The CIA invents information, then goes on to manufacture and forge documents in support of their invented information; they then recruit people inside other countries and other governments to claim that they "obtained" this explosive evidence. Being the dirty cops that they are, the CIA doesn't obtain and secure evidence, but instead they plant fake evidence on their victims. ..."
"... Knowing full well that the hackers who "leaked" the information about this "Agency" were arrested and successfully charged for treason because they worked for the CIA should prevent the CIA to run fake news about the entities and people they themselves made up. You would think that the matter of the "Kremlin trolls from Saint Petersburg" should be dead and buried after the arrest. The CIA and other 16 intelligence agencies should know better than to use information that is being known now as "discovered' with their "help." ..."
"... We also know everything that the CIA touches is fake. Speaking in layman's term, it's as if all those middle aged bald guys would start licking their balls while claiming to be in fulfilling relations. If it's just you, guys, there is no relations. It's just you. Deal with it! ..."
"... The United Business Registry database in Russia works according to the Federal laws, so after twelve months of inactivity a business is simply liquidated. The Internet Research Agency was liquidated in December 2016 by the government system after it been inactive for twelve month. It's inactivity implied that the company had no employees, no office, and no bank transactions for at least twelve months! ..."
"... The US is now perceived as an imperial power which has lost all sense of reality, thinking it can do anything it wants and having the rest of the world agree with it. That is simply not the case. All the anti-Russian rhetoric has done is to make Russia more popular and more mature in the eyes of the world, which now sees Vladimir Putin as a factor of stability. ..."
Saint Petersburg, Savushkina, 55 is the most famous office building in the world, thanks to
the relentless promotion of the United States government, the CIA, FBI, and by the powers of
the entire Western media, financed by Western governments. VOA, NPR, and Svoboda, by the
government of the US; the BBC by the government of the UK; CNN by the governments of Saudi
Arabia; the DW, by the government of Germany; and so on and so forth. You name it, they all
punched time to promote this office building.
To be specific, it's not even a building, but several adjoined buildings that cover an
entire city block, an urban development plan common for Saint Pete's. That's why every business
here has the address of Savushkina, 55 followed by a building number. You can take a virtual
tour around it, to see for yourself. The buildings are shared by several dozens of private
businesses, by the local Police department, and by the newsrooms of half a dozen Russia Media
sources like the FAN (Federal News Agency), the Neva News (Nevskie Novosti), Political Russia,
Kharkov News Agency, publishing Ukrainian news, and others. They all are privately owned and
operated and generate over 55 million unique visitors per month. Overall, several thousand
people come to this building to work every morning. But you wouldn't know this by account of
Western media. For over two years now, these people are being harassed and collectively branded
as "THE KREMLIN TROLLS."
The building is very popular because it's located in a quiet historical neighborhood and is
in walking distance from a suburban train station. It's newly renovated offices offer open
floor plans with Scandinavian fleur so very appreciated by the news people. In addition, the
rent for this building is less than in center city. Which is why Evgeny Zubarev, a former top
editor for the RIA NEWS, choose it for his media startup. He took several offices allowing him
to manage his growing media giant without wasting time to commute. Now, the FAN newsroom alone
employs about 300 journalists.
This wasn't always the case.
At the beginning of 2014, the building was still under construction and renovation, when an
anti-Russian government group of hackers called first "The Anonymous International" and latter
"Shaltay-B0ltay" fingered it as the "Kremlin trolls' layer."
Their wordpress blog is still here. It was last updated on November 2016. Its title states:
"Anonymous International. Shaltay Boltay/Press Secretary of the group. Creating reality and
giving meaning to words."
November 7, 2014, Khodorkovsky, who acted as an integral part of the CIA "Kremlin trolls"
Project, tweeted the picture of one of the entrances to one of the buildings saying:
"Savuchkina 55. New home for bots. ID check system. Not a sign there. I won't say who took the
photo."
... ... ...
The phone number on the picture 324-56-06 belongs to the commercial real estate company
Praktis Consulting & Brokerage that
managed the rent of offices.
Midsummer 2014, Evgeny Zubarev with his start up and several hundred journalists moved in,
along with the Police department, and a slew of other businesses people. Little did they know
what was to come.
The best way to get information is to make it up.
Everything what we know now about the so-called "Kremlin trolls from the Internet
Research Agency paid by Putin's favorite chef," came from one source, a group of CIA spies that
used the mascot of Shaltay-Boltay, or Humpty-Dumpty, for their collective online
persona.
They were
arrested in November 2016 and revealed as the FSB and former FSB officers . One of them
even managed a security department for the Kaspersky Lab. They all were people highly skilled
and educated in manipulating and creating large online databases, in any online research
imagined, and the knowledge of hacking and altering databases, including those that were run by
the Russian government. They weren't poor people. They weren't there for the money. They were
ideologically driven. Their hatred towards Russia and its people was the motive for their
actions.
At some point, Gazeta.ru, an online Russophobic publication, suggested that "
Shaltai-Boltai was just a distraction meant to confuse everybody." They themselves
were more concise by stating that they were working to change the reality.
Russian authorities, the courts, and the lawyers, refused to call these men hackers. There
was a reason for this. They weren't so much hackers in a classic sense, as in when someone
gains access to real information and copies it. This group wasn't necessarily hacking existing
information, but planting information. They were creating files about fake nonexistent
companies and employees, files with blurry fake paystubs, memos, emails, phone messages and so
on. The fakes looked convincing, but they still were forgeries that could be easy disproved for
someone who had access to the real information.
That's when the hacking took place, when the FSB agents went into government databases and
created records of people and companies that didn't exist.
I think that part of the reasons why some of them got the mild sentences of three years in
general security prison, and some were left free, wasn't just the fact that they agreed to
collaborate with the Russian government, but also the fact that they didn't actually steal
information from government officials like Medvedev and his press secretary, Nataliya Timakova,
or the owner of the largest in Europe catering business, Evgeny Prigozhin. They made
information up and claimed that it was real.
These guys gave a bad name to all hackers, whistleblowers, leakers and spies. Now,
journalists presented with some "hacked" and leaked secrets has to think it over, less they end
up with an egg on their face like journos from the Fontanka, Vedomosti and Novaya Gazeta in
case of the "Kremlin's trolls."
If we accept that the Shaltay-Boltay group was working to create and distribute documents
they forged, claiming that those files were "hacked," we would also understand a mysterious
statement made by them to BuzzFeed.
"We are trying to change reality. Reality has indeed begun to change as a result of the
appearance of our information in public ," wrote the representative, whose email account is
named Shaltai Boltai, which is the Russian for tragic nursery rhyme hero Humpty Dumpty."
Bazzfeed also said back in 2014, that " The leak from the Internet Research Agency is
the first time specific comments under news articles can be directly traced to a Russian
campaign." Now, this is a very important grave mark.
Just think about this working scheme: Shaltay-Boltay with a group of anti-government
"activists" created the "Internet Research Agency," they and some "activists" created 470
FaceBook accounts used to post comments that looked unmistakably "trollish."
After that other, CIA affiliated entities, like the entire Western Media, claimed the
"Russian interference in the US election." Finally, the ODNI published a report lacking any
evidence in it.
The link to their report is here, but I don't recommend you to read it. You will gain as
much information by reading this report as you would by chewing on some wet newspaper. Ask my
dog for details.
Only three paragraphs is interesting on the page 4:
"Russia used trolls as well as RT as part of its influence efforts to denigrate Secretary Clinton. This effort amplified stories on scandals about Secretary Clinton and the role of WikiLeaks in the election campaign.
The likely financier of the so-called Internet Research Agency of professional trolls located in Saint Petersburg is a close Putin ally with ties to Russian intelligence.
A journalist who is a leading expert on the Internet Research Agency claimed that some social media accounts that appear to be tied to Russia's professional trolls -- because they previously were devoted to supporting Russian actions in Ukraine -- started to advocate for President-elect Trump as early as December 2015."
In other words, in its report with a subtitle: "Background to "Assessing Russian Activities
and Intentions in Recent US Elections": The Analytic Process and Cyber Incident Attribution"
the Office of the Director of National Intelligence ODNI, is quoting the Shaltay-Boltay, a
group that had been proved to work for the CIA by "creating reality."
The only reason why they don't provide us with evidence, with at least one lousy IP address
with the Russian trace roots that would convincingly point at the company named the Internet
Research Agency, is because this company never existed, it never had any IP addresses assigned
to it that would be verifiable via third parties like RIPE network coordination and via online
domain tools.
We understand that having hundreds of people working ten to twelve hours a day, as they
claimed, posting hundreds messages hourly, would use huge amount of bandwidth. They would need
a very fast internet connection with unlimited bandwidth that only a business can get.
Inevitably, this internet connection would come with the assigned IP addresses. No internet
provider would let this kind of bandwidth hog to create this kind traffic without being forced
to separate them from other customers.
One example, a woman with the last name Malcheva filed a lawsuit in court against the
companies "Internet Research, LLC" and "TEKA, LLC," claiming unpaid wages.
An IP address that was assigned to a luxury hotel in Saint-Petersburg. A hotel that was
awarded multiple international awards for excellence. An immensely popular hotel among
discriminating travelers. A very expensive hotel located in the center of a historic city. The
woman claimed that she was an "online troll' working from this location ten hours a day with
hundreds of other virtual trolls. The judge didn't believe her. Would you?
People from the Shaltay-Boltay group weren't hackers in the proper terms because they
worked with and for the CIA. Middle-of the-road and run-of-the-mill intelligence agencies would
collect and analyze information for their governments. The CIA invents information, then goes
on to manufacture and forge documents in support of their invented information; they then
recruit people inside other countries and other governments to claim that they "obtained" this
explosive evidence. Being the dirty cops that they are, the CIA doesn't obtain and secure
evidence, but instead they plant fake evidence on their victims.
By this act alone they change our current and past reality, and they change our future. They
change our history by forging never existing "proof" of invented myths. They hire and train
groups of military men to act as "protesters" around government buildings, while other military
men from other countries shoot at unsuspected bystanders whose death allows Washington to claim
the sovereign governments' wrongdoing.
CIA-operated groups arrest and kill government officials or force them to flee, like in
Ukraine. They take over a couple of government buildings and declare their victory over a huge
country, just like it happened in Russia in 1991 and 1993 and in Ukraine in 2005 and 2014. For
some reason, they claim that governments are those people who take over a couple of buildings
in one city. When in fact, our countries' governments are those people whose names we wrote on
ballots, regardless of where these people are located. We don't run around like chickens with
our heads cut off electing a new president every time our current president leaves the
country.
Going back to the CIA's Humpty-Dumpty project that came online sometime in 2013. Why would
anyone name their enterprise after such predictable failure, you might ask. Because, in the
Russian alliteration, Shalti-Boltai means "shake up and brag about it" and not as in its
original Carroll's version of "humping and dumping."
I actually listened to the clip itself, in which they brought up the Internet Research
Agency" from SP. Knowing full well that the hackers who "leaked" the information about this
"Agency" were arrested and successfully charged for treason because they worked for the CIA
should prevent the CIA to run fake news about the entities and people they themselves made up.
You would think that the matter of the "Kremlin trolls from Saint Petersburg" should be dead
and buried after the arrest. The CIA and other 16 intelligence agencies should know better than
to use information that is being known now as "discovered' with their "help."
Because it's all fake and we know it.
We also know everything that the CIA touches is fake. Speaking in layman's term, it's as
if all those middle aged bald guys would start licking their balls while claiming to be in
fulfilling relations. If it's just you, guys, there is no relations. It's just you. Deal with
it!
The American intelligence community cannot claim an existence of threats against America if
all fingers in those "threats" are pointing back at the American intelligence community.
By stating that someone interfered with the US election using the Internet Research Agency
in SP, is plainly to state that it's CIA that interfered in the American elections.
--
Let's just briefly run over the matter, before I tell you what exactly took place.
--
On September 6, 2017, Alex Stamos, a Chief Security Officer, posted a statement titled "An
Update On Information Operations On Facebook":
"In reviewing the ads buys, we have found approximately $100,000 in ad spending from June of
2015 to May of 2017 -- associated with roughly 3,000 ads -- that was connected to about 470
inauthentic accounts and Pages in violation of our policies. Our analysis suggests these
accounts and Pages were affiliated with one another and likely operated out of Russia."
To make sure that people including myself won't find those accounts, the FB deleted
them.
"We don't allow inauthentic accounts on Facebook, and as a result, we have since shut down
the accounts and Pages we identified that were still active."
That's how it's done in the US. They destroy all potential evidence while laying heavy blame
on Russia. Facebook destroys evidence of "Russians crimes" while public ask them to show those
evidences. This means only one thing: the pieces of evidence are pointing at something Facebook
wants to protect, which is the CIA.
You see, I am not suggesting that they are lying about those accounts being real or that
they "affiliated with Russia," because, if the Shaltay-Boltay group worked with people from the
Soros and Khodorkovky-backed group of human rights lawyers " Team 29, " created in February 2015, then their
only task, it seems, was to service the psyop of the "Internet Trolls." It looks to me like
they could also coordinated the work done by those 470 FaceBook accounts while being on the
territory of Russia. Considering that, it's not a complete lie for the FB to say that those
accounts were "Russia affiliated" and that they were "likely operated from Russia."
Facebook also can claim with plausible deniability that they are ignorant of the fact that
people behind the Internet Research Agency troll hoax are proved by the Russian court to be
affiliated with the CIA, while people who have been acting as the "witnesses" to this Project
are lawyers from Team 29, "human rights activists and also journalists from the Norwegian
Bonnier AB owned Fontanka, Taiwan-based Novaya Gazeta, and the Latvia-based Meduza; these
people are factually proven to be backed by Soros, a CIA financial branch, like a journalist
who has received an award from Khodorkovsky.
The entire campaign of blaming Russia in "meddling" is being reported without ANY tangible
proof that could be verified by at least two independently existing sources, that's why we
should grab ANY grains of information. That's why Facebook's statement that " About one-quarter
of these ads were geographically targeted, and of those, more ran in 2015 than 2016″ is
very important.
Why?
Because, fake business entities known as " the Internet Research Agency ," and "
the Internet
Research" in the government electronic business registry, they were treated as real
companies by the system . Because of their inactivity on
all of their bank accounts and because no one ever filed required forms, they were
automatically liquidated by the electronic system.
The United Business Registry database in Russia works according to the Federal laws, so
after twelve months of inactivity a business is simply liquidated. The Internet Research Agency
was liquidated in December 2016 by the government system after it been inactive for twelve
month. It's inactivity implied that the company had no employees, no office, and no bank
transactions for at least twelve months! The Internet Research company was liquidated on
September 2, 2015 by merging with TEKA company. According to the federal business Registry TEKA
was a construction retailer. I wasn't able to find any indication, like an office, phone
number, names of the managers or employees, anything at all that would indicate that this
company existed. Just like the Internet Research Agency and the Internet Research, TEKA existed
only in the federal registry and nowhere else.
The automatic liquidation in the federal registry for inactivity explains the drop in
activity on the accounts run by the Shaltay-Boltay and the others. Oh, yes, they were also
hunted and on the run, out of the country. It's hard to use bank accounts to simulate
activities after you have fled the country.
The Team 29, of the human rights lawyers and activists, was created in February 2015. To
give to this new company some proof of reality and instant notoriety they immediately filed a
lawsuit against the Internet Research company using an activist woman with a Ukrainian last
name Ludmila Savchuk (Людмила
Савчук) who went and filed a lawsuit against the company,
claiming some unpaid wages. Her first lawsuit the judge threw out. Only after the local general
prosecutor's office pressed the judge to take the case, the district court took the case and
partially granted the Claimant her claim, but not the "moral damages." She wanted the money for
working for the "troll factory." In essence, they wanted an official court paper that would say
black on white, that there is a "troll factory" that this poor woman worked for. Without
reading the file, I don't know what the judge was thinking, but she might have smelled a rat
among those virtual "trolls."
This took place in August 2015, and by September 2 2015, a fake company named the "Internet
Research" was liquidated by merging it, in the Business registry, with another fake entity,
TEKA, that was created in spring 2015 as the construction materials retailer.
"Facebook disclosed on Wednesday that it had identified more than $100,000 worth of divisive
ads on hot-button issues purchased by a shadowy Russian company linked to the Kremlin."
"Most of the 3,000 ads did not refer to particular candidates but instead focused on
divisive social issues such as race, gay rights, gun control and immigration, according to a
post on Facebook by
Alex Stamos, the company's chief security officer. The ads, which ran between June 2015 and May
2017, were linked to some 470 fake accounts and pages the company said it had shut down."
"Facebook officials said the fake accounts were created by a Russian company called
the Internet
Research Agency , which is known for using "troll" accounts to post on social media and
comment on news websites."
"The January intelligence report said the "likely financier" of the Internet Research Agency
was "a close Putin ally with ties to Russian intelligence." The company, profiled by The New York
Times Magazine in 2015, is in St. Petersburg and uses its small army of trolls to put out
messages supportive of Russian government policy."
"To date, while news reports have uncovered many meetings and contacts between Trump
associates and Russians, there has been no evidence proving collusion in the hacking or other
Russian activities."
"While there is no direct link between the Kremlin and any of these projects -- both Surkov
and Zubarev say their projects are privately funded -- the timing, scale, and coordination of
these efforts are suspicious. BuzzFeed
was not able to find evidence of direct government funding to the "Internet Research Agency
," the pro-Kremlin troll outlet operating out of 55 Savushkina , but they did reference
a number of sources that revealed some level of involvement."
-- -
In my next study, I will provide you with more links, screenshots and translations. I will
demonstrate to you how this story connects to the war on the Middle East and the international
war on the Russian population of Ukraine.
--
In conclusion I just want to say that everything the United State touches turns into a
warzone. The building on Savushkina, 55 in Saint Petersburg is no exception.
Multiple death threats are being directed at people who work there. Popular and excellent in
their quality media outlets operating there have to hide their true location and rent a
separate office across the city for their visitors, because people are simply afraid to come
in.
On Oct 26, 2016, several men threw bottles of Molotov cocktail in the windows of the Nevskie
Novosti (Neva News). Luckily, no one was there but the owner of the Media conglomerate, Evgeny
Zubarev, who put out the fire.
All of these, every threat, every simple lie is all on the United State government, its
intelligence community, on those traitors, who are in prison now, and those who are still at
large.
Finally a detailed article on this. Anyone who has read sputnik or RT during the years
2015-2016 can figure that something is wrong with those claims.
We have two media outlets truelly affiliated with the Russian government (although not
completely) and they didnt produce any pro-Trump article during that period. They interviewd
Jill Stein and Ron Paul several times however
With the current uproar about Russia interfering in the USA elections. It has to be noted
that the Kremlin is very silent on this subject. It is more important now than ever to bring
forth information from Russia in exposing how serious the problem is from the USA interfering
in not only Russian affairs but how the intelligence community continues unabated in
interfering in most countries.
This article is very important and outlines the destructive effort being done to Russia by
the USA. It should be noted and clearly displayed by the psychopathic nature of USA meddling
in Russian affairs. One has to wonder why people cannot see how the current government of the
USA is totally out of control around the world. Everything has its cycle of life and the USA
is no exception to this theory.
When humanity is controlled in such a fashion, by that I mean that the USA is supported by
the four pillars consisting of GREED, CORRUPTION, POWER and CONTROL. They are sitting on the
top of these structures and are desperately trying to maintain their grip over the world.
Perhaps the purpose is to "open Russia" to debunk those silly "Kreml hacking" claims and give
Empire more important information inside Russia. E.g how to go deep through military security
defense line.
Empire actually don't know what Russia don't know or do know. Is this chess where you have
to sacrifice pawn or two or even knight to secure queen and king? Or why to shoot fly with
cannon?
"One has to wonder why people cannot see how the current government of the USA is
totally out of control around the world." end quote.
It is extremely difficult and time consuming for an ordinary person to find the truth in
the millions of pages on the Internet, the ordinary mushroom knowing that the MSM only serves
you sh't and keeps you in the dark. The most reliable method (not 100 % though) is the
"Follow the money" method, who has to gain by this or that development, but even that can
lead to false conclusions. Always count on that everyone has a hidden agenda, but watch out
you are not gripped by paranoia.
Yea, just a common internet malpractice called spoofing, that any IT professional, especially
one working in IT security, knows about. I suspected all along that most or all of this
"Russian Hacking" and "Russians did it" was exactly that.
What a pathetic waste of time. American society and government are really getting very low.
And, of course, reality is actually defined as "what you cannot change by speaking about
it". You can change reality, a very little bit at a time, by doing honest physical work.
At the same time, it's strange they don't follow up by more imbecilic slander against
Russia for Charlottesville and Las Vegas. I mean, the attention span of Ziomedia consumers is
parlously narrow. The US Presidential Election should have all but faded as an event in the
distant past.
I wonder if the US Government and Washington political establishment are aware that the rest
of the world is watching them and drawing appropriate conclusions. Probably not.
What has been happening in the US during Trumps election campaign, and in the period after
he became President, has left a very poor impression of the US in the eyes of the
international community.
The US is now perceived as an imperial power which has lost all sense of reality,
thinking it can do anything it wants and having the rest of the world agree with it. That is
simply not the case. All the anti-Russian rhetoric has done is to make Russia more popular
and more mature in the eyes of the world, which now sees Vladimir Putin as a factor of
stability.
Scott can you elaborate , what is the cause of that hate towards Russian people?
What are the reasons to hate your own nation and the people who live there , after all you
were born there and lived your whole life?
If you do not like to live there you can simply leave , Soviet Union is no more.
There's only one thing you need to know about the recent election cycle in the USA- the
organised force that operated on behalf of Hillary Clinton was unprecented in Human History
and spent more money to get her elected than in any previous campaign- and they ***failed***.
Was there pro-Trump activity, including by soft 'unofficial' foreign sources? For sure,
but it measured less than 1% of 1% of 1% of the size of the official state sanctioned efforts
made by every regime of the West to get Clinton elected. The Deep State Demons, led by Tony
Blair, are not angry cos Trump won, they are angry because their effort proved so impotent.
After all within days of Trump winning, they got Putin to back off and thus were able to
'turn' Trump. So Trump ain't the issue- but having such 'PR' resources fail is.
We, the people, are the living 'batteries' that power the Demon's greater plans. Without
our assent- even passively given- the Demons can achieve nothing major on this Planet. So the
Demons battle for hearts and minds. And our support doesn't not have to be 'active' so Brits
protesting against Blair's Iraq invasion in record numbers isn't a issue if the same Brits
support their 'troops' after the fact and then vote Blair back into power.
Americans can think they hate Trump and Clinton- but this doesn't trouble the Deep State
one whit so long as the same fools support everything Trump or Clinton do- passively or
not.
Does Russia 'troll' the West officially and unofficially? Of course it does. Russia is
obliged, as a major power, to do to the West what the West does to Russia. Do Russia's tiny
efforts 'weigh' as much as a far far greater chunk of the efforts of the West? Of course-
Russia has to be super efficient, lacking the resources of the West. Does this mean Russia
was responsible for Clinton's defeat? Obviously not!
Russia reached a tiny section of self-aware US voters who already would never vote for
Clinton. The vast majority of US sheeple are still fodder for the zionist press machine. They
voted against Clinton because they could not stand her perfume of sulpher- they perceived
correctly her rotted soul- and her "all about me" attitude. And the Clinton 'dynasty' thing
was the final straw. For the 'left' to push the idea of 'royal' families was stupid beyond
belief.
So why is Russia still based over its non-relevant activities at that time? Because it is
always about ***now*** and not ***then***. Attacking Putin in the aftermath of Trump's
election successfully got Putin to run backward, leaving Trump exposed and without powerful
allies. And the Deep State just had to walk thru that open door, and 'take' Trump. So Russia
showed itself very weak to name-calling. And our people show themselves likewise weak, hence
this article. When you spend your time apologising and denying the 'truth' of vindictive
attacks on your reputation, you look weak and start to feel weak and always on the
defensive.
Want to see how this plays out- look at the RT news service. Constant attacks on RT have
RT bending over backward to present a pro-Israeli narrative. The language of RT's news
reports are the same language used by the BBC. The people running RT are constantly looking
over their shoulder and asking themselves the question "are we fair and unbiased". Let me ask
you all a question. When does the zionist press of the West ever ask itself that
question?
You see the Deep State, via the racist zionists, controls 99.99% of the planet's
mainstream media and 95% of the so-called indy-media (mostly via real life nazi jew Soros).
It is the duty of our tiny fraction of news outlets to counter this monolith, ***not*** to
worry about 'bias'.
In Britain, the jewish run government press censorship bodies that masquerade as
'independent'- the same ones that ***banned*** PressTV- constantly attack RT for not
presenting 'both' sides of the story. This is the same Britain that when the jews of Israel
use WW3 class weapons to holocaust the people of Gaza, insist that the BBC and ITN
***never*** interview members of the Gaza government- and give exclusive airtime to the
jewish butchers so they can explain why 'sub-Human' non-jews must be slaughtered.
RT tries to mock these requirements by giving airtime to self-destruction rabid zionists
whose very mouth-frothing evil helps ruin the arguments of the Deep State. It does not
matter. RT is on 'borrowed time' and when things get darker in the near future, will be
banned anyway.
Anyway my greater point is I don't care about the zionist press demonising of counter
propaganda using false lying examples. It is their job to make our side look bad any way they
can. I car about the effectiveness of our real counter propaganda- and that we engage in it
powerfully, loudly and without apology. We don't have to present the arguements of the other
side for 'fairness'. The other side is represented by a press machine of unprecedented size,
power and reach. 100% of our efforts have to be in exposing the work and agenda of the Deep
State Demons, and those that willingly ally with them, like the Friends of Israel.
twilight is half half neither full light nor darkness. so are your writings. I admit you
write very well very cunningly instilling confusion, the devil could not do it better. You
may upset a few newcomers on this blog but that s' it. In fact your writings have a
particular air .. . Go on until nobody takes you serious anymore.
Thanks for the detailed puncturing of this mainstream fake news balloon. But, as fake as all
of the "Russian interference, Putin done it, et al" memes are, and therefore seemingly jejune
and transparent propaganda psy-ops, I think their real purpose is to create a false climate,
a public justification for the eventual hard censorship of internet alt-news sites for
Western users. And in that they seem to be succeeding, if only, for the moment, in skewing
the results of internet searches away from what are claimed to be "fake news" sites, but are,
in fact, usually the real news sources, if often contradicting the mainstream party line. A
fake threat is being created that will be answered by a real throttling of internet access.
Russia shouldn't waste precious time and resources on retarded, despicable Westerners forever
high on their vile, corporate mindrot. Well, I take back what I just said -- it would
actually be hilarious to the n :th degree if Russia dismissed the slander on
pure Western supremacist grounds:
"How the hell would a nation of backward, imbecilic, Asiatic savages like us ever be able
to master anything coming out of the West (except, perhaps, pornography) ?!?"
Supreme contempt accompanied by refined amusement is unbeatable when you're dealing with
Western supremacists, believe me.
Rather than Putin being a mastermind controlling the world from Moscow, it seems that most
bad things happening in the world are in fact being controlled out of Langley, Virginia.
Which pretty much agrees with everything I've ever read about the CIA going back decades.
The US needs to disband the CIA entirely, investigate their operations and put most of the
heads in jail.
With soros and khodorkovsky being israelis, this covert op involved a lot more than just some
trouser droppers at the cia. It is part of a much wider israeloamerican series of covert ops
against Russia. I suspect there is a whole lot more of this govno and this is just one
individual op being described here.
This is very disappointing to read. I have now been in sharp training , to hopefully be
employed by one of these nebulous actor as a bona fide troll, posting comments with a
satirical edge but always advocating this or that point of view. It is most distressing to
say the least.
End of satirical part.
If this article is true, i have no choice, but to post what is my current opinion, which of
course is formed by the current MSM tagline Confused ? Dont be!
The recent years have seen the rise of three letter agencies use of the internet in in their
paid for masters agenda, and the truth has in fact never been further out of reach for a
ordinary person.
Ohh sweet irony, 30 years ago it took searching libraries, news clippings to find the truth,
but it could be done, as the smoke and diversion was only a single or few layers thick.
Not so today, with all information at hand within microseconds, the truth has never been
buried deeper, the public never been more "propagandised than ever.
Scott, you were right in your intuition that the Catalonia "revolution" was remindful of
Maidan. Remember that Maidan video "I am Ucrainian"? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hvds2AIiWLA
Well, there is this one about Catalonia that looks and sounds very very very similar.
Clearly copied from the Maidan model
Perhaps somebody could help me to understand this story better.
It seems that the so-called "Kremlin trolls" were current and former FSB officers who went
to work for the CIA.
Questions
(1) How do we know they worked for the CIA? Reading this article, I find numerous claims
to this effect but no evidence. Did I miss something? Is there a smoking gun?
(2) Why did they defect from the FSB to join the CIA? Do we have any insight on this?
But that's what a good defense is for, to deny.
Treason is very serious charge that includes working for foreign governments intelligence
services.
I believe I have enough to prove my point, using, of course, only information openly
available on the internet.
However, if these people worked for SBU or Mossad, I will write about this, also.
You wrote "(2) Why did they defect from the FSB to join the CIA? Do we have any insight on
this?"
Maybe they defected, or maybe they started working there after being recruited by the foreign
intelligence services. We will find out.
As described by various media sources, the basic story about Shaltay-Boltay is that they
formed in mid-2013 to hack e-mail, social media, and data of officials and businessmen in
Russia, and then sold this data for large amounts of money through the digital underground.
In particular, this happened through a portal called "Exchange of Information", a kind of
anonymous auction site for stolen data. Glazastikov says Shaltay-Boltay "was supposed to be a
spokesman for the Anonymous International", and was created by himself, Vladimir Anikeev, and
Konstantin Teplyakov.
Although most all of the Western media sources insinuate some connection between
Shaltay-Boltay, the FSB officers who were arrested, and the putative "hacking" of the 2016
U.S. election, Glazastikov
denies any interest in targets outside Russia.
There is also disagreement around the connection between Shaltay-Boltay and the FSB.
Glazastikov says that the FSB contacted him, saying they were aware of Shaltay-Boltay's
activity, and wanted to assert "control" and veto power in exchange for not arresting them.
Russia Beyond
claims that it was Sergei Mikhailov (FSB) who took control of Shaltay-Boltay and
"received kickbacks from its founder, Vladimir Anikeyev". However, Glazastikov's testimony
contradicts that of Anikeev, his lawyer (Ruslan Koblev), and Ivan Pavlov, lawyer for one
of the FSB defendants, all of whom deny any working relationship between Shaltay-Boltay and
the FSB.
Interestingly, Glazastikov notes that neither Anikeev nor Teplyakov had technical
expertise. Moreover, Glazastikov makes it sound like even he was not primarily involved in
hacking, and the "Exchange of Information" admins claim no connection with Shaltay-Boltay.
For the heavy lifting, Shaltay-Boltay would use "specialized hacking sites" where they
outsourced pay-to-order hacks with IT mercenaries. A target e-mail address could be hacked
for a few thousand rubles. And even this, Glazastikov states, wasn't really the original idea
for Shaltay-Boltay. Instead, he imagined they would be doing "advertising or administration
fee".
Perhaps more significantly, it has more recently been claimed that members of
Shaltay-Boltay have admitted to
forging some parts of the correspondence that they hacked. The putative aim was to boost
the profile of their group.
Reading between the lines of this, I find more support for Scott's angle on this story.
Shaltay-Boltay were indeed not hackers in a conventional sense. They were traders in an
illicit information economy, and apparently weren't above fabricating that information if it
would raise their profile. For the extent and nature of that fabrication, i look forward to
Scott's next report!
This is incredible research, you put most YTube new journalists to shame. I hope this
material makes its way into your next book. "Enemy of the State" is an instant classic full
of insights on how to live life that are a soothing balm to children of the Sick West with
senses of humor somewhat intact.
On the east coast of the U.S., the mundane worlds of the Masters of (their imagined)
Universe can be seen fairly easily, especially if you wander into places and act like you
belong there.
Regarding the kinds of people that instigate the madness you describe above: I recently
had the opportunity to visit a very interesting social club that was opened to the public for
one day only. Three Ivy league schools I'm sure you've heard of. On the walls upstairs were
listed all the latest presidents in different colors, like red for an "H" school: Obama,
Clinton, Bush II, Bush I . Kennedy John Quincy Adams, etc. I can't remember Nixon or Carter
being there, but I talked to someone who's name is on another wall, and it struck me that
members of this club did not hate Trump because of his manners, parents, background,
politics, or alleged business acumen. Instead, they hated the fact that his name couldn't be
written on their wall. It's really only acceptable to be President if you've been BMOC at
Harvard.
Out of nowhere, my gentleman acquaintance brought up the topic of the day: Russia hacking
the elections. The more things change, the more they are not the same anymore.
There were pictures of famous football teams from years gone by, the place had a charm but
it was shabby, and the ceiling looked like sprayed styrafoam, an aesthetic disgrace that
these imaginary jocks failed to appreciate. The drinks, by the way, were terrible. They must
make their highballs with Minute Maid. The creativity and intelligence, not to mention taste
of the West are surely at a low ebb.
Frankly, I don't really see too big a problem with people swallowing the hogwash about
"Kremlin disinformation trolls" working to undermine the West's irrepressible belief in
itself. As usual, the most appropriate response amounts to contemptuous, refined amusement:
"They seem to know indeed what they are talking about -- well worth their salary for doing
honest work."
If you cannot change the Weltanschau of Ziomedia addicts, then at least you're fully
entitled to have some fun at the slobs' expense.
Absolutely, humor is one of the best weapons around. The more pompous a person is, the more
they hate being dropped down to size. Pop goes the balloon of hot air. Humor has probably
woken more people up than any other method. It's not as though we have a lack of ludicrous,
ridiculous material. As the inventor of this site once described, how did the people in the
late-era Soviet Union fight their declining regime? Jokes.
Interesting how the incorrect information masqueraded as first hand eyewitness reports by
boots on the ground in St.Petersburg -- in effect 'doxxing' the Kremin's Troll Factory.
It's as though someone misinterpreted (or merely read in school misrepresentations of) Asch's
conformity test results.
This was obviously aimed at those old enough to remember the Lubyanka building; fighting
ghosts of the cold war in old peoples' minds, eh?
It'll probably work on political fools like Kelly (chief of staff)
yet, once wonders if the yet to be released JFK files will point directly at Russia
(assuming the old intelligence communities planted evidence against russia long ago and
sealed it among the other documents) and if Clinton on her book tour spreading total BS about
russia and wikileaks is laying the groundwork for Trump to resurrect his mentor's McCarthyism
skeletons?
I don't think they really give a rat's arse about Russia. Just read Bush's speech he gave
(that the MSM blatantly lies calling it anti-racist only) about the 'cyber revolution'
coming. Who the hell do you think is the second highest paid lobbyist group besides the
military industrial complex? That's right, the USA's ISP companies.
Aaron Swartz must be rolling in his grave. poor guy. no way he hung himself.
First, I will address the author's attempted discrediting of the Shaltai Boltai hacking
group, which included someone from the FSB. They released the internal communications of the
St. Petersburg troll factory. Now, the author tries painting them as traitors working for the
CIA, who planted fake information. This is entirely untrue. The group became infamous for its
initial release of information in late 2013, and the subsequent hacks of various Kremlin
insiders. Here are the other leaks they released:
Mandatory Questions for Putin's Press-conference in Austria
An internal Kremlin index of the relevant bloggers: divided into "Guards" (either official
Kremlin
accounts or trusted trolls), highlighted in red or "Opposition", in yellow, or "Neutrals" in
green.
Mailbox of Vera Kerova, a Kremlin PR adviser who worked closely on ensuring the Crimean
referendum was a predetermined success.
Emails of Timur Prokopenko, head of the "Internal Politics" department at President
Putin's administration, de facto spin-master of the Kremlin.
Emails of Kremlin employee Alexey Anisimov, one of the assistants to the Kremlin's chief
of Domestic Politics Vyacheslav Volodin.
Emails of Georgi Gavrish, a former officer of the Russian embassy in Athens, and, like
Dugin, at one point employed by oligarch Malofeev.
As you can see, their hacks were deep and numerous. Not once has any information they
released been deemed fake. Further, the amount of information released is staggering. They
could not forge the thousands of emails messages from the troll factory, or the tens of
thousands of messages from the above personalities. Some emails contained entire drafts of
unpublished books. And the information has indeed been corroborated. Shaltai Boltai also
blackmailed some people for money, but despite this, none of their released have been proven
to be fakes. Nor do they have a connection to the CIA. The FSB is known to hire former
cybercriminals. That one of its employees ran such a hacking group is not surprising.
Now, here is some information on the hacked files:
Further, the author tries claiming that the building was "for rent" in 2014 and that this
means there could not have been a troll factory there. This is entirely false. The "for rent"
sign was placed in some time 2013 and the troll factory moved in in 2013. By the summer of
2014, Shaltai Boltai had hacked the factory. The author also tries making some incorrect
technical claims, that posting so many comments would require a huge amount of bandwith and
that no ISP would allow this. This is another false argument, considering it is very easy and
cheap to get high bandwith internet for businesses, which the troll factory technically is.
Posting comments is not some bandwith-intensive task at all, nor is general browsing. The
author also gets confused and claims that Shaltai Boltai and the CIA created those >400
troll accounts, as revealed by FB. Shaltai Boltai actually released the internal
communications years before any "Russiagate" hysteria. Lastly, the author points out that
there are many companies registered from the address, not just the troll factory. He then
lists some of these companies and fails to note the irony of mentioning FAN. We will get to
FAN news network later.
The author then states:
"This took place in August 2015, and by September 2 2015, a fake company named the
"Internet Research" was liquidated by merging it, in the Business registry, with another fake
entity, TEKA, that was created in spring 2015 as the construction materials retailer."
The lawyer who won Savchuk's case, Ivan Pavlov, who heads Team 29, says:
"Meanwhile, the company has changed its name to Teka, Pavlov said. It also has moved its
legal headquarters, although the trolling operation remains in a large gray building north of
the St. Petersburg city center, near the head of the Gulf of Finland."
This is what investigative journalist Andrei Zakharov, who works for the business media
group RBC, says (he has written numerous articles investigating the finances of the troll
factory):
"They have a lot of legal entities, and they still, I think, change it every year or every
two years."
Another company at 55 Savushkina Street is Glavset, whose director general has the same
name as the boss of IRA. Glavset lists the "creation and use of databases and information
resources" as well as the "development of computer software, advertising services and
information placement services" among its activities. It was listed as a company in the
Russian legal entities registry in February 2015. A short time later, it began advertising
for staff on a headhunting site (hh.ru). One post looking for a copywriter says the job
involves "writing diverse texts for the Internet and content for social networks." The
posting offered a salary of 30,000 rubles a month (then a little over $500) and said
experience was unnecessary. Recruits would work with a team of "young and enthusiastic
colleagues" in "a comfortable and stylish office," according to the posting. Source:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/the-notorious-kremlin-linked-troll-farm-and-the-russians-trying-to-take-it-down/2017/10/06/c8c4b160-a919-11e7-9a98-07140d2eed02_story.html
As you can see, the fact that the company continually changes names and merges is to
obscure its existence and make it difficult to find out more information about it.
After the troll factory's emails were hacked, various journalists contacted the trolls using
their leaked email addresses, to get interviews. One such journalist was the NYT's Adrian
Chen:
It's a lengthy piece, but I suggest everyone read it. It also mentions the "FAN news
network", mentioned by the author. This is another entity created to obscure the existence of
the troll factory. Several other interviews were published, by Western and Russian
sources:
Let's assume that all this is fake, including all the troll factory emails and that the
interviews were conducted by the biased Western media outlets, using CIA actors or something.
What about the Russian media? Did they report on this too? Indeed, they did:
The above is a local, St. Petersburg-based media outlet and they released several
documents from the troll factory, given to them by a former employee. Are they lying too?
RBC, one of Russia's most respected business news outlets, ran a story about the troll
factory and its funders, this April. The story focused on restaurateur Evgeny Prigozhin, a
close friend of Putin, responsible for the financing of the St. Petersburg troll factory:
They also revealed the names of two highly popular troll accounts: an anti-Clinton
FaceBook group with 140,000 subscribers, called "Secure Borders", and a right-wing Twitter
account called Tea Party News, with 22,000 followers. It's my hypothesis that FaceBook used
these accounts to find other accounts, as there were some of the first accounts suspended.
This wasn't the only Russian media article about the troll factory or its wealthy funder. One
of the very first articles about the troll factory was published in 2013, by Novaya Gazeta,
one of Russia's oldest opposition papers:
In conclusion, the author was unable to prove that the leaked correspondence is fake,
ignores the mountain of evidence proving the existence of the troll factory, blames, without
evidence, the CIA for being behind all this, and tries using faulty logic to disprove the
existence of the troll factory. He also is confused about the troll factory's continuous
morphing. Lastly, he tries linking the drop in leaking activity by Shaltai Boltai with the
troll factory's merging into other entities. The two things are completely unrelated, since
the troll factory changes its name every year or so, and has gone by many names. I find it
hard to believe that a Russian speaker like the author could make so many mistakes and leave
out the above information. I don't even understand Russian, yet, even I addressed the
mountain of evidence from the RuNet regarding the troll factory. We have thousands of
messages from the factory, leaked not just by Shaltai Boltai, but local news outlets from St.
Petersburg, who received the documents from a former employee. We have numerous interviews
from the American, Russian, British, and German media of not just one person (which the
author tries smearing due to her Ukrainian last name), but countless other former employees.
Conveniently, the author ignores them.
You say that an alleged Russian troll farm moved into that building in 2014?
Hmm. The USA had a $200 million troll farm program already in 2010. And the difference
between the existence of the US' far larger troll farm program than anything that has been
alleged of Russia, is that the US troll farm program is confirmed to exist, and was
confirmed, in comprehensive detail, to exist by the US government years before any
allegations that Russia might be doing something similar existed.
In fact, I suppose that you could be one of the US' paid social media propaganda trolls,
Matt. After all, they are everywhere, these days -- and have been for getting close to a
decade, now.
" According to publicized 2011 USA Central Command documents and contracts which detailed
the program, the USA has by far the world's largest cyber-army, and contracts companies to
set up and pay people to post in social media "around the world," "using fake online personas
to influence internet conversations and spread pro-American propaganda "the software could
allow US service personnel, working around the clock in one location, to respond to emerging
online conversations with any number of co-ordinated messages, blogposts, chatroom posts and
other interventions .The discovery that the US military is developing false online
personalities -- known to users of social media as "sock puppets" -- could also encourage
other governments, private companies and non-government organisations to do the same."
Basically, if the Russian government is paying posters to post in social media, they got
the idea from the USA government (and Israel, which admitted paying social media trolls
during their 2008 -- 2009 war against Gaza), which was publicly broadcasting that it was
doing the same thing years earlier, and with a budget in the hundreds of millions of
dollars.
Since then, a lot of countries have copies the US and Israel's pioneering of social media
troll farms, and today Israel, the US, the UK, Ukraine, Poland etc.
I already know about those links. First, none of them prove the U.S. has troll farms to
target countries. Those links only discuss writing in foreign languages to fight Jihadist
propaganda online. But no evidence of the U.S. hiring people to post messages on Russian
forums, for example.
"In fact, I suppose that you could be one of the US' paid social media propaganda trolls,
Matt."
Hmm, strange ad hominem. I never insulted you, so I don't understand.
"Those links only discuss writing in foreign languages to fight Jihadist propaganda
online"
With the USA having the largest known troll farm budget and operation in the world, and
using the phrase "around the world" to describe the scope of its social media propaganda, it
is simple logic that the US is targeting everybody with their propaganda. But, the links I
gave are certainly not exclusive to countering jihadist propaganda, with the US government's
own description of its social media propaganda program being focused on social media "around
the world", and with some of the links I gave explicitly focus on Russia-targeting efforts,
while others involve targeting US citizens with domestic propaganda.
Also, the US spends $50 -- $100 million a year just targeting Russia with propaganda in
general. And that's only what's on the public books (the real figure could be much
higher):
One of the US' social media troll farms is operated by Ntrepid, near L.A. ( https://ntrepidcorp.com/ ). Do you expect
they're working on countering jihad propaganda? Personally, I doubt that.
Another US security company that was seeking a troll farm contract from the US government
was HBGary ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HBGary ) -- a
company that had a record of conducting social media disinformation campaigns and cyber
attack on behalf of US corporations and in support of US government interests.
Now, why would the US government have made propaganda directed against US citizens legal (
http://www.businessinsider.com/ndaa-legalizes-propaganda-2012-5
), if the US government's only purpose was to counter pro-jihad messages, notably those in
countries in the Middle East? Obviously, the US government's propaganda programs are not
only, or even mostly about countering pro-jihad messaging, but feature comprehensive social
media propagandizing against many targets.
Proving this, the purpose stated in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2017, for the US' Global Engagement Center, says:
"The purpose of the Center shall be to lead, synchronize, and coordinate efforts of the
Federal Government to recognize, understand, expose, and counter foreign state and non-state
propaganda and disinformation efforts aimed at undermining United States national security
interests."
That does not limit the US' social media propaganda to countering jihadist, but
specifically includes propaganda against states.
Also, the phrasing of the US government, calling its own propaganda 'countering
propaganda', is itself propaganda, and trying to white-wash the US' hefty international
offensive propaganda programs as something noble and just, and the targets of those programs
as being deserving of being propagandized against. That rationalizing is by no means an
honest description, being just hubris and arrogance.
At any rate, all the details make it clear that the US is committing social media
propaganda not just against jihad groups, but also against its own citizens, against Russia,
and against the world, in general.
And if there was still any doubt about this (though I think there shouldn't be), then look
at the US' own description of its goals in conducting social media propaganda:
"using fake online personas to influence internet conversations and spread pro-American
propaganda."
Pro-USA propaganda is not countering-jihad propaganda. Those are completely different
subjects, and the stated goal of the social media propaganda program that the US government
detailed on a US government jobs site in 2010 was to bias internet conversation by spreading
pro-USA propaganda. I imagine that a lot of that work is done in Western news sites, and on
Facebook targeting English audiences. Maybe some of that work involves targeting Russian
audiences, too. It probably does.
Countering jihadist propaganda is only one facet of the US' comprehensive social media
propaganda programs.
The Washington Post also explains some Russia-targeting propaganda efforts by the US
government:
"The initiative grows out of a bill authored in March by Portman and Sen. Chris Murphy
(D-Conn.) called the "Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act." It initially
sprang from a desire to help independent journalists and nongovernmental organizations in
European nations such as Ukraine, Moldova and Serbia, which face a heavy tide of Russian
propaganda."
Once again, calling setting up a propaganda program a propaganda-countering program is
white-washing what it is. Propaganda is propaganda. And the US had Russia-targeting
propaganda long before this 2016 initiative, and that initiative is just one more
Russia-targeting propaganda endeavour of the US.
"Hmm, strange ad hominem. I never insulted you, so I don't understand."
Is it necessarily ad hominem? My point is that I think it's fact that people playing the
apologist for US social media propaganda, or insisting that a geopolitical rival of the US is
conducting this type of propaganda, could be a US paid propaganda troll. I think that the US
pays propaganda trolls to do. That's how the same messaging that many like yourself
constantly push sounds when the roles are reversed -- and if the public were more informed,
they'd know the roles actually are reversed since before any of the Russophobic hysteria was
even gestating.
I believe I've shown in the information that I posted above that the US is running
large-scale troll farms to spam pro-US propaganda in social media around the world. But a
statement made in the RT article by former Mi-5 agent, Annie Machon, parallels my own
thinking when I read the article's title:
" the timing to me is interesting, because for sure the West has been running these
so-called troll farms against other countries as well for a long time, so are they just
trying to expand their operations by developing this new software? Or are they trying to
disingenuously suggest to people that actually they haven't done it before and only the Big
Bad Russians, or the Big Bad Chinese, have run troll farms."
I think that the US government is trying to retro-actively legitimatize their social media
bots and paid propaganda trolls, but that this stuff that the US government is now publicly
broadcasting has been happening for a very long time.
And there is evidence of it in the 2011 Guardian article, which details US social media
propaganda software from 2010:
" the software could allow US service personnel, working around the clock in one location,
to respond to emerging online conversations with any number of co-ordinated messages,
blogposts, chatroom posts and other interventions. Details of the contract suggest this
location would be MacDill air force base near Tampa, Florida, home of US Special Operations
Command."
So, the US government's troll farms have been, for many years, attacking social media with
specialized software enabling them to facilitate tag-teaming comments sections, to make it
appear as though multiple people agree with the pro-US propaganda, when in-fact it could be
just 5 puppet account belonging to one paid US propaganda troll, or, it could be multiple
paid US propaganda trolls, using their special software to tag-team one comments section.
We do know that the US is targeting US media with its troll farm program, as the US
government did specifically change US laws in 2011 to make propagandizing against US citizens
legal. And I strongly suspect that I have personally encountered US paid propaganda trolls
multiple times when posting at US news sites.
I suspect that Ars Technica is one particular target that paid US propaganda trolls have
been targeting and staking out over the past few years. There has been definite tag-teaming
of BS US propaganda there whenever there's an attack article about Russia -- and Ars has run
many, many fanatical, hysterical, and conspiracy attack pieces against Russia in the previous
few years (most relying on now heavily-debunked information, and wild hypothesis, while
pushing it as though fact).
Other details of the US' social media troll farm program reveal that the US goes to great
lengths to disguise its paid trolls, and to provide "powerful deniability".
"It also calls for "traffic mixing", blending the persona controllers' internet usage with
the usage of people outside Centcom in a manner that must offer "excellent cover and powerful
deniability"."
" US-based controllers should be able to operate false identities from their workstations
"without fear of being discovered by sophisticated adversaries"."
So, paid US propaganda trolls are not going to admit to what they're doing, and they're
rather going to point to their identity as having robust background "evidence" that they're
normal people, that they're IP is located somewhere else, that there are multiple people
saying the same thing as they are when it's just one, or a few paid US propaganda trolls
tag-teaming a comments section, using multiple puppet accounts each, and with VPNs to make
their puppet accounts appear as though they're posting from various different places in the
US, and around the world.
I would also like to bring attention to this part of the 2011 The Guardian article:
"Centcom said it was not targeting any US-based web sites, in English or any other
language, and specifically said it was not targeting Facebook or Twitter."
That article was made regarding information on the US' social media propaganda program as
it was in 2010.
So, if the US troll farm programs weren't targeting US citizens at the time those initial
details were uncovered, it was only because it was, at the time, illegal for the US
government to target the citizens of the US with propaganda. But that was changed around
2012, and so comments that the US government is not targeting US citizens no longer apply, as
they're out-dated.
Two senior FSB officers and a high-level manager of Russia's leading cybersecurity firm
Kaspersky Lab are facing official charges of treason in the interests of the US, a lawyer
representing one of the defendants has confirmed to Interfax. Ruslan Stoyanov, head of
Kaspersky Lab's computer incidents investigations unit, Sergey Mikhailov, a senior Russian FSB
officer, and his deputy Dmitry Dokuchayev are accused of "treason in favor of the US,"
lawyer Ivan Pavlov said on Wednesday, as cited by Interfax. Read more 70mn cyberattacks,
mostly foreign, targeted Russia's critical infrastructure in 2016 – FSB
Pavlov chose not to disclose which of the defendants he represents, adding, however, that
his client denies all charges.
The charges against the defendants do not imply they were cooperating with the CIA, Pavlov
added. "There is no mention of the CIA at all. [The entity] in question is the US, not the
CIA," he stressed, according to TASS.
The lawyer maintained the court files included no mention of Vladimir Anikeev, an alleged
leader of 'Shaltai Boltai', a hacking group that previously leaked emails from top Russian
officials, including Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev.
The hacking group's name was in the news earlier in January, when Russian media reports
linked Mikhailov and Dokuchayev to 'Shaltai Boltai' . In an unsourced article last
Wednesday, Rosbalt newspaper claimed Mikhailov's unit was ordered in 2016 to work with the
group.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told RIA Novosti on Wednesday the treason charges do not
relate to the US suspicions of Russia being behind the alleged cyberattacks on the 2016
presidential elections. He added that President Vladimir Putin is receiving regular updates on
the current investigation.
Russian media reports said Mikhailov was arrested during a conference of top FSB leadership.
He was reportedly escorted out of the room with a bag placed over his head. His deputy,
Dokuchayev, is said to be a well-known hacker who allegedly began cooperating with the FSB
several years ago. Kaspersky Lab manager Stoyanov was also placed under arrest several weeks
ago.
Stoyanov is still employed by Kaspersky Lab, the company told RIA Novosti later on
Wednesday, adding there were "no personnel changes" at this point.
Treason charges mean that the defendants could be handed a sentence of up to 20 years in
prison. The treason charges also mean any trial will not be public due to its sensitive
nature.
Russians Spooked by Nukes-Against-Cyber-Attack Policy February 16, 2018
New U.S. policy on nuclear retaliatory strikes for cyber-attacks is raising concerns, with
Russia claiming that it's already been blamed for a false-flag cyber-attack – namely the
election hacking allegations of 2016, explain Ray McGovern and William Binney.
By Ray McGovern and William Binney
Moscow is showing understandable concern over the lowering of the threshold for employing
nuclear weapons to include retaliation for cyber-attacks, a change announced on Feb. 2 in the
U.S. Nuclear Posture Review (NPR).
A nuclear test detonation carried out in Nevada on April 18, 1953.
Explaining the shift in U.S. doctrine on first-use, the NPR cites the efforts of potential
adversaries "to design and use cyber weapons" and explains the change as a "hedge" against
non-nuclear threats. In response, Russia described the move as an "attempt to shift onto others
one's own responsibility" for the deteriorating security situation.
Moscow's concern goes beyond rhetoric. Cyber-attacks are notoriously difficult to trace to
the actual perpetrator and can be pinned easily on others in what we call "false-flag"
operations. These can be highly destabilizing – not only in the strategic context, but in
the political arena as well.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has good reason to believe he has been the target of a
false-flag attack of the political genre. We judged this to be the case a year and a half ago,
and said so. Our judgment was fortified last summer – thanks to forensic evidence
challenging accusations that the Russians hacked into the Democratic National Committee and
provided emails to WikiLeaks. (Curiously, the FBI declined to do forensics, even though the
"Russian hack" was being described as an "act of war.")
Our conclusions were based on work conducted over several months by highly experienced
technical specialists, including another former NSA technical director (besides co-author
Binney) and experts from outside the circle of intelligence analysts.
On August 9, 2017, investigative reporter Patrick Lawrence
summed up our findings in The Nation. "They have all argued that the hack theory is wrong
and that a locally executed leak is the far more likely explanation," he explained.
As we wrote in an open letter to Barack Obama dated January 17, three days before he left
office, the NSA's programs are fully capable of capturing all electronic transfers of data. "We
strongly suggest that you ask NSA for any evidence it may have indicating that the results of
Russian hacking were given to WikiLeaks," our letter said. "If NSA cannot produce such evidence
– and quickly – this would probably mean it does not have any."
A 'Dot' Pointing to a False Flag?
In his article, Lawrence included mention of one key, previously unknown "dot" revealed by
WikiLeaks on March 31, 2017. When connected with other dots, it puts a huge dent in the
dominant narrative about Russian hacking. Small wonder that the mainstream media immediately
applied white-out to the offending dot.
Lawrence, however, let the dot out of the bag, so to speak: "The list of the CIA's
cyber-tools WikiLeaks began to release in March and labeled Vault 7 includes one called
Marble Framework
that is capable of obfuscating the origin of documents in false-flag operations and leaving
markings that point to whatever the CIA wants to point to."
If congressional oversight committees summon the courage to look into "Obfus-Gate" and
Marble, they are likely to find this line of inquiry as lucrative as the Steele "dossier." In
fact, they are likely to find the same dramatis personae playing leading roles in both
productions.
Two Surprising Visits
Last October CIA Director Mike Pompeo invited one of us (Binney) into his office to discuss
Russian hacking. Binney told Pompeo his analysts had lied and that he could prove it.
In retrospect, the Pompeo-Binney meeting appears to have been a shot across the bow of those
cyber warriors in the CIA, FBI, and NSA with the means and incentive to adduce "just
discovered" evidence of Russian hacking. That Pompeo could promptly invite Binney back to
evaluate any such "evidence" would be seen as a strong deterrent to that kind of operation.
Pompeo's closeness to President Donald Trump is probably why the heads of Russia's three top
intelligence agencies paid Pompeo an unprecedented visit in late January. We think it likely
that the proximate cause was the strategic danger Moscow sees in the
nuclear-hedge-against-cyber-attack provision of the Nuclear Posture Statement (a draft of which
had been leaked a few weeks before).
If so, the discussion presumably focused on enhancing hot-line and other fail-safe
arrangements to reduce the possibility of false-flag attacks in the strategic arena -- by
anyone – given the extremely high stakes.
Putin may have told his intelligence chiefs to pick up on President Donald Trump's
suggestion, after the two met last July, to establish a U.S.-Russian cyber security unit. That
proposal was widely ridiculed at the time. It may make good sense now.
Ray McGovern, a CIA analyst for 27 years, was chief of the Soviet Foreign Policy Branch and
briefed the President's Daily Brief one-on-one from 1981-1985. William Binney worked for NSA
for 36 years, retiring in 2001 as the technical director of world military and geopolitical
analysis and reporting; he created many of the collection systems still used by NSA.
mike k , February 16, 2018 at 5:36 pm
Those Russians had a strange mission coming to CIA headquarters to try to negotiate with
soulless mass murderers in the name of maintaining a precarious semblance of peace, knowing
full well that these men's words and assurances were worth less than nothing. Ah well, I
guess in a mad situation one is reduced to making desperate gestures, hoping against hope
.
Mild-ly -Facetious , February 16, 2018 at 5:42 pm
F Y I :> Putin prefers Aramco to Trump's sword dance
Hardly 10 months after honoring the visiting US president, the Saudis are open to a
Russian-Chinese consortium investing in the upcoming Aramco IPO
By M.K. BHADRAKUMAR
FEBRUARY 16, 2018
[extract]
In the slideshow that is Middle Eastern politics, the series of still images seldom add up
to make an enduring narrative. And the probability is high that when an indelible image
appears, it might go unnoticed – such as Russia and Saudi Arabia wrapping up huge
energy deals on Wednesday underscoring a new narrative in regional and international
security.
The ebb and flow of events in Syria – Turkey's campaign in Afrin and its threat to
administer an "Ottoman slap" to the United States, and the shooting down of an Israeli F-16
jet – hogged the attention. But something of far greater importance was unfolding in
Riyadh, as Saudi and Russian officials met to seal major deals marking a historic challenge
to the US dominance in the Persian Gulf region.
The big news is the Russian offer to the Saudi authorities to invest directly in the
upcoming Aramco initial public offering – and the Saudis acknowledging the offer. Even
bigger news, surely, is that Moscow is putting together a Russian-Chinese consortium of joint
investment funds plus several major Russian banks to be part of the Aramco IPO.
Chinese state oil companies were interested in becoming cornerstone investors in the IPO,
but the participation of a Russia-China joint investment fund takes matters to an entirely
different realm. Clearly, the Chinese side is willing to hand over tens of billions of
dollars.
Yet the Aramco IPO was a prime motive for US President Donald Trump to choose Saudi Arabia
for his first foreign trip. The Saudi hosts extended the ultimate honor to Trump – a
ceremonial sword dance outside the Murabba Palace in Riyadh. Hardly 10 months later, they are
open to a Russian-Chinese consortium investing in the Aramco IPO.
Riyadh plans to sell 5% of Saudi Aramco in what is billed as the largest IPO in world
history. In the Saudi estimation, Aramco is worth US$2 trillion; a 5% stake sale could fetch
as much as $100 billion. The IPO is a crucial segment of Vision 2030, Saudi Crown Prince
Mohammad bin Salman's ambitious plan to diversify the kingdom's economy.
"Last October CIA Director Mike Pompeo invited one of us (Binney) into his office to
discuss Russian hacking. Binney told Pompeo his analysts had lied and that he could prove
it."
That was about some Dm. Alperovitch for CrowdStrike fame, who had discovered the "hacking" in
10 sec. Guess Alperovitch, as an "expert" at the viciously Russophobic Atlantic Council
(funded by the State Dept., NATO, and a set of unsavory characters like Ukrainian oligrach
Pinchuk) decided to show his "understanding" of the task. The shy FBI did not even attempt to
look at the Clinton's server because the bosses "knew better."
Alperovitch must be investigated for anti-American activities; the scoundrel has been sowing
discord into the US society with his lies while endangering the US citizenry.
Is not "included supporting the presidential campaign of then-candidate Donald J. Trump ("Trump Campaign") and disparaging
Hillary Clinton . " (or vise versa) by posting on social media an example of free speech ?
But usage of fake identities clearly is not: "The Russians tracked the metrics of their effort in reports and budgeted for their efforts. Some,
as described below, traveled to the U.S. to gather intelligence for the surreptitious campaign. They
used stolen U.S. identities, including fake driver's licenses, and contacted news media outlets to
promote their activities."
The question is how those unquestionable very talented Russians managed to learn English language without living in the USA and
operate such a sophisticated operation from oversees? English is a very difficult language for Russians to master and
Russian immigrants who came to the USA being older then 16 and living in the USA for ten or twenty years typically still have
horrible accent and bad or very bad grammar (tenses, "a" and "the" usage, you name it). Actually Russian woman are noticeably better
then men in this area, especially if they are married to a US spouse. Ass to this dismal understanding of the USA politics
including differences between Democratic and Republican parties (you probably need to live in the USA for ten years to start
appreciate those differences ;-) . How they managed to learn local political culture to be effective? That's a strong argument
in favor of false flag operation -- in case they have puppeteers from the USA everything is more or less rationally explainable.
Notable quotes:
"... It gets better: the defendants reportedly worked day and night shifts to pump out messages, controlling pages targeting a range of issues, including immigration, Black Lives Matter, and they amassed hundreds of thousands of followers. They set up and used servers inside the U.S. to mask the Russian origin of the accounts. ..."
"... The Russian organization named in the indictment - the Internet Research Agency - and the defendants began working in 2014 - so one year before the Trump candidacy was even announced - to interfere in U.S. elections, according to the indictment in Washington. They used false personas and social media while also staging political rallies and communicating with "unwitting individuals" associated with the Trump campaign, it said. ..."
"... The Russians tracked the metrics of their effort in reports and budgeted for their efforts. Some, as described below, traveled to the U.S. to gather intelligence for the surreptitious campaign. They used stolen U.S. identities, including fake driver's licenses, and contacted news media outlets to promote their activities. ..."
"... Defendant ORGANIZATION had a strategic goal to sow discord in the U.S. political system, including the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Defendants posted derogatory information about a number of candidates, and by early to mid-2016, Defendants' operations included supporting the presidential campaign of then-candidate Donald J. Trump ("Trump Campaign") and disparaging Hillary Clinton . ..."
"... Defendants, posing as U.S. persons and creating false U.S. personas, operated social media pages and groups designed to attract U.S. audiences. These groups and pages, which addressed divisive U.S. political and social issues, falsely claimed to be controlled by U.S. activists when, in fact, they were controlled by Defendants. Defendants also used the stolen identities of real U.S. persons to post on ORGANIZATION-controlled social media accounts. Over time, these social media accounts became Defendants' means to reach significant numbers of Americans for purposes of interfering with the U.S. political system, including the presidential election of 2016 ..."
"... Sixteen thousand Facebook users said that they planned to attend a Trump protest on Nov. 12, 2016, organized by the Facebook page for BlackMattersUS, a Russian-linked group that sought to capitalize on racial tensions between black and white Americans. The event was shared with 61,000 users. ..."
"... As many as 5,000 to 10,000 protesters actually convened at Manhattan's Union Square. They then marched to Trump Tower, according to media reports at the time . ..."
"... 13 Russians can influence US elections meanwhile US CIA and State Department spend $1 BIllion every year on opposition groups inside Russia without success. ..."
"... Indict AIPAC. That is the real foreign interference in ALL US elections. Such hypocrisy. At the very least, make them register as a foreign operation! Information warfare using social media ? What, you mean like the Israeli students who are paid to shape public opinion thru social media? This is no secret and has been in the news. I fail to find the difference? Psychologists call this projection, that is where you accuse others of the crimes you commit . ..."
"... It looks like Mueller would have these people for identity theft if he had them in the US, which he probably doesn't. ..."
"... Deep state pivot to keep the Russian hate alive. ..."
"... Fucking hilarious - Mueller has indicted an anti-Russian CIA operation that was run out of St. Petersburg. http://thesaker.is/a-brief-history-of-the-kremlin-trolls/ ..."
"... The bigger question is "when is Mueller going to be indicted for covering up the controlled demolition of the WTC buildings on nine eleven??" ..."
Mueller charges "defendants knowingly and intentionally conspired with each other (and with persons
known and unknown to the Grand Jury)
to defraud the United States by impairing, obstructing,
and defeating the lawful functions of the government through fraud and deceit for the purpose of
interfering with the U.S. political and electoral processes,
including the presidential
election of 2016."
The indictment adds that the Russians "
were instructed to post content
that focused on 'politics in the USA' and to 'use any opportunity to criticize Hillary and the rest
(except Sanders and Trump -- we support them)'
."
It gets better: the defendants reportedly worked day and night shifts to pump out messages,
controlling pages targeting a range of issues, including immigration, Black Lives Matter, and they
amassed hundreds of thousands of followers. They set up and used servers inside the U.S. to mask the
Russian origin of the accounts.
Ultimately, and this is the punchline,
the goal was to disparage Hillary Clinton and to
assist the election of Donald Trump.
In other words,
anyone who was disparaging Clinton, may have "unwittingly" been a
collaborator of the 13 Russian "specialists" who cost Hillary the election.
The Russian organization named in the indictment - the Internet Research Agency -
and the
defendants began working in 2014
-
so one year before the Trump candidacy was even
announced
- to interfere in U.S. elections, according to the indictment in Washington.
They used false personas and social media while also staging political rallies and
communicating with "unwitting individuals" associated with the Trump campaign, it said.
The Russians "had a strategic goal to sow discord in the U.S. political system," according to the
indictment in Washington.
The Russians also reportedly bought advertisements on U.S. social media, created numerous Twitter
accounts designed to appear as if they were U.S. groups or people, according to the indictment. One
fake account, @TEN_GOP account, attracted more than 100,000 online followers.
The Russians tracked the metrics of their effort in reports and budgeted for their efforts. Some,
as described below, traveled to the U.S. to gather intelligence for the surreptitious campaign. They
used stolen U.S. identities, including fake driver's licenses, and contacted news media outlets to
promote their activities.
The full list of named defendants in addition to the Internet Research Agency, as well as Concord
Management and Consulting and Concord Catering, include:
MIKHAIL IVANOVICH BYSTROV,
MIKHAIL LEONIDOVICH BURCHIK,
ALEKSANDRA YURYEVNA KRYLOVA,
ANNA VLADISLAVOVNA BOGACHEVA,
SERGEY PAVLOVICH POLOZOV,
MARIA ANATOLYEVNA BOVDA,
ROBERT SERGEYEVICH BOVDA,
DZHEYKHUN NASIMI OGLY ASLANOV,
VADIM VLADIMIROVICH PODKOPAEV,
GLEB IGOREVICH VASILCHENKO,
IRINA VIKTOROVNA KAVERZINA,
VLADIMIR VENKOV
YEVGENIY VIKTOROVICH PRIGOZHIN
Mueller's office said that none of the defendants was in custody.
So how is Trump involved? Well, he isn't, as it now seems that collusion narrative is dead, and
instead Russian involvement was unilateral. Instead, according to the indictment, the Russian
operations were unsolicited and pro bono, and included "
supporting Trump... and disparaging
Hillary Clinton,' staging political rallies, buying political advertising while posing as grassroots
U.S. groups.
Oh, and communicating "
with unwitting individuals associated with the
Trump Campaign and with other political activists to seek to coordinate political activities.
"
Defendant ORGANIZATION had a strategic goal to sow discord in the U.S. political system,
including the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
Defendants posted derogatory information
about a number of candidates, and by early to mid-2016, Defendants' operations included supporting
the presidential campaign of then-candidate Donald J. Trump
("Trump Campaign")
and
disparaging Hillary Clinton
.
Defendants made various expenditures to carry out those
activities, including buying political advertisements on social media in the names of U.S. persons
and entities. Defendants also staged political rallies inside the United States, and while posing
as U.S. grassroots entities and U.S. persons, and without revealing their Russian identities and
ORGANIZATION affiliation, solicited and compensated real U.S. persons to promote or disparage
candidates.
Some Defendants, posing as U.S. persons and without revealing their Russian
association, communicated with unwitting individuals associated with the Trump Campaign and with
other political activists to seek to coordinate political activities.
Furthermore, the dastardly Russians created fake accounts to pretend they are Americans:
Defendants, posing as U.S. persons and creating false U.S. personas, operated social media pages
and groups designed to attract U.S. audiences. These groups and pages, which addressed divisive
U.S. political and social issues, falsely claimed to be controlled by U.S. activists when, in fact,
they were controlled by Defendants. Defendants also used the stolen identities of real U.S. persons
to post on ORGANIZATION-controlled social media accounts.
Over time, these social media
accounts became Defendants' means to reach significant numbers of Americans for purposes of
interfering with the U.S. political system, including the presidential election of 2016
Mueller also alleges a combination of traditional and modern espionage...
Certain Defendants traveled to the United States under false pretenses for the purpose
of collecting intelligence to inform Defendants' operations.
Defendants also procured and
used computer infrastructure, based partly in the United States, to hide the Russian origin of
their activities and to avoid detection by U.S. regulators and law enforcement.
Mueller also charges that two of the defendants received US visas and from approximately June 4,
2014 through June 26, 2014, KRYLOVA and BOGACHEVA "
traveled in and around the United States,
including stops in Nevada, California, New Mexico, Colorado, Illinois, Michigan, Louisiana, Texas, and
New York to gather intelligence, After the trip, KRYLOVA and BURCHIK exchanged an intelligence report
regarding the trip."
* * *
The indictment points to a broader conspiracy beyond the pages of the indictment,
saying
the grand jury has heard about other people with whom the Russians allegedly conspired in their
efforts.
I wonder if any of these Russians were behind the anti-Trump rallies
of November 2016?
Thousands attended protest organized by Russians on
Facebook.
Thousands of Americans attended a march last November organized by
a Russian group that used social media to interfere in the 2016
election.
The demonstration in New York City, which took place a few
days after the election, appears to be the largest and most
successful known effort to date pulled off by Russian-linked groups
intent on using social media platforms to influence American
politics.
Sixteen thousand Facebook users said that they planned to attend a
Trump protest on Nov. 12, 2016, organized by the Facebook page for
BlackMattersUS, a Russian-linked group that sought to capitalize on
racial tensions between black and white Americans. The event was
shared with 61,000 users.
As many as 5,000 to 10,000 protesters actually convened at
Manhattan's Union Square. They then marched to Trump Tower, according
to media reports at the time
.
The BlackMattersUS-organized rally took advantage of outrage among
groups on the left following President Trump's victory on Nov. 8 to
galvanize support for its event. The group's protest was the fourth
consecutive anti-Trump rally in New York following election night,
and one of many across the country.
"Join us in the streets! Stop Trump and his bigoted
agenda!" reads the Facebook event page for the rally. "Divided is the
reason we just fell. We must unite despite our differences to stop
HATE from ruling the land."
13 Russians can influence US elections meanwhile US CIA and State
Department spend $1 BIllion every year on opposition groups inside
Russia without success.
Indict AIPAC.
That is the real foreign
interference in ALL US elections. Such hypocrisy. At the
very least, make them register as a foreign operation! Information
warfare using social media
?
What,
you mean like the Israeli students who are paid
to shape public opinion
thru social media? This is
no secret and has been in the news. I fail to find the
difference? Psychologists call this projection, that is where
you
accuse others of the crimes you commit
.
Boy Hillary sure didnt get her money's worth. She
shoulda hired these people.
Is it ok for MSM for
to make all of their disparaging commentary, but
not ok for people to do the same? Mueller
mustve forgot about the craigslist ads hiring
protesters to attack Trump rallies. What a fucking
clown show.
I guess that's it Mueller gets his indictments
to save face and Trump is pleased its over.
This ties directly into the October 31, 2017
testimony from Facebook, Twitter and Google
regarding Russian media presence on social
media. Mueller is grasping here, and given that
it talks about visas granted for short visits,
I'm led to believe that most of these people are
actually not on US soil to be arrested. This
means political grandstanding via an indictment
that is never going to see a courtroom where the
evidence can be examined and witnesses can be
cross examined. It looks like Mueller would
have these people for identity theft if he had
them in the US, which he probably doesn't.
I'm going to get called a Russian bot over
this elsewhere. Well, maybe facetiously here.
#WeAreAllRussianBotsNow
Wow, I am going to have to keep the
radio off for a couple of days.
They are going to be wall to wall on
this. Maybe even bump the stories
where fakely sympathetic reporter
cunts (FSRC) ask mother's if they
miss their dead kids.
This is a
fucking clownshow anymore. Jesus,
THIS is what the investigation
brought home? Holy fuckshit, this
is a joke. Some guy had 100k
followers? Really? Like anyone GAF
about that? We have AIPAC making
candidates kneel before them and yet
some guys on Tweeter fucked around.
I think that is even bullshit. If
Russians really did that, they
wouldn't "work in shifts" they would
program some fucking bots to do
this.
I can just imagine the fake
outrage that that worthless kike
from NY Chuckie "don't get between
me and a camera" Schumer has to say
about this.
This is a Matrix alright, and a
cheap ass one at that.
Mueller should be taken out and
horsewhipped for bringing this shit
home.
Hey Mueller, I read a comment on
Yahoo news that was in broken
English. Go get um!
I was gonna vote for
Hillary then I read tweets where
she bullied the woman her husband
raped to keep quiet. And how her
foundation got hundreds of
$millions from countries with
business before her at the state
dept. ALEKSANDRA YURYEVNA
KRYLOVA mislead me.
WANHUA CHEMICAL, A
$10
billion chemical company
controlled by the Chinese
government, now has an avenue
to influence American
elections.
On Monday, Wanhua joined
the American Chemistry
Council, a lobby organization
for chemical manufacturers
that is unusually aggressive
in intervening in U.S.
politics.
The ACC is a prominent
recipient of so-called dark
money -- that is, unlimited
amounts of cash from
corporations or
individuals the origins of
which are only disclosed to
the IRS, not the public.
During the
2012
,
2014
,
and
2016
election
cycles, the ACC took this dark
money and spent
over
$40 million
of it on
contributions to super PACs,
lobbying, and direct
expenditures. (Additional
money flowed directly to
candidates via the ACC's
political action
committee.).....
~" In other words, anyone
who was disparaging Clinton, may
have "unwittingly" been a
collaborator of the 13 Russian
"specialists" who cost Hillary
the election. "~
Wait,
does this mean that "disparaging
Hillary" was just for the
witless? I've been doing that for
years, (without any Russian
influence at all), and have found
it to be rather witty virtually
all the time.
Can we
NOW
get to the point where we appoint
a special prosecutor to
investigate Hillary?
any of us who
spread "fake news"
are now "conspirators" who
gave "support" to foreign
agents
with the goal of
undermining the "democratic
process"
by denying Hillary the
presidency.
tsk, tsk.
ignorance can be no excuse
for such wanton lawlessness.
Yes, Mueller is a clown
show, but he came up w/ this crap
in an attempt to divert media
attention away from his & McCabes
direct involvement in trying to
cover up Uranium 1 for
Hillary...The Truth!
The FBI going
DEEP
(#sarc)
into its playbook for this one.
Simultaneously distracting from their
incompetencies with regards to domestic
threats (school shooters/government
collusion to subvert presidential
election), and exonerating Hillary AGAIN.
"Using lies and deception to cover our
lies and deceptions, so that we can
enslave the populace to our will"
(visualize
Meuller/Comey/Strzok/Page/Ohr/Rosenstein/Obama/Rice/
with left hands on Satanic Bible and right
arms extended giving oath in Temple of
Mammon before upside down American flag).
The DoJ and Miller
activities are anti-American. What else is new
in occupied America?
PS
Note Trump does nothing about this
unprecedented assault on Freedom of Speech and
Assembly in the USA. Therefore, Trump is a
willing player in these criminal activities.
Mueller is going to go until he gets some meat.
Maybe this lean and stringy meat is enough to
satisfy. Of course, nobody will look at AIPAC and
all of the foreign influence money funneling into
senators coffers.
He said they stole identities, posting anti-Hillary remarks on
Russian-controlled sites, using the stolen identities. They must do that
through hacking, which is illegal.
They also organized rallies, he
said. There were ads on job sites, advertising for paid
[leftist] protestors, long before Trump emerged as a candidate. People
posted them on American sites. Some attribute it to Soros. I am a little
skeptical that Soros controls the world, anymore than Russians, but that
is what people often believe, when it is leftist ads.
Advertisements are all over the Internet. Is that illegal? He called
it fraud, referring to the misrepresentation of identity, I guess. They
should not be manipulating unknowing people.
But, I wonder if he has the same vigilance when illegal aliens use
fake SS cards to acquire jobs, while their girlfriends use real SS cards
of US-born kids to get $450 on average in EBT food assistance, in
addition to other welfare, making it easy for illegal aliens to undercut
American citizens in jobs. Using a fake SS number -- i.e. posing as an
American to get a job -- is fraud.
As long as the illegal aliens have sex after illegal border
crossings, reproduce and say they misrepresent their identities for the
good of their kids, this is legal and deserving of pay-per-birth welfare
/ child-tax-credit freebies and citizenship, whereas these Russians are
committing fraud.
They should not be doing that in either case, but the double standard
is interesting.
And if people cannot post freely on the internet without revealing
their real names, a lot of internet activity (and a lot of related
commerce) will cease. Many people post anonymously, often due to jobs or
other factors that have nothing to do with elections.
In fact, FBI agents post under identities (personas) that are not
their own. There are many articles, describing how police agencies
use fake identities on the internet to track down criminals, including
those who abuse children. They do the same thing to monitor terrorists;
they use fake identities.
Where are these indictments ? Obama, Hillary
Clinton, Victoria Nuland, Geoffrey Pyatt and John McCain.
The US has been meddling and interfering in other countries
elections and internal affairs for decades. Not only does
the US meddle and interfere in other countries elections it
overthrows democratically elected governments it simply
doesn't like, and then installs its own puppet leaders. Our
deep-state MIC owned neocons casually refer to this as
"regime change".
I can only imagine the hell that would break loose if
Russia fomented, paid for, and assisted in a violent
overthrow of the legitimately and democratically elected
government in Mexico. Imagine Russian spymasters working
from the Russian Embassy in Mexico City training radicals
how to use social media to bring out angry people and foment
violent pubic unrest. Then Russian Duma members in Mexico
City handing out tacos, and tamales emboldening and urging
these angry people to riot, and overthrow the government and
toss the bums out. Then Putin's executive group hand picking
all the new (anti-USA) drug cartel junta puppet leaders and
an old senile Russian senator in Mexico City stating at a
podium on RT, there are no drug cartels here, that's all
propaganda!
On the other side of the world Obama's neocon warmongers
spent billions doing exactly this. Instead of drug cartels
it was Banderist Neo-Nazis. Obama and our neocons, including
John McCain intentionally caused all of this fucking mess,
civil war and horrific death in Ukraine on Russia's border
and then placed the blame on Putin and Russia.
Thanks to John McCain and our evil fucking neocons - the
regime change policy implemented by Obama, Clinton and
Nuland's minions, like Geoffrey Pyatt, the Ukraine today is
totally fucked. It is now a corrupt banana republic
embroiled in a bloody civil war. For the US and NATO the
golden prize of this violent undemocratic regime change was
supposed to be the Crimea. This scheme did not play out as
intended. No matter what sanctions the warmongering neocons
place on Russia they will NEVER give back the Crimea!
Our neocon fuck heads spent billions of our hard earned
taxpayer dollars to create pain, suffering, death and a
civil war in Ukraine on the border with
Russia.
This is a case of don't do what we do, only do what we
tell you to do. It's perfectly okay when we meddle. We don't
like it when we think it may have been done to us. It's
hypocrisy and duplicity at its finest!
Tech Camp NGO
- operating out of US
Embassy in Kiev
(using social media to help bring out radicals-and cause
civil war-pre Maidan 2013)
Agreed, it's against the law to steal identities and operate
bank accounts and all that. But really, compared to the fraud
committed by just one bank - Wells Fargo- this is smal small
potatoes. And did I miss it or did the indictment not even
mention the value of the ads bought on Facebook - $100,000.
(nope, not missing any zeros). And it all started in 2014
while Donald was playing golf and sticking his dick in some
whore. And a few ruskies got into the good ol USofA with false
statements on their visas. While the courts fought Trump on the
fact that immigration from a few countries need to be stopped
because there was not way of checking data. I get it -
somebody driving too fast gets a speeding ticket, and Muellers
investigation gets to issue an indictment. I'm sure we all
feel better now.
So, did Mueller address the crime committed by the then FBI
head who refused to allow a FBI informant to address Congress
on the Uranium One scam before it was authorized? Uh, that
would be Mueller, his very self, so the answer is no.
What is the definition of a "fake social media account"? What
is the crime for operatine a fake social medial account? Is
this the standard by which we will all be judged?
Or is it
that Mueller has NOTHING and is too big of a corrupt idiot to
admit it.
"In other words,
anyone who was disparaging Clinton,
may have "unwittingly" been a collaborator of the 13 Russian
"specialists" who cost Hillary the election. "
No,
not "in other words." That's not what he said at all. Idiot
propagandist.
And Hillary has done nothing criminal in the last 40 years. All
of the evidence has been a fabrication. The Russians perfected
time travel technology in the 70's, and have been conspiring
against her and planting evidence since then.
What planet am
I living on again? We have now stepped into the twilight zone.
Facepalm.....
"Ultimately, and this is the punchline,
the goal was
to disparage Hillary Clinton and to assist the election of
Donald Trump."
The goal of the MSM was the opposite. To unfairly
disparage Trump and assist the election of Hillary Clinton.
So why no indictments of members of the American MSM?
What a bunch of horseshit. Mueller did nothing to locate
just as much foreign or Russian support for Hillary. Grand
Jury is just another one-sided court that passes judgment
without any input from the other side. Now where have we
seen that before? FISA.
What is wrong with anyone doing
what they want to support a candidate? If that is somehow
illegal interference, why is Soros running loose in the
world?
I have a friend that was a US Federal Prosecutor. He once
told me that the most un-American concepts that exist are
grand juries and conspiracy laws. I'm sure he would have
included FISA if it existed then.
The indictment adds that the Russians "
were
instructed to post content that focused on 'politics in
the USA' and to 'use any opportunity to criticize Hillary
and the rest (except Sanders and Trump -- we support them)'
."
Criticizing Hillary Clinton constitutes election
interference? This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard.
Over half the United States said she was corrupt and
morally bankrupt. Does that mean all those Americans
interfered in the election?
"Some Defendants, posing as U.S. persons and
without revealing their Russian association, communicated
with unwitting individuals associated with the Trump
Campaign and with other political activists to seek to
coordinate political activities."
I thought
this was our "shtick" for subverting and overthrowing
government(s) since 194_?... Fast forward to 2012 and
subverting sovereign foreign government(s) using other means
then election(s) (
https://jasirx.wordpress.com/
)
Just ask this person (
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CL_GShyGv3o
)
who handed out cookies before starting an "overthrow of a
sovereign government" right before a Winter Olympics?... And
while we're on the subject of subversion of sovereign
Nation(s) "OCONUS" ask this fat shit how it's going in the
Middle East with it's "partners" (
https://southfront.org/meeting-between-us-state-secretary-and-lebanese-
)
Nor should we forget 22 within the Russian diplomatic
community in the last 6 years "eliminated" for early
retirement courtesy of the U.S. government...
And if all this is true why isn't Muelller indicting
government officials within the FBI Department of
immigration and Homeland Security that would allow "some
defendants" to impersonate Americans after 9/11 and the
security infrastructure we built around U.S. to prevent
"future attacks" that were obviously (here illegally)???...
What a complete load of horseshit. Waste of time and money
while the crimes of the clintons and collaborators remain
unpunished, including Mueller himself.
"Mueller describes a sweeping, years-long,
multimillion-dollar conspiracy by hundreds of Russians aimed
at criticizing Hillary Clinton and supporting Senator Bernie
Sanders and Trump"
Only in the idiot world of Liberalism
and Conservatism is this not a laughable statement.
Dubbed "Marble," the part 3 of CIA files contains 676 source code files of a secret anti-forensic Marble Framework, which is basically
an obfuscator or a packer used to hide the true source of CIA malware.
Notable quotes:
"... And the USA has indeed thoroughly developed means to falsely laying blame for cyber attacks it actually performs itself (next to it's proven credentials of falsely laying blame with chemical and terrorist attacks). ..."
"... And the USA has indeed thoroughly developed means to falsely laying blame for cyber attacks it actually performs itself (next to it's proven credentials of falsely laying blame with chemical and terrorist attacks). ..."
There indeed doesn't seem to be a motive to why the Russian authorities would launch a cyber attack that economically disrupts
both itself, allies and other countries. Either the virus writers didn't care for a solution, hoped that a solution that never
works might panic the victims even more so they make more cash transfers or enjoyed reaping money while seeing their victims suffer
of something where there is no solution for. The last 2 reasons are short term because news that there is no solution for the
ransomware will stop victims from making cash transfers. More convincing would be a cyber attack initiated by USA authorities
that would hit already crumbling Ukraine businesses even further and create even more mistrust between Ukraine and Russia.
And the USA has indeed thoroughly developed means to falsely laying blame for cyber attacks it actually performs itself
(next to it's proven credentials of falsely laying blame with chemical and terrorist attacks). On 31 March 2017:
WikiLeaks published hundreds of more files from the Vault 7 series today which, it claims, show how CIA can mask its hacking
attacks to make it look like it came from other countries, including Russia, China, North Korea and Iran.
Dubbed "Marble," the part 3 of CIA files contains 676 source code files of a secret anti-forensic Marble Framework, which
is basically an obfuscator or a packer used to hide the true source of CIA malware.
The CIA's Marble Framework tool includes a variety of different algorithm with foreign language text intentionally inserted
into the malware source code to fool security analysts and falsely attribute attacks to the wrong nation.
...
The White House has condemned the revelations made by Wikileaks, saying that those responsible for leaking classified information
from the agency should be held accountable by the law.
There indeed doesn't seem to be a motive to why the Russian authorities would launch a cyber attack that economically disrupts
both itself, allies and other countries. Either the virus writers didn't care for a solution, hoped that a solution that never
works might panic the victims even more so they make more cash transfers or enjoyed reaping money while seeing their victims
suffer of something where there is no solution for. The last 2 reasons are short term because news that there is no solution
for the ransomware will stop victims from making cash transfers. More convincing would be a cyber attack initiated by USA authorities
that would hit already crumbling Ukraine businesses even further and create even more mistrust between Ukraine and Russia.
And the USA has indeed thoroughly developed means to falsely laying blame for cyber attacks it actually performs itself
(next to it's proven credentials of falsely laying blame with chemical and terrorist attacks). On 31 March 2017:
WikiLeaks published hundreds of more files from the Vault 7 series today which, it claims, show how CIA can mask its
hacking attacks to make it look like it came from other countries, including Russia, China, North Korea and Iran.
Dubbed "Marble," the part 3 of CIA files contains 676 source code files of a secret anti-forensic Marble Framework, which
is basically an obfuscator or a packer used to hide the true source of CIA malware.
The CIA's Marble Framework tool includes a variety of different algorithm with foreign language text intentionally inserted
into the malware source code to fool security analysts and falsely attribute attacks to the wrong nation.
...
The White House has condemned the revelations made by Wikileaks, saying that those responsible for leaking classified
information from the agency should be held accountable by the law.
Source code shows that Marble has test examples not just in English but also in Chinese, Russian, Korean, Arabic and Farsi. This
would permit a forensic attribution double game, for example by pretending that the spoken language of the malware creator was
not American English, but Chinese, but then showing attempts to conceal the use of Chinese, drawing forensic investigators even
more strongly to the wrong conclusion, --- but there are other possibilities, such as hiding fake error messages.
The source code shows that Marble has test examples not just in English but also in Chinese, Russian, Korean, Arabic and
Farsi. This would permit a forensic attribution double game, for example by pretending that the spoken language of the malware
creator was not American English, but Chinese, but then showing attempts to conceal the use of Chinese, drawing forensic investigators
even more strongly to the wrong conclusion, --- but there are other possibilities, such as hiding fake error messages.
When the White House (doesn't matter who's ostensibly in charge) claims leaker's like Julian Assange should be accountable
by the law, it of course means the malleable arbitrary law which none of the serpents in the White House, Langley, ... are
accountable to.
"... In today's podcast, we hear how Vault 8 has succeeded Vault 7 among WikiLeaks dumps (but it's still all CIA all the time from Mr. Assange and company). GCHQ expresses concerns about Kaspersky anti-virus products. ..."
"... The US Intelligence Community reiterates its conclusion that dog bites man, or rather, that Russia wants to work mischief with the United States ..."
In today's podcast, we hear how Vault 8 has succeeded Vault 7 among WikiLeaks dumps (but it's still all CIA all the time from
Mr. Assange and company). GCHQ expresses concerns about Kaspersky anti-virus products.
Media reports suggest that NSA is in the middle of a big mole hunt. Equifax begins to tally up the costs of its breach.
The US Intelligence Community reiterates its conclusion that dog bites man, or rather, that Russia wants to work mischief
with the United States...
"... Hardware and software vendors that are complicit -- most of which are American, British or Israeli -- give the CIA the opportunity to achieve informational full-spectrum dominance, relegating privacy to extinction. Such a convergence of power, money and technology entails major conflicts of interest, as can be seen in the case of Amazon AWS (Amazon's Cloud Service), cloud provider for the CIA , whose owner, Jeff Bezos, is also the owner of The Washington Post ..."
"... In general, when the 16 US spy agencies blamed Russia for the hacking of the elections, they were never specific in terms of forensic evidence. Simply put, the media, spies and politicians created false accusations based on the fact that Moscow, together with RT ..."
"... Now what is revealed through Wikileaks' publications in Vault 7 is the ability of a subsection of the CIA, known as Umbrage , to use malware, viruses, trojans and other cyber tools for their own geopolitical purposes. The CIA's Umbrage collects, analyzes and then employs software created variously from foreign security agencies, cyber mafia, private companies, and hackers in general. ..."
"... These revelations are yet more reason why countries targeted by Washington, like China, Russia, Iran and North Korea, should get rid of European and American products and invest in reducing technological dependence on American products in particular. ..."
"... This article first appeared on Strategic-Culture.org and was authored by Federico Pieraccini. ..."
New revelations from Wikileaks' 'Vault 7' leak shed a disturbing light on the safeguarding of privacy. Something already known
and largely suspected has now become documented by Wikileaks. It seems evident that the CIA is now a state within a state, an entity
out of control that has even arrived at the point of creating its own hacking network in order to avoid the scrutiny of the NSA and
other agencies.
Reading the revelations contained in the documents
released by WikiLeaks and adding them to those already presented in recent years by Snowden, it now seems evident that the
technological aspect regarding espionage is a specialty in which the CIA, as far as we know, excels. Hardware and software vendors
that are complicit -- most of which are American, British or Israeli -- give the CIA the opportunity to achieve informational full-spectrum
dominance, relegating privacy to extinction. Such a convergence of power, money and technology entails major conflicts of interest,
as can be seen in the case of Amazon AWS (Amazon's Cloud Service),
cloud provider for the
CIA , whose owner, Jeff Bezos, is also the owner of The Washington Post . It is a clear overlap of private interests
that conflicts with the theoretical need to declare uncomfortable truths without the need to consider orders numbering in the millions
of dollars from clients like the CIA.
While it is just one example, there are thousands more out there. The perverse interplay between media, spy agencies and politicians
has compromised the very meaning of the much vaunted democracy of the land of the Stars and Stripes. The constant scandals that are
beamed onto our screens now serve the sole purpose of advancing the deep interest of the Washington establishment. In geopolitical
terms, it is now more than obvious that the deep state has committed all available means toward sabotaging any dialogue and détente
between the United States and Russia. In terms of news, the Wikileaks revelations shed light on the methods used by US intelligence
agencies like the CIA to place blame on the Kremlin, or networks associated with it, for the hacking that occurred during the American
elections.
Perhaps this is too generous a depiction of matters, given that the general public has yet to see
any evidence of the hacking of the DNC servers. In addition to this, we know that the origin of Podesta's email revelations stem
from the
loss of a smartphone and the low
data-security measures
employed by the chairman of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign. In general, when the 16 US spy agencies blamed Russia for
the hacking of the elections, they were never specific in terms of forensic evidence. Simply put, the media, spies and politicians
created false accusations based on the fact that Moscow, together with
RT and other media (not directly
linked to the Kremlin), finally enjoy a major presence in the mainstream media. The biggest problem for the Washington establishment
lies in the revelation of news that is counterproductive to the interests of the deep state. RT, Sputnik, this site and many others
have diligently covered and reported to the general public every development concerning the Podesta revelations or the hacking of
the DNC.
Now what is revealed through Wikileaks' publications in Vault 7 is the ability of a subsection of the CIA, known as
Umbrage , to use malware, viruses, trojans and
other cyber tools for their own geopolitical purposes. The CIA's Umbrage collects, analyzes and then employs software created variously
from foreign security agencies, cyber mafia, private companies, and hackers in general. These revelations become particularly
relevant when we consider the consequences of these actions. The main example can be seen in the hacking of the DNC. For now, what
we know is that the hacking – if it ever occurred – is of Russian origin. This does not mean at all that the Kremlin directed it.
It could actually be very much the opposite, its responsibility falling into the category of a cyber false-flag. One thing is for
sure: all 16 US intelligence agencies are of the view that "the Russians did it". That said, the methods used to hack vulnerabilities
cannot be revealed, so as to limit the spread of easily reusable exploits on systems, such as the one that hosted the DNC server.
It is a great excuse for avoiding the revelation of any evidence at all.
So, with little information available, independent citizens are left with very little information on which to reliably form an
opinion on what happened. There is no evidence, and no evidence will be provided to the media. For politicians and so-called mainstream
journalists, this is an acceptable state of affairs. What we are left with instead is blind faith in the 16 spy agencies. The problem
for them is that what WikiLeaks revealed with Vault 7 exposes a scenario that looks more likely than not: a cyber false-flag carried
out by the Central Intelligence Agency using engineered malware and viruses made in Russia and hypothetically linking them back to
hacking networks in Russia. In all likelihood, it looks like the Democrats' server was hacked by the CIA with the clear objective
of leaving Russian fingerprints and obvious traces to be picked up by other US agencies.
In this way, it becomes easier to explain the unique views of all 16 spy agencies. Thus, it is far more likely that the CIA intentionally
left fake Russian fingerprints all over the DNC server, thereby misleading other intelligence agencies in promoting the narrative
that Russia hacked the DNC server. Of course the objective was to create a false narrative that could immediately be picked up by
the media, creating even more hysteria surrounding any rapprochement with Russia.
Diversification of computer systems.
The revelations contained in the Wikileaks vault 7 (
less than 1 % of the total data in Wikileaks'
possession has been released to date) have caused a stir, especially by exposing the astonishing complicity between hardware and
software manufacturers, often intentionally creating backdoors in their products to allow access by the CIA and NSA. In today's digital
environment, all essential services rely on computer technology and connectivity. These revelations are yet more reason why countries
targeted by Washington, like China, Russia, Iran and North Korea, should get rid of European and American products and invest in
reducing technological dependence on American products in particular.
The People's Republic has
already started down this track, with the replacement of many network devices with local vendors like Huawei in order to avoid
the type of interference revealed by Snowden.
Russia has been doing the same in terms of software, even laying the groundwork to launch of
its own operating system, abandoning American
and European systems. In North Korea, this idea was already put
into practice years ago and is an excellent tool for deterrence for external interference. In more than one computer security
conference, US experts have praised the capabilities of the DPRK to
isolate its Internet network from the rest of the world, allowing them to have strong safety mechanisms. Often, the only access
route to the DPRK systems are through the People's Republic of China, not the easiest way for the CIA or NSA to infiltrate a protected
computer network.
An important aspect of the world in which we live today involves information security, something all nations have to deal with.
At the moment, we still live in a world in which the realization of the danger and effect of hacking attacks are not apparent to
many. On the other hand, militarily speaking, the diversification and rationalization of critical equipment in terms of networks
and operability (smartphones, laptops, etc) has already produced
strong growth in non-American and European manufacturers, with the aim of making their systems more secure.
This strengthening of technology also produces deleterious consequences, such as the need for intelligence agencies to be able
to
prevent the spread of data encryption so as to always enjoy access to any desired information. The birth of the Tor protocol,
the deployment of Bitcoin, and apps that are more and more encrypted (although the WikiLeaks documents have shown that the collection
of information takes place on the device b
efore the information is encrypted ) are all responses to an exponential increase in the invasion of privacy by federal or American
government entities.
We live in a world that has an enormous dependence on the Internet and computer technology. The CIA over the years has focused
on the ability to make sure vulnerable systems are exploited as well as seeking out major security flaws in consumer products without
disclosing this to vendors, thereby taking advantage of these security gaps and leaving all consumers with a potential lack of security.
Slowly, thanks to the work and courage of people like Snowden and Assange, the world is beginning to understand how important it
is to keep personal data under control and prevent access to it by third parties, especially if they are state actors. In the case
of national security, the issue is expanded exponentially by the need to protect key and vital infrastructure, considering how many
critical services operate via the Internet and rely on computing devices.
The wars of the future will have a strong technological basis, and it is no coincidence that many armed forces, primarily the
Russian and Chinese, have opted in recent years to training troops, and conducting operations, not completely relying on connectivity.
No one can deny that in the event of a large-scale conflict, connectivity is far from guaranteed. One of the major goals of competing
nations is to penetrate the military security systems of rival nations and be able to
disarm the internal networks that operates major systems
of defense and attack.
The Wikileaks revelations are yet another confirmation of how important it is to break the technological unipolar moment, if it
may be dubbed this way, especially for nations targeted by the United States. Currently Washington dictates the technological capacities
of the private and government sectors of Europe and America, steering their development, timing and methods to suit its own interests.
It represents a clear disadvantage that the PRC and its allies will inevitably have to redress in the near future in order to achieve
full security for its vital infrastructure.
This article first appeared on Strategic-Culture.org and was authored
by Federico Pieraccini.
"... The Central Intelligence Agency now can mimic foreign intelligence agencies' hack attacks by leaving electronic "fingerprints" creating the false impression of a foreign intrusion into computer networks, according to claims accompanying a new WikiLeaks document dump. ..."
"... In other words, there may not be hard evidence that CIA operatives, say, used cyberspace to create a modern-day Reichstag fire to undermine the Trump administration, but it may be the case that the CIA has the technological capabilities to do such a thing, if it were so inclined. ..."
"... The Vault 7 collection is said to have come from a former U.S. government hacker or contractor associated with "an isolated, high-security network" within the CIA's Center for Cyber Intelligence in Langley, Va. The files made public don't include the actual cyber weapons themselves which WikiLeaks says it will not release for the time being. ..."
"... The idea behind Year Zero is that all culture and traditions within a society must be completely destroyed or discarded and a new revolutionary culture must replace it, starting from scratch. All history of a nation or people before Year Zero is deemed largely irrelevant, as it will ideally be purged and replaced from the ground up. In Cambodia, so-called New People -- teachers, artists, and intellectuals -- were especially singled out and executed during the purges accompanying Year Zero. ..."
"... According to WikiLeaks, "[t]he CIA's Remote Devices Branch's UMBRAGE group collects and maintains a substantial library of attack techniques 'stolen' from malware produced in other states including the Russian Federation." ..."
"... With UMBRAGE and related projects the CIA cannot only increase its total number of attack types but also misdirect attribution by leaving behind the "fingerprints" of the groups that the attack techniques were stolen from. UMBRAGE components cover keyloggers, password collection, webcam capture, data destruction, persistence, privilege escalation, stealth, anti-virus (PSP) avoidance and survey techniques. ..."
"... If this new information about "Umbrage" is accurate, this means that, as stated above, the CIA could hack people and institutions and then attribute the cyber-attacks to others in what amount to false-flag operations. For example, in order to create the impression that a foreign power favored one political candidate over another, the CIA or unseen rogue elements with access to "Umbrage," could have hacked into Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democratic National Committee and made it appear that the intrusion was carried out by former KGB lieutenant colonel Vladimir Putin's operatives. ..."
"... given what we've learned about the CIA's anti-Trump shenanigans in recent months, it seems unwise to reflexively rule out the possibility that that's how things could have gone down. Espionage, after all, is all about deception and covering tracks. Things aren't what they seem and the motives of those creating an illusion aren't easily discerned. ..."
"... On the other hand, combine "Umbrage" with the seemingly invincible false narrative that President Donald Trump is a tool of Russian interests, and plenty of Americans would be willing to believe Trump really does have substantial ties to the Kremlin, something that has not been proven. Even now there is still no publicly available evidence the Trump campaign somehow colluded with the Russian government last year. Sources in newspaper articles are never identified. All that exists is the alleged ..."
Troubling questions about "Umbrage" and potential false-flag attacks.53
The Central Intelligence Agency now can mimic foreign intelligence agencies' hack attacks
by leaving electronic "fingerprints" creating the false impression of a foreign intrusion into
computer networks, according to claims accompanying a new WikiLeaks document dump.
In other words, there may not be hard evidence that CIA operatives, say, used cyberspace
to create a modern-day Reichstag fire to undermine the Trump administration, but it may be the
case that the CIA has the technological capabilities to do such a thing, if it were so
inclined.
This assertion that the CIA can hack computer networks and leave behind convincing evidence
that somebody else did it, comes with the release by WikiLeaks of a huge collection of
documents – 8,761 items in all – collectively dubbed the "Vault 7" leaks that
purport to describe espionage techniques used by the CIA. The Vault 7 collection is said to
have come from a former U.S. government hacker or contractor associated with "an isolated,
high-security network" within the CIA's Center for Cyber Intelligence in Langley, Va. The files
made public don't include the actual cyber weapons themselves which WikiLeaks says it will not
release for the time being.
This documentary agglomeration covers "the entire hacking capacity of the CIA," Julian
Assange's WikiLeaks
claimed in a press release, and it is only the first in a series of what he calls the "Year
Zero" leaks.
The Year Zero label has a decidedly sinister quality to it and may offer clues into what
WikiLeaks hopes to accomplish with these new leaks, apparently the most significant and
damaging to the U.S. intelligence community since former NSA contractor Edward Snowden handed
over thousands of classified U.S. documents to journalists in 2013.
Year Zero was used by the bloodthirsty Khmer Rouge when it seized power in Cambodia in 1975.
The term is analogous to Year One of the French Revolutionary calendar, which implied a violent
break with the old system and the merciless leveling of existing institutions.
As one online resource states:
The idea behind Year Zero is that all culture and traditions within a society must be
completely destroyed or discarded and a new revolutionary culture must replace it, starting
from scratch. All history of a nation or people before Year Zero is deemed largely
irrelevant, as it will ideally be purged and replaced from the ground up. In Cambodia,
so-called New People -- teachers, artists, and intellectuals -- were especially singled out
and executed during the purges accompanying Year Zero.
According to WikiLeaks, "[t]he CIA's Remote Devices Branch's UMBRAGE group collects and
maintains a substantial library of attack techniques 'stolen' from malware produced in other
states including the Russian Federation."
With UMBRAGE and related projects the CIA cannot only increase its total number of
attack types but also misdirect attribution by leaving behind the "fingerprints" of the
groups that the attack techniques were stolen from. UMBRAGE components cover keyloggers,
password collection, webcam capture, data destruction, persistence, privilege escalation,
stealth, anti-virus (PSP) avoidance and survey techniques.
If this new information about "Umbrage" is accurate, this means that, as stated above,
the CIA could hack people and institutions and then attribute the cyber-attacks to others in
what amount to false-flag operations. For example, in order to create the impression that a
foreign power favored one political candidate over another, the CIA or unseen rogue elements
with access to "Umbrage," could have hacked into Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democratic
National Committee and made it appear that the intrusion was carried out by former KGB
lieutenant colonel Vladimir Putin's operatives.
That Russians hacked Clinton and the DNC and gave Trump an unfair advantage in the election
is precisely what Democrats allege. Is such a scenario in which U.S. operatives hack one
political party to help another at least a little far-fetched?
You bet it is. But given what we've learned about the CIA's anti-Trump shenanigans in
recent months, it seems unwise to reflexively rule out the possibility that that's how things
could have gone down. Espionage, after all, is all about deception and covering tracks. Things
aren't what they seem and the motives of those creating an illusion aren't easily
discerned.
On the positive side, "Umbrage," if it is a real thing, is a powerful innovation in
tradecraft and an indication that American cyberwarfare is soaring to dizzying new heights.
On the other hand, combine "Umbrage" with the seemingly invincible false narrative that
President Donald Trump is a tool of Russian interests, and plenty of Americans would be willing
to believe Trump really does have substantial ties to the Kremlin, something that has not been
proven. Even now there is still no publicly available evidence the Trump campaign somehow
colluded with the Russian government last year. Sources in newspaper articles are never
identified. All that exists is the alleged say-so of faceless CIA spooks and people
like former CIA employee and would-be presidential spoiler Evan McMullin whose motives are
questionable.
It is hard to know what to believe.
And it opens the door to head-spinning possibilities and far-out theories.
As investigative journalist Jerome Corsi writes
of Vault 7 and "Umbrage":
This revelation yields a "through the looking glass" possibility that the Obama
administration obtained [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act] permission to conduct
electronic surveillance on Russians believed to be coordinating with the Trump campaign based
on intelligence the CIA planted to deceive the NSA into thinking there was actual contact
between Russian agents and the Trump campaign.
Possibly, what the CIA was monitoring was not actual contacts between Russian agents and
the Trump campaign, but CIA-created counter-espionage designed to implicate Trump and provide
the legal context for the [Department of Justice] to have enough "evidence" to obtain a FISA
green-light.
This kind of double-level thinking is enough to give anyone a throbbing headache.
Vault 7 also includes eye-opening developments worthy of James Bond 007 and Q Branch.
According to WikiLeaks, the CIA recently "lost control of the majority of its hacking
arsenal including malware, viruses, trojans, weaponized 'zero day' exploits, malware remote
control systems and associated documentation." These cyber weapons can be used "against a wide
range of U.S. and European company products, [including] Apple's iPhone, Google's Android and
Microsoft's Windows and even Samsung TVs, which are turned into covert microphones."
Something called "Weeping Angel" was created by the CIA's Embedded Devices Branch to infest
smart televisions.
"After infestation, Weeping Angel places the target TV in a 'Fake-Off' mode, so that the
owner falsely believes the TV is off when it is on. In 'Fake-Off' mode the TV operates as a
bug, recording conversations in the room and sending them over the Internet to a covert CIA
server."
Another technique allows the CIA "to bypass the encryption of WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram,
Wiebo, Confide and Cloackman by hacking the 'smart' phones that they run on and collecting
audio and message traffic before encryption is applied."
"As of October 2014," WikiLeaks claims, "the CIA was also looking at infecting the vehicle
control systems used by modern cars and trucks. The purpose of such control is not specified,
but it would permit the CIA to engage in nearly undetectable assassinations."
Despite all this intrigue, it needs to be said that the CIA does some valuable work to
advance U.S. interests in the world. It's a shame that it has come to be dominated by
left-wingers over the years.
There is, though, a certain logic to the agency's slide to port. Not all self-styled
do-gooders, after all, land jobs in the nonprofit sector. A leftist member of the intelligence
community is fundamentally the same as a community organizer who is convinced he knows what is
best for his fellow man.
And left-wingers in all occupations are willing to do whatever it takes to accomplish their
objectives.
In the summer 2001 issue of Social Policy magazine, Association of Community
Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) founder Wade Rathke urged his comrades to get in on the
ground floor of the cyber-warfare revolution:
Crazy, computer viruses are started by young kids around the world or hackers bored out of
their skulls that live right down the street. As union organizers we are still doing 8 point
difficulty dumpster dives for alpha lists of employees, when theoretically some good geeks
could tap in, load up, and download the whole thing and throw it over our transom window.
What a waste of talent when such a huge contribution could be made to the labor movement.
In geopolitical terms, it is now more than obvious that the deep state has committed all available means toward sabotaging any
dialogue and détente between the United States and Russia.
Notable quotes:
"... It seems evident that the CIA is now a state within a state, an entity out of control that has even arrived at the point of creating its own hacking network in order to avoid the scrutiny of the NSA and other agencies. ..."
"... the technological aspect regarding espionage is a specialty in which the CIA, as far as we know, excels. Hardware and software vendors that are complicit -- most of which are American, British or Israeli -- give the CIA the opportunity to achieve informational full-spectrum dominance, relegating privacy to extinction. ..."
"... The Washington Post ..."
"... The perverse interplay between media, spy agencies and politicians has compromised the very meaning of the much vaunted democracy of the land of the Stars and Stripes. The constant scandals that are beamed onto our screens now serve the sole purpose of advancing the deep interest of the Washington establishment. In geopolitical terms, it is now more than obvious that the deep state has committed all available means toward sabotaging any dialogue and détente between the United States and Russia. ..."
"... In general, when the 16 US spy agencies blamed Russia for the hacking of the elections, they were never specific in terms of forensic evidence. Simply put, the media, spies and politicians created false accusations based on the fact that Moscow, together with RT ..."
New revelations from Wikileaks' 'Vault 7' leak shed a disturbing light on the safeguarding
of privacy. Something already known and largely suspected has now become documented by
Wikileaks. It seems evident that the CIA is now a state within a state, an entity out of
control that has even arrived at the point of creating its own hacking network in order to
avoid the scrutiny of the NSA and other agencies.
Reading the revelations contained in the documents
released by WikiLeaks and adding them to those already presented in recent years by
Snowden, it now seems evident that the technological aspect regarding espionage is a specialty
in which the CIA, as far as we know, excels. Hardware and software vendors that are complicit
-- most of which are American, British or Israeli -- give the CIA the opportunity to achieve
informational full-spectrum dominance, relegating privacy to extinction.
Such a convergence of
power, money and technology entails major conflicts of interest, as can be seen in the case of
Amazon AWS (Amazon's Cloud Service), cloud
provider for the CIA , whose owner, Jeff Bezos, is also the owner of The Washington
Post .
It is a clear overlap of private interests that conflicts with the theoretical need
to declare uncomfortable truths without the need to consider orders numbering in the millions
of dollars from clients like the CIA.
While it is just one example, there are thousands more out there. The perverse interplay
between media, spy agencies and politicians has compromised the very meaning of the much
vaunted democracy of the land of the Stars and Stripes. The constant scandals that are beamed
onto our screens now serve the sole purpose of advancing the deep interest of the Washington
establishment. In geopolitical terms, it is now more than obvious that the deep state has
committed all available means toward sabotaging any dialogue and détente between the
United States and Russia.
In terms of news, the Wikileaks revelations shed light on
the methods used by US intelligence agencies like the CIA to place blame on the Kremlin, or
networks associated with it, for the hacking that occurred during the American elections.
Perhaps this is too generous a depiction of matters, given that the general public has yet
to see
any evidence of the hacking of the DNC servers. In addition to this, we know that the
origin of Podesta's email revelations stem from the
loss of a smartphone and the low data-security
measures employed by the chairman of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign.
In general,
when the 16 US spy agencies blamed Russia for the hacking of the elections, they were never
specific in terms of forensic evidence. Simply put, the media, spies and politicians created
false accusations based on the fact that Moscow, together with RT and other media
(not directly linked to the Kremlin), finally enjoy a major presence in the mainstream media.
The biggest problem for the Washington establishment lies in the revelation of news that is
counterproductive to the interests of the deep state. RT, Sputnik, this site and many others
have diligently covered and reported to the general public every development concerning the
Podesta revelations or the hacking of the DNC.
Sessions is not recused from a Ukraine investigation.
An investigation of the State Dept should bring the focus around to issues of
substance.
- Obama repeal of Smith-Mundt to allow State Dept propaganda in the domestic US
- Obama coup of Ukraine
- Obama / McCain support of Nazis in Ukraine
- Adam Schiff relationship with Ukrainian arms dealer Igor Pasternak
- DNC collusion with Ukrainian IT "Security" company Crowdstrike tied to the Atlantic
Council to push false narrative of DNC hack and malware to influence US election
- DNC consultant Andrea Chalupa, unregistered foreign agent whose entire family is tied to
Ukrainian Intelligence
Further research revealed that Andrea Chalupa and her two siblings are actively involved
with other sources of digital terrorism, disinformation and spamming, like TrolleyBust com,
stopfake org, and informnapalm.
Ms. Chalupa kept cooperating with the Khodorovky owned
magazine "The Interpreter."
Now, it's a part of RFE/RL run by the government funded
Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) whose director, Dr. Leon Aron also a director of
Russian Studies at the American Enterprise Institute.
Brilliant summary of the situation. You should listen this interview. False Russiagate was from the beginning a plot to derail and then depose Trump. They created false facts.
Brazen port to exonerate Hillary Clinton and then derail Trump
Notable quotes:
"... It is rare to see a man of integrity and a lawyer who speaks in plain English and speaks about facts and conclusions of law. The problem we face today is far too many lawyers with no integrity in positions of government that protect blatant criminals holding public office who are also lawyers. Lawyers always protect other lawyers, except this wonderful man! ..."
It is rare to see a man of integrity and a lawyer who speaks in plain English and speaks
about facts and conclusions of law. The problem we face today is far too many lawyers with no
integrity in positions of government that protect blatant criminals holding public office who
are also lawyers. Lawyers always protect other lawyers, except this wonderful
man!
Love Joe to bad he can't become the new AG and why isn't this interview on the news at
least Fox, Hannity, Tucker, Laura. And we know CNN, MSNBC, and the rest are all in the bag
for Obummer and Killary. 😎
NY Times Buzzfeed Washington Post CNN ABC CBS NBC are all complicit in perpetrating these
lies Just watch Colbert Jimmy Farrel or Jimmy Kimmel These bad actors pretending to be
entertainers need to hang
Mueller carried the sample of Uranium to the Russians. Mueller was paid off, as was Comey.
So glad President Trump can confiscate all their money. Now to catch Daddy Bush and Jr for
having all those people in New York killed on 9/11! Go Trump!!
There needs to be an arrest of ALL the top MSM owners and chairpeople of all the
affiliates including those who stand in front of the camera pushing false information. Their
license needs to be rescinded and taken away. Bankrupt the news affiliates and sell off their
assets.
This is a truly excellent and clear explanation of how our government was corrupted by
Team Hillary. I reckon she needs to pay the Ultimate price: a thorough investigation into her
crimes: A fair trial... and maybe execution, followed by her being reviled down the centuries
as one of the most evil women in History. Every little girl should be told: Do not be like
this woman!
Bill, don't forget to mention that those same entities also include those working for CNN
and MSNBC who were funded by Clinton donations to push the false media on the country. Can
you say lawsuits?
You should listen this interview. As one commenter said "Three heroes will go down in history: Journalist Julian Asange, Adm.
Mike Rogers, Rep. Devin Nunes"
False Russiagate was from the beginning a plot to derail and then depose Trump. They created false facts.
It is rare to see a man of integrity and a lawyer who speaks in plain English and speaks
about facts and conclusions of law. The problem we face today is far too many lawyers with no
integrity in positions of government that protect blatant criminals holding public office who
are also lawyers. Lawyers always protect other lawyers, except this wonderful
man!
Love Joe to bad he can't become the new AG and why isn't this interview on the news at
least Fox, Hannity, Tucker, Laura. And we know CNN, MSNBC, and the rest are all in the bag
for Obummer and Killary. 😎
NY Times Buzzfeed Washington Post CNN ABC CBS NBC are all complicit in perpetrating these
lies Just watch Colbert Jimmy Farrel or Jimmy Kimmel These bad actors pretending to be
entertainers need to hang
Mueller carried the sample of Uranium to the Russians. Mueller was paid off, as was Comey.
So glad President Trump can confiscate all their money. Now to catch Daddy Bush and Jr for
having all those people in New York killed on 9/11! Go Trump!!
There needs to be an arrest of ALL the top MSM owners and chairpeople of all the
affiliates including those who stand in front of the camera pushing false information. Their
license needs to be rescinded and taken away. Bankrupt the news affiliates and sell off their
assets.
This is a truly excellent and clear explanation of how our government was corrupted by
Team Hillary. I reckon she needs to pay the Ultimate price: a thorough investigation into her
crimes: A fair trial... and maybe execution, followed by her being reviled down the centuries
as one of the most evil women in History. Every little girl should be told: Do not be like
this woman!
Bill, don't forget to mention that those same entities also include those working for CNN
and MSNBC who were funded by Clinton donations to push the false media on the country. Can
you say lawsuits?
"... Ukraine has been screaming for the US to start a war with Russia for the past 2 1/2 years. ..."
"... Is Ukrainian Intelligence trying to invent a reason for the US to take a hard-line stance against Russia? Are they using Crowdstrike to carry this out? ..."
"... Meet the real Fancy Bear and Cozy Bear, part of the groups that are targeting Ukrainian positions for the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics. These people were so tech savvy they didn't know the Ukrainian SBU (Ukrainian CIA/internal security) records every phone call and most internet use in Ukraine and Donbass. Donbass still uses Ukrainian phone and internet services. ..."
"... This is a civil war and people supporting either side are on both sides of the contact line. The SBU is awestruck because there are hundreds if not thousands of people helping to target the private volunteer armies supported by Ukrainian-Americans. ..."
"... If she was that close to the investigation Crowdstrike did how credible is she? Her sister Alexandra was named one of 16 people that shaped the election by Yahoo news. The DNC hacking investigation done by Crowdstrike concluded hacking was done by Russian actors based on the work done by Alexandra Chalupa? That is the conclusion of her sister Andrea Chalupa and obviously enough for Crowdstrike to make the Russian government connection. These words mirror Dimitri Alperovitch's identification process in his interview with PBS Judy Woodruff. ..."
"... How close is Dimitri Alperovitch to DNC officials? Close enough professionally he should have stepped down from an investigation that had the chance of throwing a presidential election in a new direction. ..."
"... According to Esquire.com , Alperovitch has vetted speeches for Hillary Clinton about cyber security issues in the past. Because of his work on the Sony hack, President Barrack Obama personally called and said the measures taken were directly because of his work. ..."
"... Still, this is not enough to show a conflict of interest. Alperovitch's relationships with the Chalupas, radical groups, think tanks, Ukrainian propagandists, and Ukrainian state supported hackers do. When it all adds up and you see it together, we have found a Russian that tried hard to influence the outcome of the US presidential election in 2016. ..."
"... According to Robert Parry's article At the forefront of people that would have taken senior positions in a Clinton administration and especially in foreign policy are the Atlantic Council. Their main goal is still a major confrontation with nuclear-armed Russia. ..."
"... The Atlantic Council is the think tank associated and supported by the CEEC (Central and Eastern European Coalition). The CEEC has only one goal which is war with Russia. Their question to candidates looking for their support in the election was "Are you willing to go to war with Russia?" Hillary Clinton has received their unqualified support throughout the campaign. ..."
"... What does any of this have to do with Dimitri Alperovitch and Crowdstrike? Since the Atlantic Council would have taken senior cabinet and policy positions, his own fellowship status at the Atlantic Council and relationship with Irene Chalupa creates a definite conflict of interest for Crowdstrike's investigation. Trump's campaign was gaining ground and Clinton needed a boost. Had she won, would he have been in charge of the CIA, NSA, or Homeland Security? ..."
"... Alperovitch's relationship with Andrea Chalupa's efforts and Ukrainian intelligence groups is where things really heat up. Noted above she works with Euromaidanpress.com and Informnapalm.org which is the outlet for Ukrainian state-sponsored hackers. ..."
"... When you look at Dimitri Alperovitch's twitter relationships, you have to ask why the CEO of a $150 million dollar company like Crowdstrike follows Ukrainian InformNapalm and its hackers individually . There is a mutual relationship. When you add up his work for the OUNb, Ukraine, support for Ukraine's Intelligence, and to the hackers it needs to be investigated to see if Ukraine is conspiring against the US government. ..."
"... Alperovitch and Fancy Bear tweet each other? ..."
"... This single tweet on a network chart shows that out of all the Ukrainian Ministry of Information Minister's following, he only wanted the 3 hacking groups associated with both him and Alperovitch to get the tweet. Alperovitch's story was received and not retweeted or shared. If this was just Alperovitch's victory, it was a victory for Ukraine. It would be shared heavily. If it was a victory for the hacking squad, it would be smart to keep it to themselves and not draw unwanted attention. ..."
"... Pravy Sektor Hackers and Crowdstrike? ..."
"... What sharp movements in international politics have been made lately? Let me spell it out for the 17 US Intelligence Agencies so there is no confusion. These state sponsored, Russian language hackers in Eastern European time zones have shown with the Surkov hack they have the tools and experience to hack states that are looking out for it. They are also laughing at US intel efforts. ..."
"... The hackers also made it clear that they will do anything to serve Ukraine. Starting a war between Russia and the USA is the one way they could serve Ukraine best, and hurt Russia worst. Given those facts, if the DNC hack was according to the criteria given by Alperovitch, both he and these hackers need to be investigated. ..."
"... According to the Esquire interview "Alperovitch was deeply frustrated: He thought the government should tell the world what it knew. There is, of course, an element of the personal in his battle cry. "A lot of people who are born here don't appreciate the freedoms we have, the opportunities we have, because they've never had it any other way," he told me. "I have." ..."
"... While I agree patriotism is a great thing, confusing it with this kind of nationalism is not. Alperovitch seems to think by serving OUNb Ukraine's interests and delivering a conflict with Russia that is against American interests, he's a patriot. He isn't serving US interests. He's definitely a Ukrainian patriot. Maybe he should move to Ukraine. ..."
In the wake of the JAR-16-20296 dated December 29, 2016 about hacking and influencing the
2016 election, the need for real evidence is clear. The joint report adds nothing substantial
to the October 7th report. It relies on proofs provided by the cyber security firm Crowdstrike
that is clearly not on par with intelligence findings or evidence. At the top of the report is
an "as is" statement showing this.
The difference between Dmitri Alperovitch's claims which are reflected in JAR-1620296 and
this article is that enough evidence is provided to warrant an investigation of specific
parties for the DNC hacks. The real story involves specific anti-American actors that need to
be investigated for real crimes.
For instance, the malware used was an out-dated version just waiting to be found. The one
other interesting point is that the Russian malware called Grizzly Steppe
is from Ukraine . How did Crowdstrike miss this when it is their business to know?
Later in this article you'll meet and know a little more about the real "Fancy Bear and Cozy
Bear." The bar for identification set by Crowdstrike has never been able to get beyond words
like probably, maybe, could be, or should be, in their attribution.
The article is lengthy because the facts need to be in one place. The bar Dimitri
Alperovitch set for identifying the hackers involved is that low. Other than asking America to
trust them, how many solid facts has Alperovitch provided to back his claim of Russian
involvement?
The December 29th JAR adds a flowchart that shows how a basic phishing hack is performed. It
doesn't add anything significant beyond that. Noticeably, they use both their designation APT
28 and APT 29 as well as the Crowdstrike labels of Fancy Bear and Cozy Bear separately.
This is important because information from outside intelligence agencies has the value of
rumor or unsubstantiated information at best according to policy. Usable intelligence needs to
be free from partisan politics and verifiable. Intel agencies noted back in the early 90's that
every private actor in the information game was radically political.
The
Hill.com article about Russia hacking the electric grid is a perfect example of why this
intelligence is political and not taken seriously. If any proof of Russian involvement existed,
the US would be at war. Under current laws of war, there would be no difference between an
attack on the power grid or a missile strike.
According
to the Hill "Private security firms provided more detailed forensic analysis, which the FBI
and DHS said Thursday correlated with the IC's findings.
"The Joint Analysis Report recognizes the excellent work undertaken by
security companies and private sector network owners and operators, and provides new indicators
of compromise and malicious infrastructure
identified during the course of investigations and incident response," read a statement. The
report identities two Russian intelligence groups already named by CrowdStrike and other
private security firms."
In an interview with Washingtonsblog , William Binney, the creator of the NSA global
surveillance system said "I expected to see the IP's or other signatures of APT's 28/29 [the
entities which the U.S. claims hacked the Democratic emails] and where they were located and
how/when the data got transferred to them from DNC/HRC [i.e. Hillary Rodham Clinton]/etc. They
seem to have been following APT 28/29 since at least 2015, so, where are they?"
According to the latest Washington Post story, Crowdstrike's CEO tied a group his company
dubbed "Fancy Bear" to targeting Ukrainian artillery positions in Debaltsevo as well as across
the Ukrainian civil war front for the past 2 years.
Alperovitch states in many articles the Ukrainians were using an Android app to target the
self-proclaimed Republics positions and that hacking this app was what gave targeting data to
the armies in Donbass instead.
Alperovitch first gained notice when he was the VP in charge of threat research with McAfee.
Asked to comment on Alperovitch's
discovery of Russian hacks on Larry King, John McAfee had this to say. "Based on all of his
experience, McAfee does not believe that Russians were behind the hacks on the Democratic
National Committee (DNC), John Podesta's emails, and the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign.
As he told RT, "if it looks like the Russians did it, then I can guarantee you it was not the
Russians."
How does Crowdstrike's story part with reality? First is the admission that it is probably,
maybe, could be Russia hacking the DNC. "
Intelligence agencies do not have specific intelligence showing officials in the Kremlin
'directing' the identified individuals to pass the Democratic emails to Wiki Leaks."
The public evidence never goes beyond the word possibility. While never going beyond that or
using facts, Crowdstrike insists that it's Russia behind both Clinton's and the Ukrainian
losses. NBC carried the story because one of the partners in Crowdstrike is also a consultant
for NBC.
According to NBC the story reads like this."
The company, Crowdstrike, was hired by the DNC to investigate the hack and issued a report
publicly attributing it to Russian intelligence. One of Crowdstrike's senior executives is
Shawn Henry, a former senior FBI official who consults for NBC News.
"But the Russians used the app to turn the tables on their foes, Crowdstrike says. Once a
Ukrainian soldier downloaded it on his Android phone, the Russians were able to eavesdrop on
his communications and determine his position through geo-location.
In June, Crowdstrike went public with its findings that two separate Russian intelligence
agencies had hacked the DNC. One, which Crowdstrike and other researchers call Cozy Bear, is
believed to be linked to Russia's CIA, known as the FSB. The other, known as Fancy Bear, is
believed to be tied to the military intelligence agency, called the GRU."
The information is so certain the level of proof never rises above "believed to be."
According to the December 12th Intercept article "Most importantly, the Post adds that
"intelligence agencies do not have specific intelligence showing officials in the Kremlin
'directing' the identified individuals to pass the Democratic emails to WikiLeaks."
Because Ukrainian soldiers are using a smartphone app they activate their geolocation to use
it. Targeting is from location to location. The app would need the current user location to
make it work.
In 2015 I wrote an article that showed many of the available open source tools that
geolocate, and track people. They even show street view. This means that using simple means,
someone with freeware or an online website, and not a military budget can look at what you are
seeing at any given moment.
Where Crowdstrike fails is insisting people believe that the code they see is (a) an
advanced way to geolocate and (b) it was how a state with large resources would do it. Would
you leave a calling card where you would get caught and fined through sanctions or worse? If
you use an anonymous online resource at least Crowdstrike won't believe you are Russian and
possibly up to something.
If you read that article and watch the video you'll see that using "geo-stalker" is a better
choice if you are on a low budget or no budget. Should someone tell the Russians they
overpaid?
According to Alperovitch, the smartphone app
plotted targets in about 15 seconds . This means that there is only a small window to get
information this way.
Using the open source tools I wrote about previously, you could track your targets all-day.
In 2014, most Ukrainian forces were using social media regularly. It would be easy to maintain
a map of their locations and track them individually.
From my research into those tools, someone using Python scripts would find it easy to take
photos, listen to conversations, turn on GPS, or even turn the phone on when they chose to.
Going a step further than Alperovitch, without the help of the Russian government, GRU, or FSB,
anyone could
take control of the drones Ukraine is fond of flying and land them. Or they could download
the footage the drones are taking. It's copy and paste at that point. Would you bother the FSB,
GRU, or Vladimir Putin with the details or just do it?
In the WaPo article Alperovitch states "The Fancy Bear crew evidently hacked the app,
allowing the GRU to use the phone's GPS coordinates to track the Ukrainian troops'
position.
In that way, the Russian military could then target the Ukrainian army with artillery and
other weaponry. Ukrainian brigades operating in eastern Ukraine were on the front lines of the
conflict with Russian-backed separatist forces during the early stages of the conflict in late
2014, CrowdStrike noted. By late 2014, Russian forces in the region numbered about 10,000. The
Android app was useful in helping the Russian troops locate Ukrainian artillery positions."
In late 2014,
I personally did the only invasive passport and weapons checks that I know of during the
Ukrainian civil war.
I spent days looking for the Russian army every major publication said were attacking
Ukraine. The keyword Cyber Security industry leader Alperovitch used is "evidently."
Crowdstrike noted that in late 2014, there were 10,000 Russian forces in the region.
When I did the passport and weapons check, it was under the condition there would be no
telephone calls. We went where I wanted to go. We stopped when I said to stop. I checked the
documents and the weapons with no obstacles. The weapons check was important because Ukraine
was stating that Russia was giving Donbass modern weapons at the time. Each weapon is stamped
with a manufacture date. The results are in the articles above.
Based on my findings which the CIA would call hard evidence, almost all the fighters had
Ukrainian passports. There are volunteers from other countries. In Debaltsevo today, I would
question Alperovitch's assertion of Russian troops based on the fact the passports will be
Ukrainian and reflect my earlier findings. There is no possibly, could be, might be, about
it.
The SBU, Olexander Turchinov, and the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense all agree that
Crowdstrike is dead wrong in this assessment . Although subtitles aren't on it, the former
Commandant of Ukrainian Army Headquarters thanks God Russia never invaded or Ukraine would have
been in deep trouble.
How could Dimitri Alperovitch and Crowdstrike be this wrong on easily checked detail and
still get this much media attention? Could the investment made by Google and some
very large players have anything to do with the media Crowdstrike is causing?
According to Alperovitch, the CEO of a $150 million dollar cyber security company "And when
you think about, well, who would be interested in targeting Ukraine artillerymen in eastern
Ukraine who has interest in hacking the Democratic Party, Russia government comes to mind, but
specifically, Russian military that would have operational over forces in the Ukraine and would
target these artillerymen."
That statement is most of the proof of Russian involvement he has. That's it, that's all the
CIA, FBI have to go on. It's why they can't certify the intelligence. It's why they can't get
beyond the threshold of maybe.
Woodruff then asked two important questions. She asked if Crowdstrike was still working for
the DNC. Alperovitch responded "We're protecting them going forward. The investigation is
closed in terms of what happened there. But certainly, we've seen the campaigns, political
organizations are continued to be targeted, and they continue to hire us and use our technology
to protect themselves."
Based on the evidence he presented Woodruff, there is no need to investigate further?
Obviously, there is no need, the money is rolling in.
Second and most important Judy Woodruff asked if there were any questions about conflicts of
interest, how he would answer? This is where Dmitri Alperovitch's story starts to unwind.
His response was "Well, this report was not about the DNC. This report was about information
we uncovered about what these Russian actors were doing in eastern Ukraine in terms of locating
these artillery units of the Ukrainian army and then targeting them. So, what we just did is
said that it looks exactly as the same to the evidence we've already uncovered from the DNC,
linking the two together."
Why is this reasonable statement going to take his story off the rails? First, let's look at
the facts surrounding his evidence and then look at the real conflicts of interest involved.
While carefully evading the question, he neglects to state his conflicts of interest are worthy
of a DOJ investigation. Can you mislead the federal government about national security issues
and not get investigated yourself?
If Alperovitch's evidence is all there is, then the US government owes some large apologies
to Russia.
After showing who is targeting Ukrainian artillerymen, we'll look at what might be a
criminal conspiracy.
Crowdstrike CEO Dmitri Alperovitch story about Russian hacks that cost Hillary Clinton the
election was broadsided by the SBU (Ukrainian Intelligence and Security) in Ukraine. If Dimitri
Alperovitch is working for Ukrainian Intelligence and is providing intelligence to 17 US
Intelligence Agencies is it a conflict of interest?
Ukraine has been screaming for the US to start a war with Russia for the past 2 1/2 years.
Using facts accepted by leaders on both sides of the conflict, the main proof Crowdstrike shows
for evidence doesn't just unravel, it falls apart. Is Ukrainian Intelligence trying to invent a
reason for the US to take a hard-line stance against Russia? Are they using Crowdstrike to
carry this out?
Real Fancy Bear?
Meet the real Fancy Bear and Cozy Bear, part of the groups that are targeting Ukrainian
positions for the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics. These people were so tech savvy they
didn't know the Ukrainian SBU (Ukrainian CIA/internal security) records every phone call and
most internet use in Ukraine and Donbass. Donbass still uses Ukrainian phone and internet
services.
These are normal people fighting back against private volunteer armies that target their
homes, schools, and hospitals. The private volunteer armies like Pravy Sektor, Donbas
Battalion, Azov, and Aidar have been cited for atrocities like child rape, torture, murder, and
kidnapping. That just gets the ball rolling. These are a large swath of the Ukrainian
servicemen Crowdstrike hopes to protect.
This story which just aired on Ukrainian news channel TCN shows the SBU questioning and
arresting some of what they call an army of people in the Ukrainian-controlled areas. This news
video shows people in Toretsk that provided targeting information to Donbass and people
probably caught up in the net accidentally.
This is a civil war and people supporting either side are on both sides of the contact line.
The SBU is awestruck because there are hundreds if not thousands of people helping to target
the private volunteer armies supported by Ukrainian-Americans.
The first person they show on the video is a woman named Olga Lubochka. On the video her
voice is heard from a recorded call saying " In the field, on the left about 130 degrees. Aim
and you'll get it." and then " Oh, you hit it so hard you leveled it to the ground.""Am I going
to get a medal for this?"
Other people caught up in the raid claim and probably were only calling friends they know.
It's common for people to call and tell their family about what is going on around them. This
has been a staple in the war especially in outlying villages for people aligned with both sides
of the conflict. A neighbor calls his friend and says "you won't believe what I just saw."
Another "fancy bear," Alexander Schevchenko was caught calling friends and telling them that
armored personnel carriers had just driven by.
Anatoli Prima, father of a DNR(Donetsk People's Republic) soldier was asked to find out what
unit was there and how many artillery pieces.
One woman providing information about fuel and incoming equipment has a husband fighting on
the opposite side in Gorlovka. Gorlovka is a major city that's been under artillery attack
since 2014. For the past 2 1/2 years, she has remained in their home in Toretsk. According to
the video, he's vowed to take no prisoners when they rescue the area.
When asked why they hate Ukraine so much, one responded that they just wanted things to go
back to what they were like before the coup in February 2014.
Another said they were born in the Soviet Union and didn't like what was going on in Kiev.
At the heart of this statement is the anti- OUN, antinationalist sentiment that most people
living in Ukraine feel. The OUNb Bandera killed millions of people in Ukraine, including
starving 3 million Soviet soldiers to death. The new Ukraine was founded
in 1991 by OUN nationalists outside the fledgling country.
Is giving misleading or false information to 17 US Intelligence Agencies a crime? If it's
done by a cyber security industry leader like Crowdstrike should that be investigated? If
unwinding the story from the "targeting of Ukrainian volunteers" side isn't enough, we should
look at this from the American perspective. How did the Russia influencing the election and DNC
hack story evolve? Who's involved? Does this pose conflicts of interest for Dmitri Alperovitch
and Crowdstrike? And let's face it, a hacking story isn't complete until real hackers with the
skills, motivation, and reason are exposed.
In the last article exploring the
DNC hacks the focus was on the Chalupas . The article focused on Alexandra, Andrea, and
Irene Chalupa. Their participation in the DNC hack story is what brought it to international
attention in the first place.
According to journalist and DNC activist Andrea Chalupa on her Facebook page "
After Chalupa sent the email to Miranda (which mentions that she had invited this reporter
to a meeting with Ukrainian journalists in Washington), it triggered high-level concerns within
the DNC, given the sensitive nature of her work. "That's when we knew it was the Russians,"
said a Democratic Party source who has been directly involved in the internal probe into the
hacked emails. In order to stem the damage, the source said, "we told her to stop her
research."" July 25, 2016
If she was that close to the investigation Crowdstrike did how credible is she? Her sister
Alexandra was named one of 16 people that shaped the election by Yahoo news. The DNC hacking
investigation done by Crowdstrike concluded hacking was done by Russian actors based on the
work done by Alexandra Chalupa? That is the conclusion of her sister Andrea Chalupa and
obviously enough for Crowdstrike to make the Russian government connection. These words mirror
Dimitri Alperovitch's identification process in his interview with PBS Judy Woodruff.
How close is Dimitri Alperovitch to DNC officials? Close enough professionally he should
have stepped down from an investigation that had the chance of throwing a presidential election
in a new direction.
According to Esquire.com ,
Alperovitch has vetted speeches for Hillary Clinton about cyber security issues in the
past. Because of his work on the Sony hack, President Barrack Obama personally called and said
the measures taken were directly because of his work.
Still, this is not enough to show a conflict of interest. Alperovitch's relationships with
the Chalupas, radical groups, think tanks, Ukrainian propagandists, and Ukrainian state
supported hackers do. When it all adds up and you see it together, we have found a Russian that
tried hard to influence the outcome of the US presidential election in 2016.
In my
previous article I showed in detail how the Chalupas fit into this. A brief bullet point
review looks like this.
The Chalupas are not Democrat or Republican. They are OUNb. The OUNb worked hard to start
a war between the USA and Russia for the last 50 years. According to the
Ukrainian Weekly in a rare open statement of their existence in 2011, "Other statements
were issued in the Ukrainian language by the leadership of the Organization of Ukrainian
Nationalists (B) and the International Conference in Support of Ukraine. The OUN (Bandera
wing) called for" What is OUNb Bandera? They follow the same political policy and platform
that was developed in the 1930's by Stepan Bandera. When these people go to a Holocaust
memorial they are celebrating both the dead and the OUNb SS that killed
There is no getting around this fact. The OUNb have no concept of democratic values and
want an authoritarian fascism.
Alexandra Chalupa- According
to the Ukrainian Weekly , "The effort, known as Digital Miadan, gained momentum following
the initial Twitter storms. Leading the effort were: Lara Chelak, Andrea Chalupa, Alexandra
Chalupa, Constatin Kostenko and others." The Digital Maidan was also how they raised money
for the coup. This was how the Ukrainian
emigres bought the bullets that were used on Euromaidan. Ukraine's chubby nazi, Dima
Yarosh stated openly he was taking money from the Ukrainian emigres during Euromaidan and
Pravy Sektor still fundraises openly in North America. The "Sniper
Massacre" on the Maidan in Ukraine by Dr. Ivan Katchanovski, University of Ottowa shows
clearly detailed evidence how the massacre happened. It has Pravy Sektor confessions that
show who created the "heavenly hundred. Their admitted involvement as leaders of Digital
Maidan by both Chalupas is a
clear violation of the Neutrality Act and has up to a 25
year prison sentence attached to it because it ended in a coup.
Andrea Chalupa-2014, in a Huff Post article Sept. 1 2016, Andrea Chalupa described
Sviatoslav Yurash as one of Ukraine's important "dreamers." He is a young activist that
founded Euromaidan
Press . Beyond the gushing glow what she doesn't say is who he actually is. Sviatoslav
Yurash was Dmitri Yarosh's spokesman just after Maidan. He is a hardcore Ukrainian
nationalist and was rewarded with the Deputy Director
position for the UWC (Ukrainian World Congress) in Kiev .
In January, 2014 when he showed up at the Maidan protests he was 17 years old. He became the
foreign language media representative for Vitali Klitschko, Arseni Yatsenyuk, and Oleh
Tyahnybok. All press enquiries went through Yurash. To meet Dimitri Yurash you had
to go through Sviatoslav Yurash as a Macleans reporter found out.
At 18 years old, Sviatoslav Yurash became the spokesman for Ministry of Defense of Ukraine
under Andrei Paruby. He was Dimitri Yarosh's spokesman and can be seen either behind Yarosh on
videos at press conferences or speaking ahead of him to reporters. From January 2014 onward, to
speak to Dimitri Yarosh, you set up an appointment with Yurash.
Irene Chalupa- Another involved Chalupa we need to cover to do the story justice is Irene
Chalupa. From her bio – Irena
Chalupa is a nonresident fellow with the Atlantic Council's Dinu Patriciu Eurasia Center.
She is also a senior correspondent at Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), where she has
worked for more than twenty years. Ms. Chalupa previously served as an editor for the
Atlantic Council, where she covered Ukraine and Eastern Europe. Irena Chalupa is also the
news anchor for Ukraine's propaganda channel org She is also a Ukrainian
emigre leader.
According to
Robert Parry's article At the forefront of people that would have taken senior positions in
a Clinton administration and especially in foreign policy are the Atlantic Council. Their main
goal is still a major confrontation with nuclear-armed Russia.
The Atlantic Council is the think tank associated and supported by the
CEEC (Central and Eastern European Coalition). The CEEC has only one goal which is war with
Russia. Their question to candidates looking for their support in the election was "Are you
willing to go to war with Russia?" Hillary Clinton has received their unqualified support
throughout the campaign.
What does any of this have to do with Dimitri Alperovitch and Crowdstrike? Since the
Atlantic Council would have taken senior cabinet and policy positions, his own fellowship
status at the Atlantic Council and relationship with Irene Chalupa creates a definite conflict
of interest for Crowdstrike's investigation. Trump's campaign was gaining ground and Clinton
needed a boost. Had she won, would he have been in charge of the CIA, NSA, or Homeland
Security?
When you put someone that has so much to gain in charge of an investigation that could
change an election, that is a conflict of interest. If the think tank is linked heavily to
groups that want war with Russia like the Atlantic Council and the CEEC, it opens up criminal
conspiracy.
If the person in charge of the investigation is a fellow at the think tank that wants a
major conflict with Russia it is a definite conflict of interest. Both the Atlantic Council and
clients stood to gain Cabinet and Policy positions based on how the result of his work affects
the election. It clouds the results of the investigation. In Dmitri Alperovitch's case, he
found the perpetrator before he was positive there was a crime.
Alperovitch's relationship with Andrea Chalupa's efforts and Ukrainian intelligence groups
is where things really heat up. Noted above she works with Euromaidanpress.com and Informnapalm.org which is the outlet
for Ukrainian state-sponsored hackers.
When you look at Dimitri Alperovitch's twitter relationships, you have to ask why the CEO of
a $150 million dollar company like Crowdstrike follows Ukrainian InformNapalm
and its hackers individually . There is a mutual relationship. When you add up his work for
the OUNb, Ukraine, support for Ukraine's Intelligence, and to the hackers it needs to be
investigated to see if Ukraine is conspiring against the US government.
Alperovitch and Fancy Bear tweet each other?
Crowdstrike is also following their hack of a Russian government official after the DNC
hack. It closely resembles the same method used with the DNC because it was an email hack.
Crowdstrike's product line includes Falcon Host, Falcon Intelligence, Falcon Overwatch and
Falcon DNS. Is it possible the hackers in Falcons Flame are another service Crowdstrike offers?
Although this profile says Virginia, tweets are from the Sofia, Bulgaria time zone and he
writes in Russian. Another curiosity considering the Fancy Bear source code is in Russian. This
image shows Crowdstrike in their network.
Crowdstrike is part of Ukrainian nationalist hacker network
In an interview with
Euromaidanpress these hackers say they have no need for the CIA. They consider the CIA
amateurish. They also say they are not part of the Ukrainian military Cyberalliance is a
quasi-organization with the participation of several groups – RUH8, Trinity, Falcon
Flames, Cyberhunta. There are structures affiliated to the hackers – the Myrotvorets
site, Informnapalm analytical agency."
In the image it shows a network diagram of Crowdstrike following the Surkov leaks. The
network communication goes through a secondary source. This is something you do when you don't
want to be too obvious. Here is another example of that.
Ukrainian Intelligence and the real Fancy Bear?
Although OSINT Academy sounds fairly innocuous, it's the official twitter account for
Ukraine's Ministry of Information head Dimitri Zolotukin. It is also Ukrainian Intelligence.
The Ministry of Information started the Peacekeeper or Myrotvorets website that geolocates
journalists and other people for assassination. If you disagree with OUNb politics, you could
be on the list.
Trying not to be obvious, the Head of Ukraine's Information Ministry (UA Intelligence)
tweeted something interesting that ties Alperovitch and Crowdstrike to the Ukrainian
Intelligence hackers and the Information Ministry even tighter.
Trying to keep it hush hush?
This single tweet on a network chart shows that out of all the Ukrainian Ministry of
Information Minister's following, he only wanted the 3 hacking groups associated with both him
and Alperovitch to get the tweet. Alperovitch's story was received and not retweeted or shared.
If this was just Alperovitch's victory, it was a victory for Ukraine. It would be shared
heavily. If it was a victory for the hacking squad, it would be smart to keep it to themselves
and not draw unwanted attention.
These same hackers are associated with Alexandra, Andrea, and Irene Chalupa through the
portals and organizations they work with through their OUNb. The hackers are funded and
directed by or through the same OUNb channels that Alperovitch is working for and with to
promote the story of Russian hacking.
Pravy Sektor Hackers and Crowdstrike?
When you look at the image for the hacking group in the euromaidanpress article, one of the
hackers identifies themselves as one of Dimitri Yarosh's Pravy Sektor members by the Pravy
Sektor sweatshirt they have on. Noted above, Pravy Sektor admitted to killing the people at the
Maidan protest and sparked the coup.
Going further with the linked Euromaidanpress article the hackers say" Let's understand that
Ukrainian hackers and Russian hackers once constituted a single very powerful group. Ukrainian
hackers have a rather high level of work. So the help of the USA I don't know, why would we
need it? We have all the talent and special means for this. And I don't think that the USA or
any NATO country would make such sharp movements in international politics."
What sharp movements in international politics have been made lately? Let me spell it out
for the 17 US Intelligence Agencies so there is no confusion. These state sponsored, Russian
language hackers in Eastern European time zones have shown with the Surkov hack they have the
tools and experience to hack states that are looking out for it. They are also laughing at US
intel efforts.
The hackers also made it clear that they will do anything to serve Ukraine. Starting a war
between Russia and the USA is the one way they could serve Ukraine best, and hurt Russia worst.
Given those facts, if the DNC hack was according to the criteria given by Alperovitch, both he
and these hackers need to be investigated.
According to the Esquire interview "Alperovitch was deeply frustrated: He thought the
government should tell the world what it knew. There is, of course, an element of the personal
in his battle cry. "A lot of people who are born here don't appreciate the freedoms we have,
the opportunities we have, because they've never had it any other way," he told me. "I
have."
While I agree patriotism is a great thing, confusing it with this kind of nationalism is
not. Alperovitch seems to think by serving OUNb Ukraine's interests and delivering a conflict
with Russia that is against American interests, he's a patriot. He isn't serving US interests.
He's definitely a Ukrainian patriot. Maybe he should move to Ukraine.
The evidence presented deserves investigation because it looks like the case for conflict of
interest is the least Dimitri Alperovitch should look forward to. If these hackers are the real
Cozy Bear and Fancy Bear, they really did make sharp movements in international politics.
By pawning it off on Russia, they made a worldwide embarrassment of an outgoing President of
the United States and made the President Elect the suspect of rumor.
From the Observer.com , " Andrea
Chalupa -- the sister of DNC
research staffer Alexandra Chalupa -- claimed on
social media, without any evidence, that despite Clinton
conceding the election to Trump, the voting results need to be audited to because
Clinton couldn't have lost -- it must have been Russia. Chalupa hysterically
tweeted to every politician on Twitter to audit the vote because of Russia and claimed the TV
show The Americans
, about two KGB spies living in America, is real."
Quite possibly now the former UK Ambassador Craig Murry's admission of being the involved
party to "leaks" should be looked at. " Now both Julian
Assange and I have stated definitively the leak does not come from Russia . Do we credibly
have access? Yes, very obviously. Very, very few people can be said to definitely have access
to the source of the leak. The people saying it is not Russia are those who do have access.
After access, you consider truthfulness. Do Julian Assange and I have a reputation for
truthfulness? Well in 10 years not one of the tens of thousands of documents WikiLeaks has
released has had its authenticity successfully challenged. As for me, I have a reputation for
inconvenient truth telling."
"... I think Jack Rabbit's question hits the money in that they KNOW what happened. My question is how come the Clintons would have so much clout to control the story away from their shenanigans? It must leak over into significant parts of the Democratic Party itself. PS I may be wrong on this--Crowdstrike is responsible for Guccifer 2.0, at the behest of Hillary. ..."
@25 I don't mean to argue but would wonder on your second note in the chain, blaming Comey.
Clinton was done far far before anything Comey could do at the last minute. In the summer. By
then the emails had been released (however that release occurred) to show how she had twisted
Sanders away from the nomination and had questions re The Clinton Foundation.
I think Jack Rabbit's question hits the money in that they KNOW what happened. My
question is how come the Clintons would have so much clout to control the story away from
their shenanigans? It must leak over into significant parts of the Democratic Party itself.
PS I may be wrong on this--Crowdstrike is responsible for Guccifer 2.0, at the behest of
Hillary.
The alleged Russian computer Hacker named Guccifer 2.0 whom the Democrat National Committee
has publicly blamed for hacking its emails and giving them to WIkiLeaks before the Election in
order for Russia to help Donald Trump, was really a fiction created by an Obama White House
Staffer in order to prevent the exposure of why DNC Staffer Seth Rich was murdered and also try
to pin the exposure of DNC emails on Russia and Trump.
Democrat operatives had pushed the fictional Guccifer 2.0 story as the supposed Russian
hacker who broke into DNC servers and downloaded thousands of emails, then sent them to the
Russians, who then sent them to Wikileaks so Hilary Clinton could be defeated.
Never mind that it has now been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the download speed
was far too great to have been done by anyone but a DNC insider like Seth Rich. Because
Internet speeds are not nearly sufficient to support download speed that the meta data,
embedded in the emails, reported.
Never mind that the same meta data shows that the download came from the eastern time zone
of the US, not Romania or Russia.
A five minute video (below) proves Guccifer 2.0 was an invention of someone using a version
of Microsoft Word that was originally registered to a DNC / White House Staffer named Warren
Flood.
Here are two screen shots from warren floods Facebook page. Notice that warren worked for
"Obama for America," the DNC, and the White House . He lives in LaGrange, GA.
The video below does a great job explaining who is behind the original Trump opposition
research leaked via WikiLeaks AND the later (same) document allegedly obtained by Guccifer 2.0
by "hacking."
EVIDENCE OF DNC/WHITE HOUSE STAFFER BEING "RUSSIAN HACKER GUCCIFER
2.0″
If you have ever accidentally tried to open a Microsoft Word document in a simple text
editor like Notepad, you can see the meta data behind each word document, including WHO that
copy of Word belongs to.
The video below explains who the author of the original opposition research document was and
how we know:
. . . it also includes who the AUTHOR of the document of is. It gets that information from
the name that was entered when you installed your copy of Microsoft Office. Inside the
original trump opposition research, the document later released by WikiLeaks, the author of
the document is listed as Lauren Dillon , DNC Research Director.
This is Lauren Dillion from the DNC:
The metadata in the WikiLeaks release of Trump Opposition research shows that it was created
by Lauren Dillon, as show below:
_______________
HOWEVER, that same document later released by Guccifer 2.0 shows a CHANGE in who authored
Document; this later copy showing the Author as Warren Flood . . . . who worked in the White
House!
Thus, the entire claim by Guccifer 2.0 that he was a Russian Hacker who stole the DNC
emails, was a deliberate deception attributable to a staffer in the Obama White House: Warren
Flood.
Here's the kicker, the version of Trump's opposition research file that was originally
released by WikiLeaks, and later released to the Main-Stream-Media (MSM), was never attributed
to the DNC, it was attributed to the Russian Hacker "Guccifer 2.0 -- A man jailed in Romania
for hacking.
THE DNC/WHITE HOUSE "FATAL MISTAKE"
It just wouldn't do, to have the head of research for the DNC be the Leaker to WikiLeaks or
to have the later Guccifer 2.0 release to come from a White House staffer, it had to
be attributable to someone connected to the Russians. The Romanian guy was the FALL GUY.
The one fatal mistake the DNC and the Obama White House made was that no one remembered
about the Microsoft Word metadata which reveals the owner of that particular copy of the Word
software. So, according to the evidence, Guccifer 2.0 was actually DNC/White House Staffer,
Warren Flood.
Yes, you read that correctly: EVIDENCE. Not speculation, or rumor, or innuendo. Actual real
life, hard copy EVIDENCE.
Guccifer 2.0 was an invention of the DNC/White House to cover-up who the real leaker was;
and at the same time start the Russian Hacking rumors that persist today.
INTERESTINGLY, the Wikipedia entry for Guccifer 2.0, describes an interview he did with
MotherBoard via an online chat. Guccifer 2.0 insisted he was Romanian but, when pressed to use
the Romanian language in an interview with an Interview with Motherboard via an online chat, he
used such clunky grammar and terminology that experts believe he was using an online
translator.
Bottom line: The Obama White House invention of Guccifer 2.0, apparently through its Staffer
Warren Flood, accomplished three things:
1) It covered DNC research director Lauren Dillon. Whatever sort of opposition research she
authored was later claimed by Guccifer 2.0.
2) It covered for Seth Rich. This is the BIG ONE, because he was killed in an obvious
assassination staged to look like street robbery -- the only problem is, the robbers didn't
take anything. He still had all his cash and his Rolex watch when police arrived. And Guccifer
2.0 took also credit for the Podesta emails which were actually downloaded by Seth Rich and
given to WikiLeaks.
AND;
3) It created the conduit to "Russian Intelligence" to fortify the claim that it was the
Russians who leaked the DNC emails to WikiLeaks, and therefore Trump "was in collusion with the
Russians" to defeat Clinton.
The whole claim of "Russian Hacking" and "Trump colluding with Russians" has come unraveled
because it was ALL a complete fraud.
What remains is how this fraud is STILL affecting our nation to this very day, and how the
Congress of the United States, acting late last month upon this totally FALSE "Russian Hacking"
claim, has now enacted further sanction upon Russia – sanctions that will very likely
lead to war.
VIDEO EVIDENCE
Here is the video containing the EVIDENCE that the Wikileaks original Trump Opposition
document was created by a user whose Microsoft Word software was registered to DNC Research
Director Lauren Dillon, and the later exact same document, allegedly hacked by "GUccifer
2.0″ was done by DNC/White House Staffer William Flood
If this is true, then this is definitely a sophisticated false flag operation. Was malware Alperovich people injected specifically
designed to implicate Russians? In other words Crowdstrike=Fancy Bear
Images removed. For full content please thee the original source
One interesting corollary of this analysis is that installing Crowdstrike software is like inviting a wolf to guard your chicken.
If they are so dishonest you take enormous risks. That might be true for some other heavily advertized "intrusion prevention" toolkits.
So those criminals who use mistyped popular addresses or buy Google searches to drive lemmings to their site and then flash the screen
that they detected a virus on your computer a, please call provided number and for a small amount of money your virus will be removed
get a new more sinister life.
"... They found that generally, in a lot of cases, malware developers didn't care to hide the compile times and that while implausible
timestamps are used, it's rare that these use dates in the future. It's possible, but unlikely that one sample would have a postdated
timestamp to coincide with their visit by mere chance but seems extremely unlikely to happen with two or more samples. Considering the
dates of CrowdStrike's activities at the DNC coincide with the compile dates of two out of the three pieces of malware discovered and
attributed to APT-28 (the other compiled approximately 2 weeks prior to their visit), the big question is: Did CrowdStrike plant some
(or all) of the APT-28 malware? ..."
"... The IP address, according to those articles, was disabled in June 2015, eleven months before the DNC emails were acquired –
meaning those IP addresses, in reality, had no involvement in the alleged hacking of the DNC. ..."
"... The fact that two out of three of the Fancy Bear malware samples identified were compiled on dates within the apparent five
day period CrowdStrike were apparently at the DNC seems incredibly unlikely to have occurred by mere chance. ..."
"... That all three malware samples were compiled within ten days either side of their visit – makes it clear just how questionable
the Fancy Bear malware discoveries were. ..."
Of course the DNC did not want to the FBI to investigate its "hacked servers". The plan was well underway to excuse Hillary's
pathetic election defeat to Trump, and
CrowdStrike would help out by planting evidence to pin on those evil "Russian hackers." Some would call this
entire DNC server hack an
"insurance policy."
"... It's very interesting. But there is one thing that is certain according to McAffee (the McAffee) "If it looked like it was the Russians, then I can guarantee it WASN'T the Russians." ..."
"... Good comment and reading the last line, it has just reminded me of 'Vault 7' and what Wiki Leaks had to say. ..."
"... Vault 7 CIA Hacking Tools Revealed.docx... https://www.scribd.com/docu... ..."
Getting closer all the time, but Mueller's job will continue till the mid-term elections just to see if they can get away
with their scheming. The tale within a tale: FBI investigates and discovers they themselves are also part of this tale. The
story will have a tail: will it be a tragic, Shakespearean end or repentance by Hillary and Mueller (Duh...).
It's about the date / time stamps on the files, and the HACKER (Guciffer 2.0) was acutely
an Obama aid called: WARREN FLOOD. Warren Flood pretended to hack the DNC and made himself
out to be Russian with an alias of Guciffer 2.0. That was the smoke screen the Democrats put
out on top of the Crowdstrike false evidence job. It's excellent reading.
Thank you for the link and must admit it has made me laugh. A line I will use in the
future. '50 Shades of Pissed Off' - no doubt I will use it as my Mantra for 2018.
Yes, that Guccifer 2.0 stuff and the clear evidence that it was not a hack was published
before but you are now updating us by identifying the guy who did it, which should also
change the process. Thanks for that!
Update: Just see what Libby and Trauma2000 mean: yes, that makes sense!
In actual fact, it was Seth Ritch who 'leaked' the material (if you believe that Huma Abdeen was the original leaker and used Seth as a 'go between' then that is up to you). When
the DNC found out Seth was the leaker, the murdered him and had to 'think up a story' hence
Guccifer 2.0. There are several DNC employees involved but Warren Flood is the 'fall guy'
along with a girl (her name is out there) whom had her name on the software licenses that
were used to doctor the emails.
It's very interesting. But there is one thing that is certain according to McAffee (the
McAffee) "If it looked like it was the Russians, then I can guarantee it WASN'T the
Russians."
For me it is because of the truth: there is not much point being on this or that "side",
but when the truth is so twisted it becomes perversion and that should be uncovered.
Flood had already stopped working as Biden's IT director back in 2011, the only place he'd
likely have had his name on a license under the company name GSA based on his work history -
was there.
So, Guccifer 2.0's first docs were most likely constructed using a computer that had
resided in the West Wing office on June 15, 2016 at the exact same time as Pyatt, Nuland and
others (also connected to the Ukraine coup in 2014) were meeting there.
source:
http://g-2.space
(the person behind it is the person who originally wrote this "Fancy Fraud, Bogus Bears..."
article too)
RE: The Eastern timezone. - If referring to the NGP-VAN analysis, the timestamps
themselves don't show timezones but the timezone can be evaluated due to how timestamps on
files (that appear to be part of the same batch transfer on July 5, 2016) are displayed in
the 7zip archive root versus those in various RAR files contained within (and the different
methods of timestamp storage used by the different archive formats) and how this changes
depending on what your computer's timezone is set to (the time changes in the 7zip but not in
the RARs and the only timezone in which these have a close correlation is Eastern).
There was an article, that I read, just before Christmas Day, that supports what you say.
That Mueller has got to keep the narrative running, until they have sorted out the Mid-Term
Elections, that the Dems believe will work to their advantage. Is it something to do with the
Dems hoping to control Congress and managing to close any investigations that Trump is
working on?
Surprised with Fox. Considering old Murdoch has a problem with Russia, no doubt owing to
his interests in Genie Energy. However, not complaining, Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity and now
the ex-NSA on Fox News. Nice.
This is just the beginning: just read New Trump Executive Order Targets Clinton-Linked
Individuals, Lobbyists And Perhaps Uranium One on
Zerohedge.com
1. It will have huge consequences for all those who made shady deals with dictators and
criminals (adding to the coffers of the Clinton Foundation etc.etc.). Perhaps this is what
Trump was waiting for to start in the new year:his fireworks response to all the mud slung
around?
2. Seth Rich and distraction by Guccifer 2.0: Trauma200 comments below is BIG and makes the
connection to SETH RICH's murder, which also shows how Assange made it necessary for the
complete the search and expose with evidence what was going on.
What I am curious about, is will he use it for that or will he go for any foreigner that
Washington DC has a problem with. Such as anybody who is a friend of President Putin, just to
cause problems, before the Russian Presidential Campaign.
Or am I being cynical. I seriously hope he uses it for the Russia Gate crowd and no doubt,
he has good reason and he is not known to like being insulted, with no payback. However, I
can also see him using it as another form of punishment on non-nationals.
One additional point: Thomas Rid and most of the mainstream media keeps saying that German
intelligence fingered Russia for the German Parliament attacks. While this is partly true,
German intelligence in fact never said directly that APT 29 or "Fancy Bear" WAS DEFINITELY
Russian state sponsored. They said they ASSUMED Russia was conducting hacks on Germany.
See here:
Digital Attack on German Parliament: Investigative Report on the Hack of the Left Party
Infrastructure in Bundestag
https://netzpolitik.org/201...
Jeffrey Carr made this point early on in his Medium article:
One of the strongest pieces of evidence linking GRU to the DNC hack is the equivalent of
identical fingerprints found in two burglarized buildings: a reused command-and-control
address -- 176.31.112[.]10 -- that was hard coded in a piece of
malware found both in the German parliament as well as on
the DNC's servers. Russian military intelligence was identified by the German domestic
security agency BfV as the actor responsible for the Bundestag breach. The infrastructure
behind the fake MIS Department domain was also linked to the Berlin intrusion through at
least one other element, a shared SSL certificate.
This paragraph sounds quite damning if you take it at face value, but if you invest a
little time into checking the source material, its carefully constructed narrative falls
apart.
Problem #1:
The IP address 176.31.112[.]10 used in the Bundestag breach as a Command and Control server
has never been connected to the Russian intelligence services. In fact, Claudio Guarnieri, a
highly regarded security researcher, whose technical analysis was referenced by Rid, stated
that "no evidence allows to tie the attacks to governments of any particular country."
Problem #2: The Command & Control server (176.31.112.10) was using an outdated version
of OpenSSL vulnerable to Heartbleed attacks. Heartbleed allows attackers to exfiltrate data
including private keys, usernames, passwords and other sensitive information.
The existence of a known security vulnerability that's trivial to exploit opens the door
to the possibility that the systems in question were used by one rogue group, and then
infiltrated by a second rogue group,
making the attribution process even more complicated. At the very least, the C2 server should
be considered a compromised indicator.
Problem #3: The BfV published a newsletter in January 2016 which assumes that the GRU and
FSB are responsible because of technical indicators, not because of any classified finding;
to wit: "Many
of these attack campaigns have each other on technical similarities, such as malicious
software families, and infrastructure -- these are important indicators of the
same authorship. It is assumed that both the
Russian domestic intelligence service FSB and the military foreign intelligence service GRU
run cyber operations."
Professor Rid's argument depended heavily on conveying hard attribution by the BfV even
though the President of the BfV didn't disguise the fact that their attribution was based on
an assumption and not hard evidence.
Thanks for the article and reminding us of Crowd Strike. Must admit, I read an interesting
article, over on Oped News, by George Eliason, with regards Crowd Strike. Plus a few other
reminders.
Does anybody remember the Awan Brothers from Pakistan and what they were arrested for,
with regards the DNC and computers?
Then you have Google and Soros and their links into Crowd Strike. Hasn't the CEO of Google
just stepped down, the same day that Trump signed a Presidential Order, that might prove a
problem for some, in the future?
QANON EXPOSES DEM CONSPIRACY TO FRAME TRUMP, CLAIMS GOOGLE'S SCHMIDT PLAYED PIVOTAL
ROLE
QAnon also claims Debbie Wasserman Schultz contracted MS-13 gang to kill Seth Rich...
https://www.infowars.com/qa...
Remember, Crowd Strike, Dmitry Alperovic and his links back to The Atlantic Council? Then
you have the Ukrainian Oligarch Pinchuk, who happily invested $25 million in the Clinton
Foundation. Remember his Yalta Summits and the one back in September 2013? Now who attended
and what were the various topics that they discussed?
Then you have Obama giving Crowd Strike
a White House Commission for Cyber Security. Plus, the DNC refusing the FBI access to their
servers, but, having no problem giving Crowd Strike full access. Now why was that? Funny how
often Ukraine comes up, when looking into Clinton, Fusion, Crowdstrike, Old Ukrainian Malware
and The Trump Dossier? Coincidence or what?
"... Donald Trump is deep in the world of spooks now, the world of spies, agents and operatives. He and his inner circle have a nest of friends, but an even larger, more varied nest of enemies. As John Sevigny writes below, his enemies include not only the intel and counter-intel people, but also "Republican lawmakers, journalists, the Clintons, the Bush family, Barack Obama, the ACLU, every living Democrat and even Rand Paul." ..."
"... A total of 8,761 documents have been published as part of 'Year Zero', the first in a series of leaks the whistleblower organization has dubbed 'Vault 7.' WikiLeaks said that 'Year Zero' revealed details of the CIA's "global covert hacking program," including "weaponized exploits" used against company products including " Apple's iPhone , Google's Android and Microsoft's Windows and even Samsung TVs , which are turned into covert microphones." ..."
"... According to the statement from WikiLeaks, government hackers can penetrate Android phones and collect "audio and message traffic before encryption is applied." ..."
"... "CIA turned every Microsoft Windows PC in the world into spyware. Can activate backdoors on demand, including via Windows update "[.] ..."
"... Do you still trust Windows Update? ..."
"... As of October 2014 the CIA was also looking at infecting the vehicle control systems used by modern cars and trucks. ..."
"... "Richard Clarke, the counterterrorism chief under both Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, told the Huffington Post that Hastings's crash looked consistent with a car cyber attack.'" Full and fascinating article here . ..."
"... Recently, the CIA lost control of the majority of its hacking arsenal including malware, viruses, trojans, weaponized "zero day" exploits, malware remote control systems and associated documentation. This extraordinary collection, which amounts to more than several hundred million lines of code, gives its possessor the entire hacking capacity of the CIA The archive appears to have been circulated among former U.S. government hackers and contractors in an unauthorized manner, one of whom has provided WikiLeaks with portions of the archive. ..."
"... Since 2001 the CIA has gained political and budgetary preeminence over the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA). The CIA found itself building not just its now infamous drone fleet, but a very different type of covert, globe-spanning force - its own substantial fleet of hackers. The agency's hacking division freed it from having to disclose its often controversial operations to the NSA (its primary bureaucratic rival) in order to draw on the NSA's hacking capacities. ..."
"... By the end of 2016, the CIA's hacking division, which formally falls under the agency's Center for Cyber Intelligence (CCI), had over 5000 registered users and had produced more than a thousand hacking systems, trojans, viruses, and other "weaponized" malware. Such is the scale of the CIA's undertaking that by 2016, its hackers had utilized more code than that used to run Facebook. The CIA had created, in effect, its "own NSA" with even less accountability and without publicly answering the question as to whether such a massive budgetary spend on duplicating the capacities of a rival agency could be justified. ..."
"... I learned this when I was in my 20s. The Catholic Church was funding my early critique of American foreign aid as being imperialist. I asked whether they thought I should go into politics. They said, "No, you'd never make it". And I said, "Why?" and they said, "Well, nobody has a police record or any other dirt on you." I asked what they meant. They said, "Unless they have something over you to blackmail you with, you're not going to be able to get campaign funding. Because they believe that you might do something surprising," in other words, something they haven't asked you to do. So basically throughout politics, on both sides of the spectrum, voters have candidates who are funded by backers who have enough over them that they can always blackmail. ..."
"... The campaign to frame up and discredit Trump and his associates is characteristic of how a police state routinely operates. A national security apparatus that vacuums up all our communications and stores them for later retrieval has been utilized by political operatives to go after their enemies – and not even the President of the United States is immune. This is something that one might expect to occur in, say, Turkey, or China: that it is happening here, to the cheers of much of the media and the Democratic party, is beyond frightening. ..."
"... 4th impressions – I went looking for the "juicy bits" of interest to me – SOHO routers, small routers – sadly its just a table documenting routers sold around the world, and whether these guys have put the firmware in their Stash Repository. Original firmware, not hacked one. But the repository isn't in the vault dump, AFAIK. ..."
"... The WikiLeaks docs show that CIA has developed means to use all personal digital device microphones and cameras even when they are "off," and to send all of your files and personal data to themselves, and to send your private messages to themselves before they are encrypted. They have installed these spyware in the released version of Windows 10, and can easily install them on all common systems and devices. ..."
"... So we have a zillion ways to spy and hack and deceive and assassinate, but no control. I think this is what the military refers to as "being overtaken by events." ..."
"... My godfather was in the CIA in the late sixties and early seventies, and he said that outside of the President's pet projects there was no way to sift through and bring important information to decision makers before it made the Washington Post (he is aware of the irony) and hit the President's breakfast table. ..."
"... To what extent do these hacks represent the CIA operating within the US? To what extent is that illegal? With the democrats worshipping the IC, will anyone in an official position dare to speak out? ..."
"... Schumer said that as he understands, intelligence officials are "very upset with how [Trump] has treated them and talked about them ..."
"... The CIA's internal security is crap, too. Really a lot of people should be fired over that, as well as over Snowden's release. We didn't hear of it happening in the NSA, though I'm not sure we would have. Given Gaius's description of Trump's situation, it seems unlikely it will happen this time, either. One of my hopes for a Trump administration, as long as we're stuck with it, was a thorough cleanout of the upper echelons in the IC. It's obviously long overdue, and Obama wasn't up to it. But I used the past tense because I don't think it's going to happen. Trump seems more interested in sucking up to them, presumably so they won't kill him or his family. That being one of their options. ..."
"... "The CIA had created, in effect, its "own NSA" with even less accountability ." [My emphasis]. It seems to characterize an organization that operates outside of any control and oversight – and one that is intentionally structuring itself that way. That worries me. ..."
"... It's a dangerous world out there and only our brave IC can protect us from it. Come on. Stop blaming the victim and place the blame where it belongs–our IC and MIC. I say stop feeding the beast with your loyalty to a government that has ceased to be yours. ..."
"... "These CIA revelations in conjunction with those of the NSA paints a pretty dark future for privacy and freedom. Edward Snowden made us aware of the NSA's program XKEYSCORE and PRISM which are utilized to monitor and bulk collect information from virtually any electronic device on the planet and put it into a searchable database. Now Wikileaks has published what appears to be additional Big Brother techniques used by a competing agency. Say what you want about the method of discovery, but Pandora's box has been opened." ..."
March 9, 2017 by Yves Smith Yves here. The first
release of the Wikileaks Vault 7 trove has curiously gone from being a MSM lead story yesterday to a handwave today. On the one hand,
anyone who was half awake during the Edward Snowden revelations knows that the NSA is in full spectrum surveillance and data storage
mode, and members of the Five Eyes back-scratch each other to evade pesky domestic curbs on snooping. So the idea that the CIA (and
presumably the NSA) found a way to circumvent encryption tools on smartphones, or are trying to figure out how to control cars remotely,
should hardly come as a surprise.
However, at a minimum, reminding the generally complacent public that they are being spied on any time they use the Web, and increasingly
the times in between, makes the officialdom Not Happy.
And if this Wikileaks claim is even halfway true, its Vault 7 publication is a big deal:
Recently, the CIA lost control of the majority of its hacking arsenal including malware, viruses, trojans, weaponized "zero
day" exploits, malware remote control systems and associated documentation. This extraordinary collection, which amounts to more
than several hundred million lines of code, gives its possessor the entire hacking capacity of the CIA The archive appears to
have been circulated among former U.S. government hackers and contractors in an unauthorized manner, one of whom has provided
WikiLeaks with portions of the archive.
This is an indictment of the model of having the intelligence services rely heavily on outside contractors. It is far more difficult
to control information when you have multiple organizations involved. In addition, neolibearlism posits that workers are free agents
who have no loyalties save to their own bottom lines (or for oddballs, their own sense of ethics). Let us not forget that
Snowden planned his career job moves
, which included a stint at NSA contractor Dell, before executing his information haul at a Booz Allen site that he had targeted.
Admittedly, there are no doubt many individuals who are very dedicated to the agencies for which they work and aspire to spend
most it not all of their woking lives there. But I would assume that they are a minority.
The reason outsiders can attempt to pooh-pooh the Wikileaks release is that the organization redacted sensitive information like
the names of targets and attack machines. The CIA staffers who have access to the full versions of these documents as well as other
major components in the hacking toolkit will be the ones who can judge how large and serious the breach really is. 1 And
their incentives are to minimize it no matter what.
By Gaius Publius , a professional writer living
on the West Coast of the United States and frequent contributor to DownWithTyranny, digby, Truthout, and Naked Capitalism. Follow
him on Twitter @Gaius_Publius ,
Tumblr and
Facebook . GP article archive
here . Originally published at
DownWithTyranny
CIA org chart from the WikiLeaks cache (click to enlarge). "The organizational chart corresponds to the material published
by WikiLeaks so far. Since the organizational structure of the CIA below the level of Directorates is not public, the placement
of the EDG [Engineering Development Group]and its branches is reconstructed from information contained in the documents released
so far. It is intended to be used as a rough outline of the internal organization; please be aware that the reconstructed org
chart is incomplete and that internal reorganizations occur frequently."
* * *
"O brave new world, that has such people in it."
Bottom line first. As you read what's below, consider:
That the CIA is capable of doing all of the things described, and has been for years, is not in doubt.
That unnameable many others have stolen ("exfiltrated") these tools and capabilities is, according to the Wikileaks leaker, also
certain. Consider this an especially dangerous form of proliferation, with cyber warfare tools in the hands of anyone with money
and intent. As WikiLeaks notes, "Once a single cyber 'weapon' is 'loose' it can spread around the world in seconds, to be used
by peer states, cyber mafia and teenage hackers alike."
That the CIA is itself using these tools, and if so, to what degree, are the only unknowns. But can anyone doubt, in this aggressively
militarized environment, that only the degree of use is in question?
Now the story.
WikiLeaks just dropped a huge cache of documents (the first of several promised releases), leaked from a person or people
associated with the CIA in one or more capacities (examples, employee, contractor), which shows an agency out-of-control in its spying
and hacking overreach. Read through to the end. If you're like me, you'll be stunned, not just about what they can do, but that they
would want to do it, in some cases in direct violation of President Obama's orders. This story is bigger than anything you can imagine.
Consider this piece just an introduction, to make sure the story stays on your radar as it unfolds - and to help you identify
those media figures who will try to minimize or bury it. (Unless I missed it, on MSNBC last night, for example, the first mention
of this story was not Chris Hayes, not Maddow, but the Lawrence O'Donnell show, and then only to support his guest's "Russia gave
us Trump" narrative. If anything, this leak suggests a much muddier picture, which I'll explore in a later piece.)
So I'll start with just a taste, a few of its many revelations, to give you, without too much time spent, the scope of the problem.
Then I'll add some longer bullet-point detail, to indicate just how much of American life this revelation touches.
While the cache of documents has been vetted and redacted
, it hasn't been fully explored for implications. I'll follow this story as bits and piece are added from the crowd sourced research
done on the cache of information. If you wish to play along at home, the WikiLeaks
torrent file is here . The torrent's
passphrase is here . WikiLeaks
press release is here (also reproduced below). Their FAQ
is here .
Note that this release covers the years 2013–2016. As WikiLeaks says in its FAQ, "The series is the largest intelligence publication
in history."
Preface - Trump and Our "Brave New World"
But first, this preface, consisting of one idea only. Donald Trump is deep in the world of spooks now, the world of spies,
agents and operatives. He and his inner circle have a nest of friends, but an even larger, more varied nest of enemies. As John Sevigny
writes below, his enemies include not only the intel and counter-intel people, but also "Republican lawmakers, journalists, the Clintons,
the Bush family, Barack Obama, the ACLU, every living Democrat and even Rand Paul." Plus Vladimir Putin, whose relationship
with Trump is just "business," an alliance of convenience, if you will.
I have zero sympathy for Donald Trump. But his world is now our world, and with both of his feet firmly planted in spook world,
ours are too. He's in it to his neck, in fact, and what happens in that world will affect every one of us. He's so impossibly erratic,
so impossibly unfit for his office, that everyone on the list above wants to remove him. Many of them are allied, but if they are,
it's also only for convenience.
How do spooks remove the inconvenient and unfit? I leave that to your imagination;they have their ways. Whatever method they choose,
however, it must be one without fingerprints - or more accurately, without their fingerprints - on it.
Which suggests two more questions. One, who will help them do it, take him down? Clearly, anyone and everyone on the list. Second,
how do you bring down the president, using extra-electoral, extra-constitutional means, without bringing down the Republic? I have
no answer for that.
Here's a brief look at "spook world" (my phrase, not the author's) from "
The Fox Hunt " by John
Sevigny:
Several times in my life – as a journalist and rambling, independent photographer - I've ended up rubbing shoulders with
spooks. Long before that was a racist term, it was a catch-all to describe intelligence community people, counter intel types,
and everyone working for or against them. I don't have any special insight into the current situation with Donald Trump and his
battle with the IC as the intelligence community calls itself, but I can offer a few first hand observations about the labyrinth
of shadows, light, reflections, paranoia, perceptions and misperceptions through which he finds himself wandering, blindly. More
baffling and scary is the thought he may have no idea his ankles are already bound together in a cluster of quadruple gordian
knots, the likes of which very few people ever escape.
Criminal underworlds, of which the Trump administration is just one, are terrifying and confusing places. They become
far more complicated once they've been penetrated by authorities and faux-authorities who often represent competing interests,
but are nearly always in it for themselves.
One big complication - and I've written
about this before - is that you never know who's working for whom . Another problem is that the hierarchy of handlers,
informants, assets and sources is never defined. People who believe, for example, they are CIA assets are really just being used
by people who are perhaps not in the CIA at all but depend on controlling the dupe in question. It is very simple - and I have
seen this happen - for the subject of an international investigation to claim that he is part of that operation. [emphasis added]
Which leads Sevigny to this observation about Trump, which I partially quoted above: "Donald Trump may be crazy, stupid, evil
or all three but he knows the knives are being sharpened and there are now too many blades for him to count. The intel people are
against him, as are the counter intel people. His phone conversations were almost certainly recorded by one organization or another,
legal or quasi legal. His enemies include Republican lawmakers, journalists, the Clintons, the Bush family, Barack Obama, the ACLU,
every living Democrat and even Rand Paul. Putin is not on his side - that's a business matter and not an alliance."
Again, this is not to defend Trump, or even to generate sympathy for him - I personally have none. It's to characterize where
he is, and we are, at in this pivotal moment. Pivotal not for what they're doing, the broad intelligence community. But pivotal for
what we're finding out, the extent and blatancy of the violations.
All of this creates an incredibly complex story, with only a tenth or less being covered by anything like the mainstream press.
For example, the Trump-Putin tale is much more likely to be part of a much broader "international mobster" story, whose participants
include not only Trump and Putin, but Wall Street (think HSBC) and major international banks, sovereign wealth funds, major hedge
funds, venture capital (vulture capital) firms, international drug and other trafficking cartels, corrupt dictators and presidents
around the world and much of the highest reaches of the "Davos crowd."
Much of the highest reaches of the .01 percent, in other words, all served, supported and "curated" by the various, often competing
elements of the first-world military and intelligence communities. What a stew of competing and aligned interests, of marriages and
divorces of convenience, all for the common currencies of money and power, all of them
dealing in
death .
What this new WikiLeaks revelation shows us is what just one arm of that community, the CIA, has been up to. Again, the breadth
of the spying and hacking capability is beyond imagination. This is where we've come to as a nation.
What the CIA Is Up To - A Brief Sample
Now about those CIA spooks and their surprising capabilities. A number of
other outlets have written up the story, but
this
from Zero Hedge has managed to capture the essence as well as the breadth in not too many words (emphasis mine throughout):
WikiLeaks has published what it claims is the largest ever release
of confidential documents on the CIA It includes more than 8,000 documents as part of 'Vault 7', a series of leaks on the agency,
which have allegedly emerged from the CIA's Center
For Cyber Intelligence in Langley , and which can be seen on the org
chart below, which Wikileaks also released : [org
chart reproduced above]
A total of 8,761 documents have been published
as part of 'Year Zero', the first in a series of leaks the whistleblower organization has dubbed 'Vault 7.' WikiLeaks said
that 'Year Zero' revealed details of the CIA's "global covert hacking program," including "weaponized exploits" used against company
products including " Apple's iPhone , Google's Android and Microsoft's Windows and even Samsung TVs
, which are turned into covert microphones."
WikiLeaks tweeted the leak, which it claims came from a network inside the CIA's Center for Cyber Intelligence in Langley,
Virginia.
Among the more notable disclosures which, if confirmed, "
would rock the technology world ", the CIA had managed to bypass encryption on popular phone and messaging services
such as Signal, WhatsApp and Telegram. According to the statement from WikiLeaks, government hackers can penetrate
Android phones and collect "audio and message traffic before encryption is applied."
With respect to hacked devices like you smart phone, smart TV and computer, consider the concept of putting these devices in "fake-off"
mode:
Among the various techniques profiled by WikiLeaks is "Weeping Angel", developed by the CIA's Embedded Devices Branch (EDB),
which infests smart TVs , transforming them into covert microphones. After infestation, Weeping Angel places the target
TV in a 'Fake-Off' mode , so that the owner falsely believes the TV is off when it is on. In 'Fake-Off' mode the TV operates
as a bug, recording conversations in the room and sending them over the Internet to a covert CIA server.
As Kim Dotcom chimed in on Twitter, "CIA turns Smart TVs, iPhones, gaming consoles and many other consumer gadgets into open
microphones" and added "CIA turned every Microsoft Windows PC in the world into spyware. Can activate backdoors on demand,
including via Windows update "[.]
Do you still trust Windows Update?
About "Russia did it"
Adding to the "Russia did it" story, note this:
Another profound revelation is that the CIA can engage in "false flag" cyberattacks which portray Russia as the assailant
. Discussing the CIA's Remote Devices Branch's UMBRAGE group, Wikileaks' source notes that it "collects and maintains a substantial
library of attack techniques 'stolen' from malware produced in other states including the Russian Federation.["]
As Kim Dotcom summarizes this finding, " CIA uses techniques to make cyber attacks look like they originated from enemy
state ."
This doesn't prove that Russia didn't do it ("it" meaning actually hacking the presidency for Trump, as opposed to providing
much influence in that direction), but again, we're in spook world, with all the phrase implies. The CIA can clearly put anyone's
fingerprints on any weapon they wish, and I can't imagine they're alone in that capability.
Hacking Presidential Devices?
If I were a president, I'd be concerned about this, from the WikiLeaks "
Analysis " portion of the Press Release (emphasis added):
"Year Zero" documents show that the CIA breached the Obama administration's commitments [that the intelligence community would
reveal to device manufacturers whatever vulnerabilities it discovered]. Many of the vulnerabilities used in the CIA's cyber arsenal
are pervasive [across devices and device types] and some may already have been found by rival intelligence agencies or cyber criminals.
As an example, specific CIA malware revealed in "Year Zero" [that it] is able to penetrate, infest and control both the
Android phone and iPhone software that runs or has run presidential Twitter accounts . The CIA attacks this software by using
undisclosed security vulnerabilities ("zero days") possessed by the CIA[,] but if the CIA can hack these phones then so can everyone
else who has obtained or discovered the vulnerability. As long as the CIA keeps these vulnerabilities concealed from Apple and
Google (who make the phones) they will not be fixed, and the phones will remain hackable.
Does or did the CIA do this (hack presidential devices), or is it just capable of it? The second paragraph implies the latter.
That's a discussion for another day, but I can say now that both Lawrence Wilkerson, aide to Colin Powell and a non-partisan (though
an admitted Republican) expert in these matters, and
William Binney,
one of the triumvirate of major pre-Snowden leakers, think emphatically yes. (See
Wilkerson's
comments here . See
Binney's comments here .)
Whether or not you believe Wilkerson and Binney, do you doubt that if our intelligence people can do something, they would
balk at the deed itself, in this
world of "collect it all
"? If nothing else, imagine the power this kind of bugging would confer on those who do it.
The Breadth of the CIA Cyber-Hacking Scheme
But there is so much more in this Wikileaks release than suggested by the brief summary above. Here's a bullet-point overview
of what we've learned so far, again via Zero Hedge:
Key Highlights from the Vault 7 release so far:
"Year Zero" introduces the scope and direction of the CIA's global covert hacking program, its malware arsenal and dozens of
"zero day" weaponized exploits against a wide range of U.S. and European company products , include Apple's iPhone,
Google's Android and Microsoft's Windows and even Samsung TVs, which are turned into covert microphones.
Wikileaks claims that the CIA lost control of the majority of its hacking arsenal including malware, viruses, trojans, weaponized
"zero day" exploits, malware remote control systems and associated documentation . This extraordinary collection, which
amounts to more than several hundred million lines of code, gives its possessor the entire hacking capacity of the CIA The
archive appears to have been circulated among former U.S. government hackers and contractors in an unauthorized manner, one
of whom has provided WikiLeaks with portions of the archive.
By the end of 2016, the CIA's hacking division, which formally falls under the agency's Center for Cyber Intelligence (CCI),
had over 5000 registered users and had produced more than a thousand hacking systems, trojans, viruses, and other
"weaponized" malware . Such is the scale of the CIA's undertaking that by 2016, its hackers had utilized more code than
that used to run Facebook.
The CIA had created, in effect, its "own NSA" with even less accountability and without publicly answering the question
as to whether such a massive budgetary spend on duplicating the capacities of a rival agency could be justified.
Once a single cyber 'weapon' is 'loose' it can spread around the world in seconds , to be used by rival states, cyber
mafia and teenage hackers alike.
Also this scary possibility:
As of October 2014 the CIA was also looking at infecting the vehicle control systems used by modern cars and trucks.
The purpose of such control is not specified, but it would permit the CIA to engage in nearly undetectable assassinations
.
Journalist Michael Hastings, who in 2010
destroyed the career of General
Stanley McChrystal and was hated by the military for it, was killed in 2013 in an inexplicably out-of-control car. This isn't
to suggest the CIA, specifically, caused his death. It's to ask that, if these capabilities existed in 2013, what would prevent their
use by elements of the military, which is, after all a death-delivery organization?
And lest you consider this last speculation just crazy talk, Richard Clarke (that
Richard Clarke ) agrees: "Richard Clarke, the counterterrorism
chief under both Bill Clinton and George W. Bush,
told the Huffington
Post that Hastings's crash looked consistent with a car cyber attack.'" Full and fascinating
article here .
WiliLeaks Press Release
Here's what WikiLeaks itself says about this first document cache (again, emphasis mine):
Press Release
Today, Tuesday 7 March 2017, WikiLeaks begins its new series of leaks on the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency. Code-named "Vault
7" by WikiLeaks, it is the largest ever publication of confidential documents on the agency.
Recently, the CIA lost control of the majority of its hacking arsenal including malware, viruses, trojans, weaponized "zero
day" exploits, malware remote control systems and associated documentation. This extraordinary collection, which amounts to more
than several hundred million lines of code, gives its possessor the entire hacking capacity of the CIA The archive appears to
have been circulated among former U.S. government hackers and contractors in an unauthorized manner, one of whom has provided
WikiLeaks with portions of the archive.
"Year Zero" introduces the scope and direction of the CIA's global covert hacking program, its malware arsenal and dozens of
"zero day" weaponized exploits against a wide range of U.S. and European company products, include Apple's iPhone, Google's Android
and Microsoft's Windows and even Samsung TVs, which are turned into covert microphones.
Since 2001 the CIA has gained political and budgetary preeminence over the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA). The CIA
found itself building not just its now infamous drone fleet, but a very different type of covert, globe-spanning force - its own
substantial fleet of hackers. The agency's hacking division freed it from having to disclose its often controversial operations
to the NSA (its primary bureaucratic rival) in order to draw on the NSA's hacking capacities.
By the end of 2016, the CIA's hacking division, which formally falls under the agency's
Center for Cyber Intelligence (CCI), had over
5000 registered users and had produced more than a thousand hacking systems, trojans, viruses, and other "weaponized" malware.
Such is the scale of the CIA's undertaking that by 2016, its hackers had utilized more code than that used to run Facebook. The
CIA had created, in effect, its "own NSA" with even less accountability and without publicly answering the question as to whether
such a massive budgetary spend on duplicating the capacities of a rival agency could be justified.
In a statement to WikiLeaks the source details policy questions that they say urgently need to be debated in public
, including whether the CIA's hacking capabilities exceed its mandated powers and the problem of public oversight of the agency.
The source wishes to initiate a public debate about the security, creation, use, proliferation and democratic control of cyberweapons.
Once a single cyber 'weapon' is 'loose' it can spread around the world in seconds, to be used by rival states, cyber mafia
and teenage hackers alike.
Julian Assange, WikiLeaks editor stated that "There is an extreme proliferation risk in the development of cyber 'weapons'.
Comparisons can be drawn between the uncontrolled proliferation of such 'weapons', which results from the inability to contain
them combined with their high market value, and the global arms trade. But the significance of "Year Zero" goes well beyond the
choice between cyberwar and cyberpeace. The disclosure is also exceptional from a political, legal and forensic perspective."
Wikileaks has carefully reviewed the "Year Zero" disclosure and published substantive CIA documentation while avoiding the
distribution of 'armed' cyberweapons until a consensus emerges on the technical and political nature of the CIA's program and
how such 'weapons' should analyzed, disarmed and published.
Wikileaks has also decided to redact and anonymise some
identifying information in "Year Zero" for in depth analysis. These redactions include ten of thousands of CIA targets and attack
machines throughout Latin America, Europe and the United States. While we are aware of the imperfect results of any approach chosen,
we remain committed to our publishing model and note that the quantity of published pages in "Vault 7" part one ("Year Zero")
already eclipses the total number of pages published over the first three years of the Edward Snowden NSA leaks.
Be sure to click through for the Analysis, Examples and FAQ sections
as well.
"O brave new world," someone once wrote . Indeed.
Brave new world, that only the brave can live in.
____
1 Mind you, the leakers may have had a comprehensive enough view to be making an accurate call. But the real point
is there are no actors who will be allowed to make an independent assessment.
Senator John McCain passed documents to the FBI director, James Comey, last month alleging secret contacts between the Trump
campaign and Moscow and that Russian intelligence had personally compromising material on the president-elect himself.
The material, which has been seen by the Guardian, is a series of reports on Trump's relationship with Moscow. They were
drawn up by a former western counter-intelligence official, now working as a private consultant. BuzzFeed on Tuesday published
the documents, which it said were "unverified and potentially unverifiable".
The Guardian has not been able to confirm the veracity of the documents' contents,
Emphases mine. I had been sitting on this link trying to make sense of this part. Clearly, the Trump Whitehouse has some major
leaks, which the MSM is exploiting. But the start of this article suggests that para-intelligence (is that a word? Eh, it is now)
was the source of the allegedly damaging info.
This is no longer about the deep-state, but a rouge state, possibly guns for higher, each having fealty to specific political
interests. The CIA arsenal wasn't leaked. It was delivered.
hmm.. as far as I can see, noone seems to care here in Germany anymore about being spied on by our US friends, apart from a
few alternative sources which are being accused of spreading fake news, of being anti-american, russian trolls, the matter is
widely ignored
I have read a few articles about the Vault 7 leak that typically raise a few alarms I would like to comment on.
1) The fact that the
CIA had managed to bypass encryption on popular phone and messaging services
does not mean that it has broken encryption, just that it has a way to install a program at a lower level, close to the operating
system, that will read messages before they are encrypted and sent by the messaging app, or just after they
have been decrypted by it.
As a side note: banks have now largely introduced two-factor authentication when accessing online services. One enters username
(or account number) and password; the bank site returns a code; the user must then enter this code into a smartphone app or a
tiny specialized device, which computes and returns a value out of it; the user enters this last value into the entry form as
a throw-away additional password, and gains access to the bank website.
I have always refused to use such methods on a smartphone and insist on getting the specialized "single-use password computer",
precisely because the smartphone platform can be subverted.
2) The fact that
"Weeping Angel", developed by the CIA's Embedded Devices Branch (EDB), [ ] infests smart TVs, transforming them into covert
microphones.
is possible largely because smart TVs are designed by their manufacturers to serve as spying devices. "Weeping Angel" is not
some kind of virus that turns normal devices into zombies, but a tool to take control of existing zombie devices.
The fact that smart TVs from
Vizio ,
Samsung or
LG constitute an outrageous intrusion into the privacy of their owners has been a known topic for years already.
3) The
CIA [ ] also looking at infecting the vehicle control systems used by modern cars and trucks
is not a "scary possibility" either; various demonstrations of such feats on
Tesla ,
Nissan , or
Chrysler vehicles have been demonstrated in the past few years.
And the consequences have already been suggested (killing people by disabling their car controls on the highway for instance).
My take on this is that we should seriously look askance not just at the shenanigans of the CIA, but at the entire "innovative
technology" that is imposed upon (computerized cars) or joyfully adopted by (smartphones) consumers. Of course, most NC readers
are aware of the pitfalls already, but alas not the majority of the population.
4) Finally this:
He's so impossibly erratic, so impossibly unfit for his office,
Trump is arguably unfit for office, does not have a clue about many things (such as foreign relations), but by taxing him of
being "erratic" Gaius Publius shows that he still does not "get" the Donald.
Trump has a completely different modus operandi than career politicians, formed by his experience as a real-estate mogul and
media star. His world has been one where one makes outrageous offers to try anchoring the negotiation before reducing one's claims
- even significantly, or abruptly exiting just before an agreement to strike a deal with another party that has been lured to
concessions through negotiations with the first one. NC once included a video of Trump doing an interactive A/B testing of his
slogans during a campaign meeting; while changing one's slogans on the spot might seem "erratic", it is actually a very systematic
market probing technique.
So stop asserting that Trump is "unpredictable" or "irrational"; this is underestimating him (a dangerous fault), as he is
very consistent, though in an uncommon fashion amongst political pundits.
While I agree that it's worth pointing out that the CIA has not broken any of the major encryption tools, even Snowden regards
being able to circumvent them as worse, since people using encryption are presumably those who feel particularly at risk and will
get a false sense of security and say things or keep data on their devices that they never never would if they thought they were
insecure.
Re Gaius on Trump, I agree the lady doth protest too much. But I said repeatedly that Trump would not want to be President
if he understood the job. It is not like being the CEO of a private company. Trump has vastly more control over his smaller terrain
in his past life than he does as President.
And Trump is no longer campaigning. No more a/b testing.
The fact is that he still does not have effective control of the Executive branch. He has lots of open positions in the political
appointee slots (largely due to not having even submitted candidates!) plus has rebellion in some organizations (like folks in
the EPA storing data outside the agency to prevent its destruction).
You cannot pretend that Trump's former MO is working at all well for him. And he isn't showing an ability to adapt or learn
(not surprising at his age). For instance, he should have figured out by now that DC is run by lawyers, yet his team has hardly
any on it. This is continuing to be a source of major self inflicted wounds.
His erraticness may be keeping his opponents off base, but it is also keeping him from advancing any of his goals.
Yes, not breaking encryption is devious, as it gives a false sense of security - this is precisely why I refuse to use those
supposedly secure e-banking login apps on smartphones whose system software can be subverted, and prefer those non-connected,
non-reprogrammable, special-purpose password generating devices.
As for Trump being incompetent for his job, and his skills in wheeling-dealing do not carrying over usefully to conducting
high political offices, that much is clear. But he is not "erratic", rather he is out of place and out of his depth.
I am writing this in the shower with a paper bag over my head and my iPhone in the microwave.
I have for years had a password-protected document on computer with all my important numbers and passwords. I have today deleted
that document and reverted to a paper record.
I think he means a machine dedicated to high-security operations like anything financial or bill-pay. Something that is not
exposed to email or web-browsing operations that happen on a casual-use computer that can easily compromise. That's not a bad
way to go; it's cheaper in terms of time than the labor-intensive approaches I use, but those are a hobby more than anything else.
It depends on how much you have at stake if they get your bank account or brokerage service password.
I take a few basic security measures, which would not impress the IT crowd I hang out with elsewhere, but at least would not
make me a laughingstock. I run Linux and use only open-source software; run ad-blockers and script blockers; confine risky operations,
which means any non-corporate or non-mainstream website to a virtual machine that is reset after each use; use separate browsers
with different cookie storage policies and different accounts for different purposes. I keep a well-maintained pfSense router
with a proxy server and an intrusion detection system, allowing me to segregate my secure network, home servers, guest networks,
audiovisual streaming and entertainment devices, and IoT devices each on their own VLANs with appropriate ACLs between them. No
device on the more-secured network is allowed out to any port without permission, and similar rules are there for the IoT devices,
and the VoIP tools.
The hardware to do all of that costs at least $700, but the real expense is in the time to learn the systems properly. Of course
if you use Linux, you could save that on software in a year if you are too cheap to send a contribution to the developers.
It's not perfect, because I still have computers turned on :) , but I feel a bit safer this way.
That said, absolutely nothing that I have here would last 30 milliseconds against anything the "hats" could use, if they wanted
in. It would be over before it began. If I had anything to hide, really, I would have something to fear; so guess I'm OK.
They're key fobs handed to you by your IT dept. The code displayed changes every couple of minutes. The plus is there's nothing
sent over the air. The minus is the fobs are subject to theft, and are only good for connecting to 'home'. And since they have
a cost, and need to be physically handed to you, they're not good fit for most two factor login applications (ie logging into
your bank account).
I watched (fast forwarded through, really) Morning Joe yesterday to see what they would have to say about Wikileaks. The show
mostly revolved around the health care bill and Trump's lying and tweeting about Obama wiretapping him. They gave Tim Kaine plenty
of time to discuss his recent trip to London talking to "some of our allies there" saying that they are concerned that "all the
intelligence agencies" say the Rooskies "cyber hacked" our election, and since it looks like we aren't doing anything when we
are attacked, they KNOW we won't do anything when they are attacked. (more red baiting)
The only two mentions I saw was about Wikileaks were, first, a question asked of David Cohen, ex Deputy Director of the CIA,
who refused to confirm the Wikileaks were authentic, saying whatever tools and techniques the CIA had were used against foreign
persons overseas, so there is no reason to worry that your TV is looking at you. And second, Senator Tom Cotton, who didn't want
to comment on the contents of Wikileaks, only saying that the CIA is a foreign intelligence service, collecting evidence on foreign
targets to keep our country safe, and it does not do intelligence work domestically.
So that appears to be their story, the CIA doesn't spy on us, and they are sticking with it, probably hoping the whole Wikileaks
thing just cycles out of the news.
The unwillingness of the main stream media (so far) to really cover the Wikileaks reveal is perhaps the bigger story. This
should be ongoing front page stuff .. but it is not.
As for using ZeroHedge as a source for anything, can we give that a rest. That site has become a cesspool of insanity. It used
to have some good stuff. Now it is just unreadable. SAD
And yes I know the hypocrisy of slamming ZH and the MSM at the same time we live in interesting times.
Your remarks on ZH are an ad hominem attack and therefore a violation of site policies. The onus is on you to say what ZH got
wrong and not engage in an ungrounded smear. The mainstream media often cites ZH.
NC more than just about any other finance site is loath to link to ZH precisely because it is off base or hyperventilating
a not acceptably high percent of the time, and is generally wrong about the Fed (as in governance and how money works). We don't
want to encourage readers to see it as reliable. However, it is good on trader gossip and mining Bloomberg data.
And I read through its summary of the Wikileaks material as used by Gaius and there was nothing wrong with it. It was careful
about attributing certain claims to Wikileaks as opposed to depicting them as true.
My rules for reading ZH:
1- Skip every article with no picture
2- Skip every article where the picture is a graph
3- Skip every article where the picture is of a single person's face
4- Skip every afticle where the picture is a cartoon
5- Skip every article about gold, BitCoin, or high-frequency trading
6- Skip all the "Guest Posts"
7- ALWAYS click through to the source
8- NEVER read the comments
It is in my opinion a very high noise-to-signal source, but there is some there there.
Discerning a 'news from noise' is NEVER that easy b/c it is an art, developed by years of shifting through ever increasing
'DATA information' load. This again has to be filtered and tested against one's own 'critical' thinking or reasoning! You have
to give ZH, deserved credit, when they are right!
There is no longer a Black or white there, even at ZH! But it is one of the few, willing to challenge the main stream narrative
'kool aid'
In addition to the "para-intelligence" community (hat tip Code named D) there are multiple enterprises with unique areas of
expertise that interface closely with the CIA The long-exposed operations, which include entrapment and blackmailing of key actors
to guarantee complicity, "loyalty" and/or sealed lips, infect businesses, NGOs, law enforcement agencies, judges, politicians,
and other government agencies. Equal opportunity employment for those with strong stomachs and a weak moral compass.
Yes I can't remember where I read it but it was a tale passed around supposedly by an FBI guy that had, along with his colleagues,
the job of vetting candidates for political office. They'd do their background research and pass on either a thick or thin folder
full of all the compromising dirt on each potential appointee. Over time he said he was perturbed to notice a persistent pattern
where the thickest folders were always the ones who got in.
I learned this when I was in my 20s. The Catholic Church was funding my early critique of American foreign aid as being
imperialist. I asked whether they thought I should go into politics. They said, "No, you'd never make it". And I said, "Why?"
and they said, "Well, nobody has a police record or any other dirt on you." I asked what they meant. They said, "Unless they
have something over you to blackmail you with, you're not going to be able to get campaign funding. Because they believe that
you might do something surprising," in other words, something they haven't asked you to do. So basically throughout politics,
on both sides of the spectrum, voters have candidates who are funded by backers who have enough over them that they can always
blackmail.
I find the notion that my consumer electronics may be CIA microphones somewhat irritating, but my imagination quickly runs
off to far worse scenarios. (although the popular phase, "You're tax dollars at work." keeps running thru my head like a earworm.
And whenever I hear "conservatives" speak of their desire for "small government", usually when topics of health care, Medicare
and social security come up, I can only manage a snort of incredulousness anymore)
One being malware penetrating our nuke power plants and shutting down the cooling system. Then the reactor slowly overheats
over the next 3 days, goes critical, and blows the surrounding area to high heaven. We have plants all around the coast of the
country and also around the Great Lakes Region – our largest fresh water store in a drought threatened future.
Then the same happening in our offensive nuke missile systems.
Some other inconvenient truths – the stuxnet virus has been redesigned. Kaspersky – premier anti malware software maker – had
a variant on their corporate network for months before finally discovering it. What chance have we?
In China, hacking is becoming a consumer service industry. There are companies building high power data centers with a host
of hacking tools. Anyone, including high school script kiddies, can rent time to use the sophisticated hacking tools, web search
bots, and whatever, all hosted on powerful servers with high speed internet bandwidth.
Being a bit "spooked" by all this, I began to worry about my humble home computer and decided to research whatever products
I could get to at least ward off annoying vandalism. Among other things, I did sign up for a VPN service. I'm looking at the control
app for my VPN connection here and I see that with a simple checkbox mouse click I can make my IP address appear to be located
in my choice of 40 some countries around the world. Romania is on the list!
Actually, I very much doubt that does work. The mic "pickup" would feed its analog output to a DAC (digital to analog converter)
which would convert the signal to digital. This then goes to something similar to a virtual com port in the operating system.
Here is where a malware program would pick it up and either create a audio file to be sent to an internet address, or stream it
directly there.
The article is just plugging in a microphone at the output jack. The malware got the data long before it goes thru another
DAC and analog amp to get to the speakers or output jack.
It depends on how it is hooked up internally. Old fashioned amateur radio headphones would disable the speakers when plugged
in because the physical insertion of the plug pushed open the connection to the speakers. The jack that you plug the ear buds
into might do the same, disconnecting the path between the built-in microphone and the ADC (actually it is an ADC not a DAC).
The only way to know is to take it apart and see how it is connected.
The CIA is not allowed to operate in the US is also the panacea for the public. And some are buying it. Along with everyone
knows they can do this is fueling the NOTHING to see here keep walking weak practically non existent coverage.
At what point do people quit negotiating in terrorism and errorism? For this is what the police, the very State itself has
long been. Far beyond being illegitimate, illegal, immoral, this is a clear and ever present danger to not just it's own people,
but the rule of law itself. Blanket statements like we all know this just makes the dangerously absurd normal I'll never understand
that part of human nature. But hey, the TSA literally just keeps probing further each and every year. Bend over!
Trump may not be the one for the task but we the people desperately need people 'unfit', for it is the many fit who brought
us to this point. His unfit nature is as refreshing on these matters in its chaotic honest disbelief as Snowden and Wiki revelations.
Refreshing because it's all we've got. One doesn't have to like Trump to still see missed opportunity so many should be telling
him he could be the greatest pres ever if (for two examples) he fought tirelessly for single payer and to bring down this police
state rather than the EPA or public education.
This cannot stand on so many levels. Not only is the fourth amendment rendered utterly void, but even if it weren't it falls
far short of the protections we deserve.
No enemy could possibly be as bad as who we are and what we allow/do among ourselves. If an election can be hacked (not saying
it was by Russia).. as these and other files prove anything can and will be hacked then our system is to blame, not someone else.
What amazes me is that the spooks haven't manufactured proof needed to take Trump out of office Bonfire of The Vanities style.
I'd like to think the people have moved beyond the point they would believe manufactured evidence but the Russia thing proves
otherwise.
These people foment world war while probing our every move and we do nothing!
If we wait for someone fit nothing will ever change because we wait for the police/media/oligarch state to tell us who is fit.
But being fit by the standards of our ruling class, the "real owners" as Carlin called them is, in my book, an automatic proof
that they are up to no good. Trump is not my cup of tea as a president but no one we have had in a while wasn't clearly compromised
by those who fund them. Did you ever wonder why we have never had a president or even a powerful member of congress that was not
totally in the tank for that little country on the Eastern Mediterranean? Or the Gulf Monarchies? Do you think that is by accident?
Do you think money isn't involved? Talk about hacked elections! We should be so lucky as to have ONLY Russians attempting to affect
our elections. Money is what hacks US elections and never forget that. To me it is laughable to discuss hacking the elections
without discussing the real way our "democracy" is subverted–money not document leaks or voting machine hacks. It's money.
Why isn't Saudi Arabia on Trump's list? Iran that has never been involved in a terrorist act on US soil is but not Saudi Arabia?
How many 911 hijackers came from Iran? If anything saves Trump from destruction by the real owners of our democracy it is his
devotion to the aforementioned countries.
The point again is not to remove him from office but to control him. With Trump's past you better believe the surveillance
state has more than enough to remove him from office. Notice the change in his rhetoric since inauguration? More and more he is
towing the establishment Republican line. Of course this depends on whether you believe Trump is a break with the past or just
the best liar out there. A very unpopular establishment would be clever in promoting their agent by pretending to be against him.
Anyone who still believes that the US is a democratic republic and not a mafia state needs to stick their heads deeper into
the sands. When will the low information voters and police forces on whom a real revolution depends realize this is anyone's guess.
The day is getting closer especially for the younger generation. The meme among the masses is that government has always been
corrupt and that this is nothing new. I do believe the level of immorality among the credentialed classes is indeed very new and
has become the new normal. Generations of every man for himself capitalist philosophy undermining any sense of morality or community
has finally done its work.
Go take a jaunt over to huffpo, at the time of this post there was not a single mention of vault 7 on the front page. Just
a long series of anti trump administration articles.
Glad to know for sure who the true warmongers were all along.
No.. The Church commission was a sweep it under the rug operation. It got us FISA courts. More carte blanche secrecy, not less.
The commission nor the rest of the system didn't even hold violators of the time accountable.
We have files like Vault 7. Commissions rarely get in secret what we have right here before our eyes.
River: Interesting historic parallel? I believe that the Ottomans got rid of the Janissaries that way, after the Janissaries
had become a state within a state, by using cannons on their HQ
From Wiki entry, Janissaries:
The corps was abolished by Sultan Mahmud II in 1826 in the Auspicious Incident in which 6,000 or more were executed.[8]
Took less than a minute to download the 513.33MB file. The passphrase is what JFK said he'd like to do to CIA: SplinterItIntoAThousandPiecesAndScatterItIntoTheWinds.
"The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer." Henry Kissinger, 1975.
The campaign to frame up and discredit Trump and his associates is characteristic of how a police state routinely operates.
A national security apparatus that vacuums up all our communications and stores them for later retrieval has been utilized
by political operatives to go after their enemies – and not even the President of the United States is immune. This is something
that one might expect to occur in, say, Turkey, or China: that it is happening here, to the cheers of much of the media and
the Democratic party, is beyond frightening.
The irony is that the existence of this dangerous apparatus – which civil libertarians have warned could and probably would
be used for political purposes – has been hailed by Trump and his team as a necessary and proper function of government. Indeed,
Trump has called for the execution of the person who revealed the existence of this sinister engine of oppression – Edward
Snowden. Absent Snowden's revelations, we would still be in the dark as to the existence and vast scope of the NSA's surveillance.
And now the monster Trump embraced in the name of "national security" has come back to bite him.
We hear all the time that what's needed is an open and impartial "investigation" of Trump's alleged "ties" to Russia. This
is dangerous nonsense: does every wild-eyed accusation from embittered losers deserve a congressional committee armed with
subpoena power bent on conducting an inquisition? Certainly not.
What must be investigated is the incubation of a clandestine political police force inside the national security apparatus,
one that has been unleashed against Trump – and could be deployed against anyone.
This isn't about Donald Trump. It's about preserving what's left of our old republic.
Yeah I downloaded it the day it came out and spent an hour or so looking at it last night. First impressions – "heyyy this
is like a Hackers Guide – the sort I used in the 80s, or DerEngel's Cable Modem Hacking" of the 00s.
2nd impressions – wow it really gives foundational stuff – like "Enable Debug on PolarSSL".
3rd impressions – "I could spend hours going thru this happily ".
4th impressions – I went looking for the "juicy bits" of interest to me – SOHO routers, small routers – sadly its just
a table documenting routers sold around the world, and whether these guys have put the firmware in their Stash Repository. Original
firmware, not hacked one. But the repository isn't in the vault dump, AFAIK.
Its quite fascinating. But trying to find the "juicy stuff" is going to be tedious. One can spend hours and hours going thru
it. To speed up going thru it, I'm going to need some tech sites to say "where to go".
It seems clear that Wikileaks has not and will not release actual ongoing method "how-to" info or hacking scripts. They are
releasing the "whats", not the tech level detailed "hows". This seems like a sane approach to releasing the data. The release
appears to be for political discussion, not for spreading the hacking tools. So I wouldn't look for "juicy bits" about detailed
methodology. Just my guess.
That said, love what you're doing digging into this stuff. I look forward to a more detailed report in future. Thanks.
Yves, I think that you much underestimate the extremity of these exposed violations of the security of freedom of expression,
and of the security of private records. The WikiLeaks docs show that CIA has developed means to use all personal digital device
microphones and cameras even when they are "off," and to send all of your files and personal data to themselves, and to send your
private messages to themselves before they are encrypted. They have installed these spyware in the released version of Windows
10, and can easily install them on all common systems and devices.
This goes far beyond the kind of snooping that required specialized devices installed near the target, which could be controlled
by warrant process. There is no control over this extreme spying. It is totalitarianism now.
This is probably the most extreme violation of the rights of citizens by a government in all of history. It is far worse than
the "turnkey tyranny" against which Snowden warned, on the interception of private messages. It is tyranny itself, the death of
democracy.
Your first sentence is a bit difficult to understand. If you read Yves' remarks introducing the post, she says that the revelations
are "a big deal" "if the Wikileaks claim is even halfway true," while coming down hard on the MSM and others for "pooh-pooh[ing]"
the story. Did you want her to add more exclamation points?
So we have a zillion ways to spy and hack and deceive and assassinate, but no control. I think this is what the military
refers to as "being overtaken by events."
It's easy to gather information; not so easy to analyze it, and somehow impossible to act on it in good faith. With all this
ability to know stuff and surveil people the big question is, Why does everything seem so beyond our ability to control it?
We should know well in advance that banks will fail catastrophically; that we will indeed have sea level rise; that resources
will run out; that water will be undrinkable; that people will be impossible to manipulate when panic hits – but what do we do?
We play dirty tricks, spy on each other like voyeurs, and ignore the inevitable. Like the Stasi, we clearly know what happened,
what is happening and what is going to happen. But we have no control.
My godfather was in the CIA in the late sixties and early seventies, and he said that outside of the President's pet projects
there was no way to sift through and bring important information to decision makers before it made the Washington Post (he is
aware of the irony) and hit the President's breakfast table.
AS, I would interpret it as saying that there was so much coming in it was like trying to classify snowflakes in a snowstorm.
They could pick a few subject areas to look at closely but the rest just went into the files.
Leaking like a sieve is also likely, but perhaps not the main point.
The archive appears to have been circulated among government hackers and contractors in a authorized manner
There, that looks the more likely framing considering CIA & DNI on behalf of the whole US IC seemingly fostered wide dissimilation
of these tools, information. Demonstration of media control an added plus.
Todd Pierce , on the other hand, nails it. (From his Facebook page.)
The East German Stasi could only dream of the sort of surveillance the NSA and CIA do now, with just as nefarious of purposes.
Perhaps the scare quotes around "international mobster" aren't really necessary.
In all this talk about the various factions aligned with and against Trump, that's one I haven't heard brought up by anybody.
With all the cement poured in Trump's name over the years, it would be naive to think his businesses had not brushed up against
organized crime at some point. Question is, whose side are they on?
Like all the other players, the "side" they are on is them-effing-selves. And isn't that the whole problem with our misbegotten
species, writ large?
Then there's this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1Hzds9aGdA
Maybe these people will be around and still eating after us urban insects and rodents are long gone? Or will our rulers decide
no one should survive if they don't?
To what extent do these hacks represent the CIA operating within the US? To what extent is that illegal? With the democrats
worshipping the IC, will anyone in an official position dare to speak out?
I've long thought that the reason Snowden was pursued so passionately was that he exposed the biggest, most embarrassing secret:
that the National "Security" Agency's INTERNAL security was crap.
And here it is: "Wikileaks claims that the CIA lost control of the majority of its hacking arsenal "
The CIA's internal security is crap, too. Really a lot of people should be fired over that, as well as over Snowden's release.
We didn't hear of it happening in the NSA, though I'm not sure we would have. Given Gaius's description of Trump's situation,
it seems unlikely it will happen this time, either. One of my hopes for a Trump administration, as long as we're stuck with it,
was a thorough cleanout of the upper echelons in the IC. It's obviously long overdue, and Obama wasn't up to it. But I used the
past tense because I don't think it's going to happen. Trump seems more interested in sucking up to them, presumably so they won't
kill him or his family. That being one of their options.
Ah, that's the beauty of contracting it out. No one gets fired. Did anyone get fired because of Snowden? It was officially
a contractor problem and since there are only a small number of contractors capable of doing the work, well you know. We can't
get new ones.
What I find by far the most distressing is this: "The CIA had created, in effect, its "own NSA" with even less accountability
." [My emphasis]. It seems to characterize an organization that operates outside of any control and oversight – and one that is
intentionally structuring itself that way. That worries me.
It is becoming increasingly clear that the Republic is lost because we didn't stand guard for it. Blaming others don't cut
it either – we let it happen. And like the Germans about the Nazi atrocities, we will say that we didn't know about it.
Hey, I didn't let it happen. Stuff that spooks and sh!tes do behind the Lycra ™ curtain happens because it is, what is the
big word again, "ineluctable." Is my neighbor to blame for having his house half eaten by both kinds of termites, where the construction
is such that the infestation and damage are invisible until the vast damage is done?
And just how were we supposed to stand guard against a secret and unaccountable organization that protected itself with a shield
of lies? And every time some poor misfit complained about it they were told that they just didn't know the facts. If they only
knew what our IC knows they would not complain.
It's a dangerous world out there and only our brave IC can protect us from it. Come on. Stop blaming the victim and place
the blame where it belongs–our IC and MIC. I say stop feeding the beast with your loyalty to a government that has ceased to be
yours.
Studiously avoid any military celebrations. Worship of the military is part of the problem. Remember, the people you thank
for "their service" are as much victims as you are. Sadly they don't realize that their service is to a rotten empire that is
not worthy of their sacrifice but every time we perform the obligatory ritual of thankfulness we participate in the lie that the
service is to a democratic country instead of an undemocratic empire.
It's clearly a case of Wilfred Owen's classic "Dulce et Decorum Est". Read the poem, google it and read it. It is instructive:
" you would not tell with such high zest To children ardent for some desperate glory, The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est Pro patria
mori." Make no mistake. It is a lie and it can only be undone if we all cease to tell it.
"These CIA revelations in conjunction with those of the NSA paints a pretty dark future for privacy and freedom. Edward
Snowden made us aware of the NSA's program XKEYSCORE and PRISM which are utilized to monitor and bulk collect information from
virtually any electronic device on the planet and put it into a searchable database. Now Wikileaks has published what appears
to be additional Big Brother techniques used by a competing agency. Say what you want about the method of discovery, but Pandora's
box has been opened."
All signs of sophisticated false flag operation, which probably involved putting malware into DNC servers and then
detecting and analyzing them
Notable quotes:
"... 6 May 2016 when CrowdStrike first detected what it assessed to be a Russian presence inside the DNC server. Follow me here. One week after realizing there had been a penetration, the DNC learns, courtesy of the computer security firm it hired, that the Russians are doing it. Okay. Does CrowdStrike shut down the penetration. Nope. The hacking apparently continues unabated. ..."
"... The Smoking Gun ..."
"... I introduce Seth Rich at this point because he represents an alternative hypothesis. Rich, who reportedly was a Bernie Sanders supporter, was in a position at the DNC that gave him access to the emails in question and the opportunity to download the emails and take them from the DNC headquarters. Worth noting that Julian Assange offered $20,000 for information leading to the arrest of Rich's killer or killers. 8. 22 July 2016. Wikileaks published the DNC emails starting on 22 July 2016. Bill Binney, a former senior official at NSA, insists that if such a hack and electronic transfer over the internet had occurred then the NSA has in it possession the intelligence data to prove that such activity had occurred. ..."
"... Notwithstanding the claim by CrowdStrike not a single piece of evidence has been provided to the public to support the conclusion that the emails were hacked and physically transferred to a server under the control of a Russian intelligence operative. ..."
"... Please do not try to post a comment stating that the "Intelligence Community" concluded as well that Russia was responsible. That claim is totally without one shred of actual forensic evidence. Also, Julian Assange insists that the emails did not come from a Russian source. ..."
"... Wikileaks, the protector of the accountability of the top, has announced a reward for finding the murderers of Seth Rich. In comparison, the DNC has not offered any reward to help the investigation of the murder of the DNC staffer, but the DNC found a well-connected lawyer to protect Imran Awan who is guilty (along with Debbie Wasserman-Schultz) in the greatest breach of national cybersecurity: http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/29/wasserman-schultz-seemingly-planned-to-pay-suspect-even-while-he-lived-in-pakistan/ ..."
"... I'm afraid you're behind the times. Wheeler is no longer relevant now that Sy Hersh has revealed an FBI report that explicitly says Rich was in contact with Wikileaks offering to sell them DNC documents. ..."
"... It's unfortunate for the Rich family, but now that the connection is pretty much confirmed, they're going to have to allow the truth to come out ..."
"... Mr. Dmitri Alperovitch, of Jewish descent (and an emigre from Russia), has been an "expert" at the Atlantic Council, the same organization that cherishes and provides for Mr. Eliot Higgins. These two gentlemen - and the directorate of Atlantic Council - are exhibit one of opportunism and intellectual dishonesty (though it is hard to think about Mr. Higgins in terms of "intellect"). ..."
"... Alperovitch is not just an incompetent "expert" in cybersecurity - he is a willing liar and war-mongering, for money. ..."
"... One could of course start earlier. What is the exact timeline of the larger cyberwar post 9/11, or at least the bits and pieces that surfaced for the nitwits among us, like: Stuxnet? ..."
"... Scott Ritter's article referenced in PT's post is terrific, covering a ton of issues related to CrowdStrike and the DNC hack. You need to read it, not just PT's timeline. In case you missed the link in PT's post: ..."
"... His article echoes and reinforces what Carr and others have said about the difficulty of attribution of infosec breaches. Namely that the basic problem of both intelligence and infosec operations is that there is too much obfuscation, manipulation, and misdirection involved to be sure of who or what is going on. ..."
"... The Seth Rich connection is pretty much a done deal, now that Sy Hersh has been caught on tape stating that he knows of an FBI report based on a forensic analysis of Rich's laptop that shows Rich was in direct contact with Wikileaks with an attempt to sell them DNC documents and that Wikileaks had access to Rich's DropBox account. Despite Hersh's subsequent denials - which everyone knows are his usual impatient deflections prior to putting out a sourced and organized article - it's pretty clear that Rich was at least one of the sources of the Wikileaks email dump and that there is zero connection to Russia. ..."
"... None of this proves that Russian intelligence - or Russians of some stripe - or for that matter hackers from literally anywhere - couldn't or didn't ALSO do a hack of the DNC. But it does prove that the iron-clad attribution of the source of Wikileaks email release to Russia is at best flawed, and at worst a deliberate cover up of a leak. ..."
Notwithstanding the conventional wisdom that Russia hacked into the DNC computers, downloaded emails and a passed the stolen missives
to Julian Assange's crew at Wikileaks, a careful examination of the timeline of events from 2016 shows that this story is simply
not plausible.
Let me take you through the known facts:
1. 29 April 2016 , when the DNC became aware its servers had been penetrated (https://medium.com/homefront-rising/dumbstruck-how-crowdstrike-conned-america-on-the-hack-of-the-dnc-ecfa522ff44f).
Note. They apparently did not know who was doing it. 2, 6 May 2016 when CrowdStrike first detected what it assessed to be a Russian
presence inside the DNC server. Follow me here. One week after realizing there had been a penetration, the DNC learns, courtesy of
the computer security firm it hired, that the Russians are doing it. Okay. Does CrowdStrike shut down the penetration. Nope. The
hacking apparently continues unabated. 3. 25 May 2016. The messages published on Wikileaks from the DNC show that 26 May 2016
was the last date that emails were sent and received at the DNC. There are no emails in the public domain after that date. In other
words, if the DNC emails were taken via a hacking operation, we can conclude from the fact that the last messages posted to Wikileaks
show a date time group of 25 May 2016. Wikileaks has not reported nor posted any emails from the DNC after the 25th of May. I think
it is reasonable to assume that was the day the dirty deed was done. 4. 12 June 2016, CrowdStrike purged the DNC server of all malware.
Are you kidding me? 45 days after the DNC discovers that its serve has been penetrated the decision to purge the DNC server is finally
made. What in the hell were they waiting for? But this also tells us that 18 days after the last email "taken" from the DNC, no additional
emails were taken by this nasty malware. Here is what does not make sense to me. If the DNC emails were truly hacked and the malware
was still in place on 11 June 2016 (it was not purged until the 12th) then why are there no emails from the DNC after 26 May 2016?
an excellent analysis of Guccifer's role : Almost immediately after the one-two punch of the Washington Post article/CrowdStrike
technical report went public, however, something totally unexpected happened -- someone came forward and took full responsibility
for the DNC cyber attack. Moreover, this entity -- operating under the persona Guccifer 2.0 (ostensibly named after the original
Guccifer , a Romanian hacker who stole the emails of a number of high-profile celebrities and who was arrested in 2014 and sentenced
to 4 ½ years of prison in May 2016) -- did something no state actor has ever done before, publishing documents stolen from the DNC
server as proof of his claims.
Hi. This is Guccifer 2.0 and this is me who hacked Democratic National Committee.
With that simple email, sent to the on-line news magazine,
The Smoking
Gun , Guccifer 2.0 stole the limelight away from Alperovitch. Over the course of the next few days, through a series of
emails, online posts and
interviews
, Guccifer 2.0 openly mocked CrowdStrike and its Russian attribution. Guccifer 2.0 released a number of documents, including a massive
200-plus-missive containing opposition research on Donald Trump.
Guccifer 2.0 also directly contradicted the efforts on the part of the DNC to minimize the extent of the hacking,
releasing the very donor lists
the DNC specifically stated had not been stolen. More chilling, Guccifer 2.0 claimed to be in possession of "about 100 Gb of data"
which had been passed on to the online publisher, Wikileaks, who "will publish them soon." 7. Seth Rich died on 10 July 2016.
I introduce Seth Rich at this point because he represents an alternative hypothesis. Rich, who reportedly was a Bernie Sanders supporter,
was in a position at the DNC that gave him access to the emails in question and the opportunity to download the emails and take them
from the DNC headquarters. Worth noting that Julian Assange offered
$20,000 for information leading to the arrest of Rich's killer or killers. 8. 22 July 2016. Wikileaks published the DNC emails
starting on 22 July 2016. Bill Binney, a former senior official at NSA, insists that if such a hack and electronic transfer over
the internet had occurred then the NSA has in it possession the intelligence data to prove that such activity had occurred.Notwithstanding the claim by CrowdStrike not a single piece of evidence has been provided to the public to support the conclusion
that the emails were hacked and physically transferred to a server under the control of a Russian intelligence operative.Please do not try to post a comment stating that the "Intelligence Community" concluded as well that Russia was responsible.
That claim is totally without one shred of actual forensic evidence. Also, Julian Assange insists that the emails did not come from
a Russian source.
Wikileaks, the protector of the accountability of the top, has announced a reward for finding the murderers of Seth Rich.
In comparison, the DNC has not offered any reward to help the investigation of the murder of the DNC staffer, but the DNC found
a well-connected lawyer to protect Imran Awan who is guilty (along with Debbie Wasserman-Schultz) in the greatest breach of national
cybersecurity:
http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/29/wasserman-schultz-seemingly-planned-to-pay-suspect-even-while-he-lived-in-pakistan/
Seth Rich's family have pleaded, and continue to plead, that the conspiracy theorists leave the death of their son alone and have
said that those who continue to flog this nonsense around the internet are only serving to increase their pain. I suggest respectfully
that some here may wish to consider their feelings. (Also, this stuff is nuts, you know.)
"We also know that many people are angry at our government and want to see justice done in some way, somehow. We are asking
you to please consider our feelings and words. There are people who are using our beloved Seth's memory and legacy for their own
political goals, and they are using your outrage to perpetuate our nightmare."
"Wheeler, a former Metropolitan Police Department officer, was a key figure in a series of debunked stories claiming that Rich
had been in contact with Wikileaks before his death. Fox News, which reported the story online and on television, retracted it
in June."
I'm afraid you're behind the times. Wheeler is no longer relevant now that Sy Hersh has revealed an FBI report that explicitly
says Rich was in contact with Wikileaks offering to sell them DNC documents.
It's unfortunate for the Rich family, but now that the connection is pretty much confirmed, they're going to have to allow
the truth to come out.
Mr. Dmitri Alperovitch, of Jewish descent (and an emigre from Russia), has been an "expert" at the Atlantic Council, the same
organization that cherishes and provides for Mr. Eliot Higgins. These two gentlemen - and the directorate of Atlantic Council
- are exhibit one of opportunism and intellectual dishonesty (though it is hard to think about Mr. Higgins in terms of "intellect").
Take note how Alperovitch coded the names of the supposed hackers: "Russian intelligence services hacked the Democratic National
Committee's computer network and accessed opposition research on Donald Trump, according to the Atlantic Council's Dmitri Alperovitch.
Two Russian groups ! codenamed FancyBear and CozyBear ! have been identified as spearheading the DNC breach." Alperovitch
is not just an incompetent "expert" in cybersecurity - he is a willing liar and war-mongering, for money.
The DNC hacking story has never been about national security; Alperovitch (and his handlers) have no loyalty to the US.
PT, I make a short exception. Actually decided to stop babbling for a while. But: Just finished something successfully.
And since I usually need distraction by something far more interesting then matters at hand. I was close to your line of thought
yesters.
But really: Shouldn't the timeline start in 2015, since that's supposedly the time someone got into the DNC's system?
One could of course start earlier. What is the exact timeline of the larger cyberwar post 9/11, or at least the bits and
pieces that surfaced for the nitwits among us, like: Stuxnet?
But nevermind. Don't forget developments and recent events around Eugene or Jewgeni Walentinowitsch Kasperski?
The Russia thing certainly seems to have gone quiet.
Bannon's chum says the issue with pursuing the Clinton email thing is that you would end up having to indict almost all of
the last administration, including Obama, unseemly certainly. Still there might be a fall guy, maybe Comey, and obviously it serves
Trump's purposes to keep this a live issue through the good work of Grassley and the occasional tweet.
Would be amusing if Trump pardoned Obama. Still think Brennan should pay a price though, can't really be allowed to get away
with it
Scott Ritter's article referenced in PT's post is terrific, covering a ton of issues related to CrowdStrike and the DNC hack.
You need to read it, not just PT's timeline. In case you missed the link in PT's post:
Also, the article Carr references is very important for understanding the limits of malware analysis and "attribution". Written
by Michael Tanji, whose credentials appear impressive: "spent nearly 20 years in the US intelligence community. Trained in both
SIGINT and HUMINT disciplines he has worked at the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, and the National
Reconnaissance Office. At various points in his career he served as an expert in information warfare, computer network operations,
computer forensics, and indications and warning. A veteran of the US Army, Michael has served in both strategic and tactical assignments
in the Pacific Theater, the Balkans, and the Middle East."
His article echoes and reinforces what Carr and others have said about the difficulty of attribution of infosec breaches.
Namely that the basic problem of both intelligence and infosec operations is that there is too much obfuscation, manipulation,
and misdirection involved to be sure of who or what is going on.
The Seth Rich connection is pretty much a done deal, now that Sy Hersh has been caught on tape stating that he knows of
an FBI report based on a forensic analysis of Rich's laptop that shows Rich was in direct contact with Wikileaks with an attempt
to sell them DNC documents and that Wikileaks had access to Rich's DropBox account. Despite Hersh's subsequent denials - which
everyone knows are his usual impatient deflections prior to putting out a sourced and organized article - it's pretty clear that
Rich was at least one of the sources of the Wikileaks email dump and that there is zero connection to Russia.
None of this proves that Russian intelligence - or Russians of some stripe - or for that matter hackers from literally
anywhere - couldn't or didn't ALSO do a hack of the DNC. But it does prove that the iron-clad attribution of the source of Wikileaks
email release to Russia is at best flawed, and at worst a deliberate cover up of a leak.
And Russiagate depends primarily on BOTH alleged "facts" being true: 1) that Russia hacked the DNC, and 2) that Russia was
the source of Wikileaks release. And if the latter is not true, then one has to question why Russia hacked the DNC in the first
place, other than for "normal" espionage operations. "Influencing the election" then becomes a far less plausible theory.
The general takeaway from an infosec point of view is that attribution by means of target identification, tools used, and "indicators
of compromise" is a fatally flawed means of identifying, and thus being able to counter, the adversaries encountered in today's
Internet world, as Tanji proves. Only HUMINT offers a way around this, just as it is really the only valid option in countering
terrorism.
"... The elephant in the room is not privacy problems. It is blackmail for various purposes. ..."
"... This makes he US Government totally dysfunctional. the spread of such spy technique has created chaos. Latest news is that Democrats paid some hackers for not revealing their server information. ..."
"... I don't think this can be stopped. But we need more open discussion about blackmailing and thus protection from such methods. An elected President or Official should not have their private life discussed by the Media. It should be banned ..."
"... And Clinton never feared anything, probably because the CIA was in her pocket and could get the goods on anybody even Loretta Lynch. ..."
That the CIA has reached into the lives of all Americans through its wholesale gathering of the nation's "haystack" of information
has already been reported.
It is bad enough that the government spies on its own people. It is equally bad that the CIA, through its incompetence, has opened
the cyberdoor to anyone with the technological skills and connections to spy on anyone else.
The constant erosion of privacy at the hands of the government and corporations has annihilated the concept of a "right to privacy,"
which is embedded in the rationale of the First, Third, Fourth, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
It is becoming increasingly clear that we are sliding down the slippery slope toward totalitarianism, where private lives do not
exist.
We have entered a condition of constitutional crisis that requires a full-throated response from the American people.
Before you label Kucinich as being overly-dramatic, you may want to note that Bill Binney – the high-level NSA executive who created
the agency's mass surveillance program for digital information, the 36-year NSA veteran widely who was the senior technical director
within the agency and managed thousands of NSA employees –
told Washington's
Blog that America has already become a police state.
And Thomas Drake – one of the top NSA executives, and Senior Change Leader within the NSA –
told
us the same thing.
And Kirk Wiebe – a 32-year NSA veteran who received the Director CIA's Meritorious Unit Award and the NSA's Meritorious Civilian
Service Award – agrees (tweet via Jesselyn Radack, attorney for many national security whistleblowers, herself a Department of Justice
whistleblower):
It's not just NSA officials Two former
U.S. Supreme Court Justices have warned that America is sliding into tyranny.
The elephant in the room is not privacy problems. It is blackmail for various purposes.
We have many indications that politicians, judges, officials and even other intel organizations are being blackmailed, and
destroyed using lucid information from their private life.
This makes he US Government totally dysfunctional. the spread of such spy technique has created chaos. Latest news is that
Democrats paid some hackers for not revealing their server information.
I don't think this can be stopped. But we need more open discussion about blackmailing and thus protection from such methods.
An elected President or Official should not have their private life discussed by the Media. It should be banned.
Officials say disclosures about targeting of Joaquín Almunia was 'not the type of behaviour that we expect from strategic partners'
The latest disclosures from the Snowden files provoked exasperation at the
European commission, with officials saying they
intended to press the British and American governments for answers about the targeting of one its most senior officials.
Reacting shortly after an EU summit had finished in Brussels, the commission said disclosures about the targeting of Joaquín Almunia,
a vice-president with responsibility for competition policy, was "not the type of behaviour that we expect from strategic partners,
let alone from our own member states".
A spokesman added: "This piece of news follows a series of other revelations which, as we clearly stated in the past, if proven
true, are unacceptable and deserve our strongest condemnation."
In Britain, Sir Malcolm Rifkind, the chair of the parliamentary committee that provides oversight of GCHQ, said he was "disturbed
by these allegations." He added he could be "examining them in due course as part of the intelligence and security committee's wider
investigation into the interception of communications."
A prominent German MP, Hans-Christian Ströbele, who met
Edward Snowden in Moscow in October, told the Guardian
it was becoming "increasingly clear that Britain has been more than the US' stooge in this surveillance scandal". He suggested the
snooping by GCHQ on German government buildings and embassies was unacceptable.
"Great Britain is not just any country. It is a country that we are supposed to be in a union with. It's incredible for one member
of the European Union to spy on another – it's like members of
a family spying on each other. The German government will need to raise this with the British government directly and ask tough questions
about the victims, and that is the right word, of this affair."
The Liberal Democrats have been inching towards calling for an independent commission to investigate the activities of Britain's
spy agencies and the party president, Tim Farron, said that "spying on friendly governments like this is not only bad politics, it
is bad foreign policy".
"These nations are our allies and we should work together on issues from terrorism to Iran and climate change," he said. "But
we seem to be spying on them in conjunction with the NSA in what seems like an industrial basis."
In its strongest statement yet on the issue, Labour called for the ISC to be given beefed up powers, with Douglas Alexander, shadow
foreign secretary, saying it was time for Britain to follow the lead of the US and start a more vigorous debate about surveillance.
"I think we should also consider whether the ISC should be empowered to subpoena and to compel witnesses to appear before them
as is the case for the other parliament select committees," he said.
Nicolas Imboden, head of the Geneva-based Ideas Centre, said he believed his work in Africa had been the reason he was targeted.
"It's about cotton," he told Der Spiegel. "That is clearly economic espionage and politically motivated." For the past 10 years his
group has advised and represented African countries such as Chad, Mali and Benin in their fight against high cotton subsidies in
western countries including the US. "This was clearly about them trying to gain advantages during WTO negotiations by illegal means,"
Imboden told Der Spiegel.
But the strongest condemnation came from one of the groups named in the documents, Médecins du Monde.
Leigh Daynes, UK executive director of the organisation said: "If substantiated, snooping on aid workers would be a shameful waste
of taxpayers' money. Our doctors, nurses and midwives are not a threat to national security. We're an independent health charity
with over 30 years' experience in delivering impartial care in some of the world's poorest and most dangerous places.
"Our medical professionals, many of whom are volunteers, risk their lives daily in countries like Mali and Somalia, and in and
around Syria. There is absolutely no reason for our operations to be secretly monitored. We are also gravely concerned about any
breach of doctor-patient confidentiality, which would be an egregious impingement on medical ethics."
Nick Pickles, Director of Big Brother Watch, said it appeared GCHQ has "become a law unto itself". Eric King, head of research
at Privacy International, added: "The targeting of the international actors tasked with caring for the most vulnerable people, particularly
children, is one of the most distressing revelations yet."
Downing Street has repeatedly refused to comment on the allegations in any detail saying it is not comment on security issues.
The Israeli government said it would not comment on leaks.
Secret documents reveal more than 1,000 targets of American and British surveillance in recent years, including the office of
an Israeli prime minister, heads of international aid organizations, foreign energy companies and a European Union official involved
in antitrust battles with American technology businesses.
While the names of some political and diplomatic leaders have previously emerged as targets, the newly disclosed intelligence
documents provide a much fuller portrait of the spies' sweeping interests in more than 60 countries.
Britain's Government Communications Headquarters, working closely with the National Security Agency, monitored the communications
of senior European Union officials, foreign leaders including African heads of state and sometimes their family members, directors
of United Nations and other relief programs, and officials overseeing oil and finance ministries, according to the documents. In
addition to Israel, some targets involved close allies like France and Germany, where
tensions have already erupted over recent revelations about spying by the N.S.A.
Details of the surveillance are described in documents from the N.S.A. and Britain's eavesdropping agency, known as GCHQ, dating
from 2008 to 2011. The target lists appear in a set of GCHQ reports that sometimes identify which agency requested the surveillance,
but more often do not. The documents were leaked by the former N.S.A. contractor Edward J. Snowden and shared by The New York Times,
The Guardian and
Der Spiegel.
The reports are spare, technical bulletins produced as the spies, typically working out of British intelligence sites, systematically
tapped one international communications link after another, focusing especially on satellite transmissions. The value of each link
is gauged, in part, by the number of surveillance targets found to be using it for emails, text messages or phone calls. More than
1,000 targets, which also include people suspected of being terrorists or militants, are in the reports.
It is unclear what the eavesdroppers gleaned. The documents include a few fragmentary transcripts of conversations and messages,
but otherwise contain only hints that further information was available elsewhere, possibly in a larger database.
Some condemned the surveillance on Friday as unjustified and improper. "This is not the type of behavior that we expect from strategic
partners," Pia Ahrenkilde Hansen, a spokeswoman for the European Commission, said on the latest revelations of American and British
spying in Europe.
Some of the surveillance relates to issues that are being scrutinized by President Obama and a panel he appointed in Washington
that on Wednesday
recommended
tighter limits on the N.S.A., particularly on spying of foreign leaders, especially allies.
The reports show that spies monitored the email traffic of several Israeli officials, including one target identified as "Israeli
prime minister," followed by an email address. The prime minister at the time, in January 2009, was Ehud Olmert. The next month,
spies intercepted the email traffic of the Israeli defense minister, Ehud Barak, according to another report. Two Israeli embassies
also appear on the target lists.
Mr. Olmert said in a telephone interview on Friday that the email address was used for correspondence with his office, which he
said staff members often handled. He added that it was unlikely that any secrets could have been compromised.
"This was an unimpressive target," Mr. Olmert said. He noted, for example, that his most sensitive discussions with President
George W. Bush took place in person. "I would be surprised if there was any attempt by American intelligence in Israel to listen
to the prime minister's lines," he said.
Mr. Barak, who declined to comment, has said publicly that he used to take it for granted that he was under surveillance.
Despite the close ties between the United States and Israel, the record of mutual spying is long: Israeli spies, including Jonathan
Jay Pollard, who was sentenced in 1987 to life in prison for passing intelligence information to Israel, have often operated in the
United States, and the United States has often turned the abilities of the N.S.A. against Israel.
Mr. Olmert's office email was intercepted while he was dealing with fallout from
Israel's military
response to rocket attacks from Gaza, but also at a particularly tense time in relations with the United States. The two countries
were simultaneously at odds on Israeli preparations to attack Iran's nuclear program and cooperating on a
wave of cyberattacks on Iran's major nuclear enrichment facility.
A year before the interception of Mr. Olmert's office email, the documents listed another target, the Institute of Physics at
the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, an internationally recognized center for research in atomic and nuclear physics.
Also appearing on the surveillance lists is Joaquín Almunia, vice president of the European Commission, which, among other
powers, has oversight of antitrust issues in Europe. The commission has broad authority over local and foreign companies, and
it has punished a number of American companies, including Microsoft and Intel, with heavy fines for hampering fair competition. The
reports say that spies intercepted Mr. Almunia's communications in 2008 and 2009.
Italian communications have been targeted through the US's Special Collection Service sites in Rome and Milan, according to Italy's
l'Espresso. The same service allegedly tapped into German Chancellor Angela Merkel's cellphone.
The new leak, revealed by Glenn Greenwald with l'Espresso, alleges that the National Security Agency subjected Italy's leadership
to surveillance, although not specifying which people within the country's "leadership" were monitored, via US diplomatic
missions in Rome and Milan. The spying went on from 1988 to at least 2010.
The NSA conducted snooping in Italy via its Special Collection Service, which came under scrutiny after the snooping
scandal involving Chancellor Angela Merkel. The
report
on Friday reveals the service kept whole two sites running in Italy: one in Milan, the country's main economic hub, and one in Rome
(staffed with agents). Of all European nations, only Italy and Germany had two SCS sites working simultaneously, according to the
leak.
"The NSA partners with the CIA in the SCS construct in which NSA employees under diplomatic covert conduct SIGINT collection,"
reads the telling line in the newly published file. SIGNIT is the NSA's Signal Intelligence service, which intercepts communications
between people.
SCS is one of the most sensitive units in US intelligence. It has teams working in US embassies around the world, including in
Berlin, Athens, Mexico City, New Delhi and Kiev, according to a recent Cryptome
leak. In NSA revelations on Germany it was alleged that
the US embassy in Berlin provided its roof for the service's intercepting antennae.
According to the l'Espresso documents, the SCS "in 1988 had 88 sites, our peak." Despite the number of sites being reduced
following the fall of the Berlin Wall and the official end of the Cold War with the Soviet Union, by 2010 the SCS had up to 80 sites,
two of which were the Rome and Milan sites in Italy. The document states that the SCS has always "opened or closed sites based
on productivity."
The new report provided appears to directly contradict official statements which have been dismissive of earlier spying allegations.
In November, Italian PM Enrico Letta stated that "we are not aware that the security of the Italian government and embassies
has been compromised."
PRIME Minister Tony Abbott could be constrained in responding to Indonesia over spying claims because of concerns there could
be more damaging revelations still
Josh Frydenberg, parliamentary secretary to Prime Minister Tony Abbott, said the Guardian newspaper had stated that just one per
cent of the information from US intelligence leaker Edward Snowden was in the public arena.
Similarly, the head of the United States National Security Agency, where Snowden worked, suggested as many as 200,000 files could
have gone missing, he said.
"This could be a very slow burn. Today it could be Indonesia," Mr Frydenberg told the ABC's Q and A program.
"I would be astounded if, with only one per cent of that information out there, if there will not be more damaging revelations
for Australia and its allies in due course. I don't know."
Mr Frydenberg said as Snowden was now in Russia, the intelligence files he took could now be in the possession of the Russians.
"This may be part of a bigger play out there," he said.
A week ago, the Guardian Australia and ABC reported that Australian intelligence had monitored the mobile phones of Indonesian
President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, his wife and other leaders.
These revelations outraged Indonesia which suspended all co-operation with Australia in terms of strategic partnerships, including
in combating people smuggling, intelligence gathering and anti-terrorism efforts and halted some joint defence activities.
Mr Frydenberg said it was a longstanding tradition of both sides of politics not to comment on on intelligence matters and Mr
Abbott had adopted exactly the right approach in expressing regret but not an apology.
Former US assistant secretary of state Kurt Campbell said this was the very beginning of a whole string of revelations.
"So you just don't know what to expect so you have to be very careful how you handle this," he said.
Massive data collection by the NSA comes down much heavier on the cost side of the ledger than the benefit.
Senator Frank Church, spied on by the NSA
Polls
show that a majority of Americans rhetorically oppose the extensive domestic surveillance conducted by the National Security Agency
(NSA). But the outrage is far less than one might expect, considering the agency's profound intrusion into people's private spheres.
One explanation for this might be that, in the age of Facebook and Google, people are simply used to the massive sharing of information
as a condition for using social media services. The currency is information, not money-a price many citizens seem to be very willing
to pay.
Many might also think that they are simply not affected by the extensive collection of data-and even if they are, it is unclear
why they, innocent citizens with "nothing to hide," should be concerned. After all, the collection is done for the sake of security,
a value many are willing to pay for with their privacy.
But the many recent revelations fueled by the documents provided
by Edward Snowden have cast serious doubt on these arguments. Even for people who hold the very modern assumption that privacy is
not a value in itself-as "old fashioned" people might argue-there are much broader consequences of the intrusion that must be considered.
Let's first look at the domestic problems of the massive data collection.
Even for ordinary Americans, assenting to this massive intrusion of privacy requires enormous trust in the government, which is
not supported by historic experience with the NSA. As it increasingly becomes an independent actor, surveillance can become a purpose
in and of itself, or even a political instrument.
Only 50 years ago, the NSA massively spied on protesters who organized against the Vietnam War. The NSA - yes, the very same institution
we are discussing today - even spied on
two sitting
U.S. senators who criticized the war. You don't even have to agree with the anti-war movement of the 60s and 70s to be deeply
appalled that the NSA previously spied on elected representatives of the American people.
"If there's a lesson to be learned from all this, when we are dealing with a non-transparent society such as the intelligence
community that has a vast amount of power, then abuses can and usually do happen," writes
Matthew Aid,
an intelligence historian specializing in the NSA.
There is no guarantee your data can't be used against you in the future. And unlike paper documents back then that could be burned,
the Internet hardly forgets.
This massive data collection also weakens the Fourth Estate and civil society, two key institutions in the separation of power
in liberal democracies. It becomes harder for journalists to provide credible protection of sources when informants must always be
afraid that each digital move is being monitored and even phone records could be seized, as has been the case for the
Associated Press.
Civil society loses its ability to challenge the government when citizens no longer have untapped channels to speak truth to power
as whistleblowers. Given what torments whistleblowers are now made to endure, will the next Daniel Ellsberg or Chelsea Manning lose
the courage to speak up? By prosecuting an unprecedented number of whistleblowers, the Obama administration has sent a clear signal
about what it is willing to do when someone reveals a secret connected to the massively collected data.
Moreover, besides these potential domestic threats, the costs of the NSA's "institutional
obsession" with surveillance have today reached an international scale.
The documents released by Edward Snowden helped reveal that the U.S. was spying on
35 world leaders, as well as
institutions
like the UN, the EU, and millions of foreign citizens.
The cost in U.S. credibility and soft power must not be underestimated. Brazil's president canceled a recent meeting with the
President Obama, and Germany and Brazil are pushing for a
UN resolution, obviously
addressed at the United States, to outlaw state intrusion on private communications.
If the U.S. ever had any credibility in criticizing other countries for violating privacy and misusing intelligence, it is
now irreversibly gone. Several diplomatic initiatives, like the
trade talks with the
EU, could be hampered as fallout of the revelations.
For all these costs, how much security did the program actually bring to the American people? It is important to note that even
the core argument of the NSA and the Obama Administration-security-is on
shaky ground.
"We've heard over and over again the assertion that 54 terrorist plots were thwarted" by the two programs,
said
Sen. Patrick Leahy, who had the opportunity to read a classified list concerning the benefits of the NSA's surveillance. "That's
plainly wrong, but we still get it in letters to members of Congress, we get it in statements. These weren't all plots and they weren't
all thwarted. The American people are getting left with the inaccurate impression of the effectiveness of NSA programs."
It is the very narrow dominant security narrative since 9/11 that irrationally portrays external
terroristic threats as the major danger for security and aggressive measures like extensive spying as solutions. This overlooks the
fact that human security has many more facets like shelter, healthcare and a sustainable environment. The Institute for Policy Studies
uses the term "just security"
to draw attention to this.
In the political climate in the U.S., even the right to carry a weapon for self-defense-against one's fellow citizens as well
as, its backers say, the government itself - is so sacrosanct that thousands of deaths are accepted for it each year. It seems absurd
that the right to privacy enjoys so little priority.
So the massive collection of data weakens the media and civil society, concentrates the power of information in the hands of few,
and creates a powerful secretive institution that damages America's standing on the diplomatic stage. In return the American people
get some unverifiable claims about terrorist plots that may have been disrupted, and even that seems like a stretch.
Not convinced about the highly problematic nature of massive data collection and the NSA? We will see what revelations are yet
to come.
Moritz Laurer is an intern at Foreign Policy in Focus.
Conceptually speaking, we've never seen anything like the National Security Agency's urge to surveil,
eavesdrop on, spy on, monitor, record, and save every communication of any sort on the planet-to keep track of humanity, all of humanity,
from its major leaders to obscure figures in the backlands of the planet. And the fact is that, within the scope of what might be
technologically feasible in our era, they seem not to have missed an opportunity.
The NSA, we now know, is everywhere, gobbling up emails, phone calls, texts, tweets, Facebook posts,
credit card sales, communications and transactions of every conceivable sort. The NSA and
British intelligence
are feeding off the fiber optic cables that carry Internet and phone activity. The agency stores records ("metadata") of
every phone call made in the United States. In various ways, legal and otherwise, its operatives long ago slipped through
the conveniently ajar backdoors of media giants like
Yahoo, Verizon, and Google-and also in conjunction with British intelligence they have been
secretly collecting "records" from the "clouds" or private networks of Yahoo and Google to the tune of
181
million communications in a single month, or more than two billion a year.
Meanwhile, their privately
hired corporate hackers have systems that, among other things, can slip inside your computer to count and see every keystroke
you make. Thanks to that mobile phone of yours (even when off), those same hackers can also locate you just about anywhere on the
planet. And that's just to begin to summarize what we know of their still developing global surveillance state.
In other words, there's my email and your phone metadata, and his tweets and her texts, and the swept up records of billions of
cell phone calls and other communications by
French
and Nigerians,
Italians and
Pakistanis,
Germans and
Yemenis,
Egyptians and
Spaniards
(thank you,
Spanish intelligence, for lending the NSA such a hand!), and don't forget the Chinese, Vietnamese, Indonesians, and
Burmese, among others (thank you,
Australian
intelligence, for lending the NSA such a hand!), and it would be a reasonable bet to include just about any other nationality
you care to mention. Then there are the NSA
listening posts
at all those U.S. embassies and consulates around the world, and the reports on the way the NSA listened in
on the U.N.,
bugged European Union
offices
"on both sides of the Atlantic,"
accessed computers
inside the Indian embassy in Washington D.C. and that country's U.N. mission in New York, hacked into the computer network of and
spied on Brazil's largest oil company,
hacked into
the Brazilian president's emails and the emails of two Mexican presidents, monitored the German Chancellor's
mobile phone, not to speak of those of dozens,
possibly hundreds, of other German leaders, monitored the phone calls of at least
35 global leaders,
as well as U.N. Secretary-General
Ban Ki-Moon, and-if you're
keeping score-that's just a partial list of what we've learned so far about the NSA's surveillance programs, knowing that, given
the Snowden documents still to come, there has to be so much
more.
When it comes to the "success" part of the NSA story, you could also play a little numbers game: the NSA has at least 35,000 employees,
possibly as many as
55,000, and an almost $11 billion budget. With
up to 70 percent of that budget possibly going to private contractors, we are undoubtedly talking about tens of thousands more
"employees" indirectly on the agency's payroll. The Associated Press
estimates that there are 500,000
employees of private contractors "who have access to the government's most sensitive secrets." In Bluffdale, Utah, the NSA is
spending $2 billion to build what may be
one of the largest data-storage facilities on the planet (with its own
bizarre fireworks),
capable of storing almost inconceivable yottabytes of information. And keep in mind that since 9/11,
according to
the New York Times, the agency has also built or expanded major data-storage facilities in Georgia, Texas, Colorado, Hawaii,
Alaska, and Washington State.
But success, too, can have its downside and there is a small catch when it comes to the NSA's global omniscience. For everything
it can, at least theoretically, see, hear, and search, there's one obvious thing the agency's leaders and the rest of the intelligence
community have proven remarkably un-omniscient about, one thing they clearly have been incapable of taking in-and that's the most
essential aspect of the system they are building. Whatever they may have understood about the rest of us, they understood next
to nothing about themselves or the real impact of what they were doing, which is why the revelations of Edward Snowden caught them
so off-guard.
Along with the giant Internet corporations, they have been involved in a process aimed at taking away the very notion of a right
to privacy in our world; yet they utterly failed to grasp the basic lesson they have taught the rest of us. If we live in an era
of no privacy, there are no exemptions; if, that is, it's an age of no-privacy for us, then it's an age of no-privacy for them, too.
The word "conspiracy" is an interesting one in this context. It comes from the Latin conspirare for "breathe the same
air." In order to do that, you need to be a small group in a small room. Make yourself the largest surveillance outfit on the planet,
hire tens of thousands of private contractors-young computer geeks plunged into a situation that would have boggled the mind of George
Orwell-and organize a system of storage and electronic retrieval that puts much at an insider's fingertips, and you've just kissed
secrecy goodnight and put it to bed for the duration.
There was always going to be an Edward Snowden-or rather Edward Snowdens. And no matter what the NSA and the Obama administration
do, no matter what they threaten, no matter how fiercely they
attack whistleblowers, or who they
put away for
how long, there will be more. No matter the levels of classification
and the desire to throw a penumbra of secrecy over government operations of all sorts, we will eventually know.
They have constructed a system potentially riddled with what, in the Cold War days, used to be called "moles." In this case, however,
those "moles" won't be spying for a foreign power, but
for us. There is no privacy left. That
fact of life has been embedded, like so much institutional DNA, in the system they have so brilliantly constructed. They will see
us, but in the end, we will see them, too.
Omnipotence
With our line-ups in place, let's turn to the obvious question: How's it going? How's the game of surveillance playing out at
the global level? How has success in building such a system translated into policy and power? How useful has it been to have
advance info on just what
the U.N. general-secretary will have to say when he visits you at the White House? How helpful is it to store endless tweets, social
networking interactions, and phone calls
from Egypt when it comes to controlling or influencing actors there, whether the Muslim Brotherhood or the generals?
We know that
1,477 "items" from the NSA's PRISM program (which
taps into the central servers of nine major American Internet companies) were cited in the president's Daily Briefing in 2012
alone. With all that help, with all that advanced notice, with all that insight into the workings of the world from but one of so
many NSA programs, just how has Washington been getting along?
Though we have very little information about how intelligence insiders and top administration officials assess the effectiveness
of the NSA's surveillance programs in maintaining American global power, there's really no need for such assessments. All you have
to do is look at the world.
Long before Snowden walked off with those documents, it was clear that things weren't exactly going well. Some
breakthroughs
in surveillance techniques were, for instance, developed in America's war zones in Iraq and
Afghanistan, where U.S. intelligence outfits and spies were clearly capable of locating and listening in on insurgencies in ways
never before possible. And yet, we all know what happened in Iraq and is happening in Afghanistan. In both places, omniscience visibly
didn't translate into success. And by the way, when the Arab Spring hit, how prepared was the Obama administration? Don't even bother
to answer that one.
In fact, it's reasonable to assume that, while U.S. spymasters and operators were working at the technological frontiers of surveillance
and cryptography, their model for success was distinctly antiquated. However unconsciously, they were still living with a World War
II-style mindset. Back then, in an all-out military conflict between two sides, listening in on enemy communications had been at
least one key to winning the war. Breaking the German
Enigma codes meant knowing precisely where
the enemy's U-boats were, just as breaking Japan's naval
codes ensured victory in the Battle of Midway and elsewhere.
Unfortunately for the NSA and two administrations in Washington, our world isn't so clear-cut any more. Breaking the codes, whatever
codes, isn't going to do the trick. You may be able to pick up every kind of communication in
Pakistan or
Egypt, but even if you could listen to or read them all (and the NSA doesn't have the linguists or the time to do so), instead of
simply drowning in useless data, what good would it do you?
Given how Washington has fared since September 12, 2001, the answer would undoubtedly range from not much to none at all-and in
the wake of Edward Snowden, it would have to be in the negative. Today, the NSA formula might go something like this: the more communications
the agency intercepts, the more it stores, the more it officially knows, the more information it gives those it
calls its "external customers"
(the White House, the State Department, the CIA, and others), the less omnipotent and the more impotent Washington turns out to be.
In scorecard terms, once the Edward Snowden revelations began and the vast conspiracy to capture a world of communications was
revealed, things only went from bad to worse. Here's just a partial list of some of the casualties from Washington's point of view:
The first
European
near-revolt against American power in living memory (former French leader Charles de Gaulle aside), and a phenomenon that
is
still growing across that continent along with an upsurge in distaste for Washington.
A
shudder of horror in Brazil and across Latin America, emphasizing a growing distaste for the not-so-good neighbor to the North.
China, which has its own sophisticated surveillance network and was being
pounded for it by Washington, now looks like Mr. Clean.
Russia, a country run by a former secret police agent, has in the post-Snowden era been miraculously transformed into a
global
peacemaker and a land that provided a haven
for an important western dissident.
The Internet giants of Silicon valley, a beacon of U.S. technological prowess, could in the end take a
monstrous
hit, losing billions of dollars and
possibly their near monopoly status globally, thanks to the revelation that when you email, tweet, post to Facebook, or do
anything else through any of them, you automatically put yourself
in
the hands of the NSA. Their CEOs are
shuddering with worry,
as well they should be.
And the list of post-Snowden fallout only seems to be growing. The NSA's vast
global security state
is now visibly an edifice of negative value, yet it remains so deeply embedded in the post-9/11 American national security state
that seriously paring it back, no less dismantling it, is probably inconceivable. Of course, those running that state within a state
claim success by focusing only on counterterrorism operations where, they swear,
54 potential terror attacks on or
in the United States have been thwarted, thanks to NSA surveillance. Based on the relatively minimal information available to us,
this looks like a major case of threat
and credit inflation, if not pure balderdash. More important, it doesn't faintly cover the ambitions of a system that was meant to
give Washington a jump on every foreign power, offer an economic edge in just about every situation, and enhance U.S. power globally.
A First-Place Line-Up and a Last-Place Finish
What's perhaps most striking about all this is the inability of the Obama administration and its intelligence bureaucrats to grasp
the nature of what's happening to them. For that, they would need to skip those daily briefs from an intelligence community which,
on the subject, seems blind, deaf, and dumb, and instead take a clear look at the world.
As a measuring stick for pure tone-deafness in Washington, consider that it took our secretary of state and so, implicitly, the
president, five painful months to finally agree that the NSA had, in certain limited areas, "reached
too far." And even now, in response to a global uproar and changing attitudes toward the U.S. across the planet, their response
has been laughably modest.
According to David Sanger of the New York Times, for instance, the administration believes that there is "no workable
alternative to the bulk collection of huge quantities of 'metadata,' including records of all telephone calls made inside the United
States."
On the bright side, however, maybe, just maybe, they can store it all for a mere three years, rather than the present five. And
perhaps, just perhaps, they might consider giving up on listening in on some friendly world leaders, but only after a major rethink
and reevaluation of the complete NSA surveillance system. And in Washington, this sort of response to the Snowden debacle is
considered a "balanced" approach to security versus privacy.
In fact, in this country each post-9/11 disaster has led, in the end, to more and worse of the same. And that's likely to be the
result here, too, given a national security universe in which everyone assumes the value of an increasingly para-militarized, bureaucratized,
heavily funded creature we continue to call "intelligence," even though remarkably little of what would commonsensically be called
intelligence is actually on view.
No one knows what a major state would be like if it radically cut back or even wiped out its intelligence services. No one knows
what the planet's sole superpower would be like if it had only one or, for the sake of competition, two major intelligence outfits
rather than 17 of them, or if those agencies essentially relied
on open source material. In other words, no one knows what the U.S. would be like if its intelligence agents stopped trying to collect
the planet's communications and mainly used their native intelligence to analyze the world. Based on the recent American record,
however, it's hard to imagine we could be anything but better off. Unfortunately, we'll never find out.
In short, if the NSA's surveillance lineup was classic New York Yankees, their season is shaping up as a last-place finish.
Here, then, is the bottom line of the scorecard for twenty-first century Washington: omniscience, maybe; omnipotence, forget it;
intelligence, not a bit of it; and no end in sight.
When German Chancellor Angela Merkel celebrated the opening of the new U.S. embassy in Berlin in 2008, she could not have imagined
that she was blessing the workplace for the largest and most effective gaggle of American spies anywhere outside of the U.S.
It
seems straight out of a grade-B movie, but it has been happening for the past eleven years: The NSA has been using Merkel as an instrument
to spy on the president of the United States.
We now know that the NSA has been listening to and recording Merkel's cellphone calls since 2002.
Angela Merkel was raised in East Germany, and she has a personal revulsion at the concept of omnipresent state surveillance.
In 2008, when the new embassy opened, the NSA began using more sophisticated techniques that included not only listening, but
also following her.
Merkel uses her cellphone more frequently than her landline, and she uses it to communicate with her husband and family members,
the leadership of her political party, and her colleagues and officials in the German government.
She also uses her cellphone to speak with foreign leaders, among whom have been President George W. Bush and President Obama.
Thus, the NSA -- which Bush and Obama have unlawfully and unconstitutionally authorized to obtain and retain digital copies of
all telephone conversations, texts and emails of everyone in the U.S., as well as those of hundreds of millions of persons in Europe
and Latin America -- has been listening to the telephone calls of both American presidents whenever they have spoken with the chancellor.
One could understand the NSA's propensity to listen to the conversations of those foreign leaders who wish us ill. And one would
expect that it would do so. But the urge to listen to the leadership of our allies serves no discernible intelligence-gathering purpose.
Rather, it fuels distrust between our nations and in the case of Merkel exacerbates memories of the all-seeing and all-hearing
Stasi, which was the East German version of the KGB that ruled that police state from the end of World War II until it collapsed
in 1989.
Merkel was raised in East Germany, and she has a personal revulsion at the concept of omnipresent state surveillance.
Obama apparently has no such revulsion. One would think he's not happy that his own spies have been listening to him.
One would expect that he would have known of this.
Not from me, says Gen. Keith Alexander, the director of the NSA, who disputed claims in the media that he told Obama of the NSA
spying network in Germany last summer.
Either the president knew of this and has denied it, or he is invincibly ignorant of the forces he has unleashed on us and on
himself.
When Susan Rice, Obama's national security advisor, was confronted with all of this by her German counterpart, she first told
him the White House would deny it. Then she called him to say that the White House could not deny it, but the president would deny
that he personally knew of it.
How did we get here? What are the consequences of a president spying on himself? What does this mean for the rest of us?
Neither Bush nor Obama has had a strong fidelity to the Constitution. They share the views of another odd couple of presidents
from opposing political parties, Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, in that the Constitution is not the supreme law of the land
as it proclaims to be, but rather a guideline that unleashes the president to do all that it does not expressly forbid him to do.
In the progressive era 100 years ago, that presidential attitude brought us the Federal Reserve, the federal income tax, Prohibition,
World War I, prosecutions for speech critical of the government and the beginnings of official modern government racial segregation.
That same attitude in our era has brought us the Patriot Act, which allows federal agents to write their own search warrants,
government borrowing that knows no end -- including the $2 trillion Bush borrowed for the war in Iraq, a country which is now less
stable than before Bush invaded, and the $7 trillion Obama borrowed to redistribute -- and an NSA that monitors all Americans all
the time. In the case of the NSA spying, this came about by the secret orders of Bush and Obama, animated by that perverse TR/Wilsonian
view of the Constitution and not by a congressional vote after a great national debate.
Just as people change when they know they are being watched, the government changes when it knows no one can watch it.
Just as we can never be ourselves when we fear that we may need to justify our most intimate thoughts to an all-knowing government,
so, too, the government knows that when we cannot see what it is doing, it can do whatever it wants. And it is in the nature of government
to expand, not shrink. Thomas Jefferson correctly predicted that 175 years ago.
But spying on yourself is truly asinine and perhaps criminal. You see, the president can officially declassify any secrets he
wants, but he cannot -- without official declassification -- simply reveal them to NSA agents.
One can only imagine what NSA agents learned from listening to Bush and Obama as they spoke to Merkel and 34 other friendly foreign
leaders, as yet unidentified publicly.
Now we know how pervasive this NSA spying is: It not only reaches the Supreme Court, the Pentagon, the CIA, the local police and
the cellphones and homes of all Americans; it reaches the Oval Office itself. Yet when the president denies that he knows of this,
that denial leads to more questions.
The president claims he can start secret foreign wars using the CIA, secretly kill Americans using drones, and now secretly spy
on anyone anywhere using the NSA.
Is the president an unwitting dupe to a secret rats' nest of uncontrolled government spies and killers?
Or is he a megalomaniacal, totalitarian secret micromanager who lies regularly, consistently and systematically about the role
of government in our lives?
Which is worse? What do we do about it?
Andrew P. Napolitano joined Fox News Channel (FNC) in January 1998 and currently serves as the senior judicial analyst. He
provides legal analysis on both FNC and Fox Business Network (FBN).
A four-page internal précis regarding a visit to Washington by two top French intelligence officials denies the NSA or any US
intelligence agency was behind the May 2012 attempted break-in – which sought to implant a monitoring device inside the Elysee Palace's
communications system – but instead fingers the Israelis, albeit indirectly:
The visit by Barnard Barbier, head of the DGSE's technical division, and Patrick Pailloux, a top official with France's National
Information Systems Security, was intended to elicit an explanation for the break-in, which the French media blamed on the Americans.
The NSA's inquiries to the British, Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders, and other US allies all turned up negative. However,
one such close ally wasn't asked.
As Glenn Greenwald and Jacques Follorou, citing the NSA document,
put it in their Le Monde piece: the NSA "'intentionally did not ask either the Mossad or the ISNU (the technical administration
of the Israeli services) whether they were involved' in this espionage operation against the head of the French government."
An interesting omission, to say the least, one justified by the author of the memo with some odd phraseology: "France is not an
approved target for joint discussion by Israel and the United States." Meaning – exactly what? This is a job for
Marcy Wheeler! But I'll hazard a guess: the US is well aware of Israeli
spying on France and wants nothing to do with it, and/or the author of the memo is simply invoking some obscure protocol in order
to justify going any farther.
In any case, the Israeli connection to the NSA's global spying network – including its all-pervasive surveillance inside the US
– has been well-established by Greenwald's previous reporting on the subject: a September 11
article detailing
how the NSA shares raw intercepts from its data-dragnet with Israeli intelligence, scooping up purloined emails and other data –
in effect giving the Mossad a "back door" into a treasure trove of information on the private lives and activities of American citizens.
The Guardian
published a five-page memorandum of understanding between Tel Aviv and Washington, provided to Greenwald by Snowden: rife with
references to the legal and constitutional constraints "pertaining to the protection of US persons," it goes on to state forthrightly
that the Israelis are permitted access to "raw Sigint" – unredacted and unreviewed transcripts, Internet metadata, and the content
of emails and telephonic communications. While the Israelis supposedly solemnly swear to not "deliberately" target any American citizen,
the agreement explicitly rules out a legal obligation on the part of the Israelis to follow the rules:
"This agreement is not intended to create any legally enforceable rights and shall not be construed to be either an international
agreement or a legally binding instrument according to international law."
The Israelis are allowed to retain raw NSA data on American citizens for up to a year, as long as they inform the NSA, but when
it comes to US government communications – those must be destroyed "upon recognition." This interdict presumably covers the internal
communications of our law enforcement officers, but as both
James Bamford and Fox News's
Carl Cameron have reported, Israeli penetration
of this vital sector is already an accomplished fact.
New submitter badzilla writes with a story from ZDnet that says a vote is scheduled in the European Parliament for today, U.S.
Independence Day, on "whether existing data sharing agreements between the two continents should be suspended, following allegations
that U.S. intelligence spied on EU citizens." One interesting scenario outlined by the article is that it may disrupt air travel
between the U.S. and EU: "In the resolution, submitted to the Parliament on Tuesday, more than two-dozen politicians from a range
of political parties call the spying 'a serious violation of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations,' and call on the suspension
of the Passenger Name Records (PNR) system. Prior to leaving the airport, airlines must make passenger data available to the U.S.
Names, dates of birth, addresses, credit or debit card details and seat numbers are among the data - though critics say the information
has never helped catch a suspected criminal or terrorist before. Should the PNR system be suspended, it could result in the suspension
of flights to the U.S. from European member states."
Chrisq
Let me get this right
The British GCHQ taps fibre connections, collects data on EU citizens and shares it with US intelligence services. In response
the EU wants to stop sharing information on passenger records for people flying between the EU and the USA. .... Well I suppose
its easier than suggesting that EU governments should not spy on its citizens.
xaxa
Re:Let me get this right
The British are not the EU, in fact they are viewed by most as an US shill inside the EU. In the area of surveillance they
are ahead US by quite a bit.
We need another De Gaulle. He gave the finger to the US and to NATO in the sixties, and he absolutely didn't want the UK in
the CEE (later to be known as the EU). We don't need Turkey nor Israel in the EU and we certainly don't need the 51st american
state either (aka the UK).
Please don't make us (the UK) leave! The EU's the only thing with a chance of preventing further erosion of British citizens'
working rights, civil liberties, environment, etc.
Unfortunately, many of the uninformed voters here want to leave :-(
ledow
Re:Let me get this right
Britain and the EU have an odd relationship unlike almost any other country in the EU.
Yes, technically, we are part of it. But we're exempt from other parts associated with it (we don't use the Euro, etc.). We
pump more money in than some others and, as compensation, we're allowed to opt-out of certain things.
Also, if you ask people in Britain what it means to go to Europe, it doesn't include touring around Britain. Britain and the
EU are - to the British - two separate entities. Even more confusing you have things like the EC and the continent of Europe and
lots of other definitions over the years that we are sometimes in, sometimes out.
However, GCHQ has hit a LOT of flak for its actions. The question really is - if what the US does is illegal, and the EU is
doing it back, why do we have a formal legal statement of something else entirely? Why bother? Why not just legalise what we do
or not? But, ultimately, the attitude is - if we DO share things with you, why distrust us and find things out illegally for your
self? And if you do that, why should we bother to trust you or give you anything anyway?
The GCHQ involvement is a side-issue, and you can guarantee that whatever sanctions the US has imposed on it, those on GCHQ
will be worse.
But, politics what it is, I find it hard to believe that anything will happen, certainly anything that will affect air travel.
More likely a few trade agreements will have more lenient terms than they would have otherwise and promises to clean up, and that'll
be the end of it.
Though, I swore off going to the US many years ago after they basically took liberties with what rights they think they have
(which include this EU passenger data crap). If I was forced to enter the US now, I'd do so for as short a time as possible and
carry no electronic equipment whatsoever and encrypt all communications home. That's the only sensible business choice and has
been for years, and it just happens to be the complete antithesis of the intention to collect that data in the first place.
gstoddart:
The British GCHQ taps fibre connections, collects data on EU citizens and shares it with US intelligence services. In response
the EU wants to stop sharing information on passenger records for people flying between the EU and the USA
Well, it's right there in the article:
Meanwhile, Reuters reports that the European Commission is examining if the U.K. broke EU law, which could lead to an infringement
procedure against the British government. This could lead to financial sanctions imposed by the European Court of Justice.
That the UK did this is also something they're looking at.
Well I suppose its easier than suggesting that EU governments should not spy on its citizens.
That's exactly what they're suggesting.
There's also this:
I can not understand why a U.S. citizen has the right to redress in the EU, but an EU citizen does not have the right to redress
in the U.S.
As usual, the US won't sign an agreement which says a US entity would have to face laws in other countries, but expect they
will get access to those laws when convenient.
It's a one-sided arrangement that isn't working for anyone but the US, and I believe you're going to start seeing countries
deciding they're not going to sign up for any more of those. I think people are getting fed up with having terms dictated to them,
and aren't going to be willing to keep doing it.
eulernet
Side effects
There is an interesting side effect about this data problem: the cloud.
Currently, the biggest cloud providers are based in US. But due to the NSA disclosure, most companies cannot afford to
give their data to outside countries, especially since it's now clear that NSA spied european companies economically.
So local cloud providers will quickly emerge, and this will directly impact Google and Amazon's services. US clouds cannot
be trusted anymore.
wvmarle
Re: Side effects
Agreed, fully.
Recently I had the need of a virtual server - just to run my web site, host my documents, and various other tasks. So searching
for this I specifically searched for local Hong Kong companies (which is where I live), to host such a server. And a short search
later I found one that offers cloud servers, just what I needed.
A few months ago I was thinking about the same issue - and then I was considering Amazon. I am a customer of Amazon already,
for their glacier cold storage service, where I keep back-ups (all encrypted before they leave my systems). They have a good reputation,
and overall very good prices, however it being a US company made me not even consider them now.
And that's a direct result of Snowden's revelations.
TheP4st
Re:Side effects
US clouds cannot be trusted anymore.
They never could, only difference is that now it is confirmed and I can enjoy of saying "I told you so!". However, I would
not trust any cloud service regardless of its country of origin with important data.
In a big data world, we have our first global big data scandal. It seems the 'Basketballer-in-chief' who was a liberal dream in 2008,
would make an Orwellian bureaucrat from 1984 blush with his ambitious spy programme.
Presented with the most unpalatable development
in a generation, President Hollande of France has led vitriolic condemnation of the USA's addiction to espionage.
There are those who might argue that being a mono-superpower world, the American empire, at, or around, the height of its unchallenged
superpower status, has a right to collate whatever data it can. This, after all was standard practice in the 19th century, why not
scale the same thing for the digital era? Meanwhile, allies cry with the sort of anguish which demonstrates a real concern on their
part. Mostly it is the concern that voters might oust, say, Mrs Merkel in her looming general election as all her claims of being
a great US ally have proven as vapid as her supposed European crisis resolution skills.
Widespread spying is nothing new. It's just the scale of digital equipment in the age of big data that makes it appear so remarkable.
Only a couple of decades ago, the British government, while negotiating with Ulster's terrorists to bring peace to the province,
chided their Irish counterparts to improve security standards as their codes were so simple London found it easy to read sensitive
Dublin government data..
The Internet Defense League, a coalition of web companies against government control of the internet and its data that formed
after the SOPA blackout in 2012, is also getting in on the action. Reddit released its own
blog post announcing the rally
and continues to hold conversations with organizers and participants at
/r/restorethefourth. The league's other members, including
Mozilla and WordPress, are also involved in the rally, which was
recently endorsed by the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
What should Europeans expect from the European Commission in response to the
Prism
scandal? Not a lot, unfortunately, because it's mostly a matter for individual countries.
When it emerged that the U.S. was spying on foreign users of Google (GOOG),
Facebook (FB), and
other services, the first reaction to come out of the commission was an unfortunately phrased
placeholder
that suggested the global surveillance scheme was "an internal U.S. matter." After a few hours of consideration, Home Affairs Commissioner
Cecilia Malmström put out something slightly
weightier,
expressing concern for "possible consequences on EU citizens' privacy" and explaining that the commission would "get in contact with
our U.S. counterparts to seek more details on these issues."
Since then, EU sources have told me that the commission already knew about Prism before the current leaks and has raised it "systematically"
when talking to U.S. authorities about EU-U.S. data protection agreements, particularly in the context of police and judicial cooperation.
Justice Commissioner Viviane Reding apparently spoke about the matter with U.S. Attorney General Holder Eric Holder at a meeting
in Washington in April.
It is certainly the case that the EU has previously
warned that
"any data-at-rest formerly processed 'on premise' within the EU, which becomes migrated into Clouds, becomes liable to mass-surveillance-for
purposes of furthering the foreign affairs of the U.S. (as well as the expected purposes of terrorism, money-laundering etc.)."
It doesn't look, however, as if the Commission can or will issue any blanket direction on what should happen now or whether it
is acceptable for EU member states to allow their citizens to be monitored under Prism, as appears to be the case in the U.K. That
is because, under the legal principles governing the European Union, national security remains a matter for member states.
As the Commission said in a statement:
"Where the rights of an EU citizen in a Member State are concerned, it is for a national judge to determine whether the data
can be lawfully transmitted in accordance with legal requirements (be they national, EU or international)."
Still, according to the Commission, Reding will raise the issue in ministerial talks with the U.S. on Friday (June 14) in Dublin.
Reding views this debacle as a matter of data protection principles that need to be firmed up, as she said in this statement:
"This case shows that a clear legal framework for the protection of personal data is not a luxury or constraint but a fundamental
right. This is the spirit of the EU's data protection reform. These proposals have been on the table for 18 months now. In contrast,
when dealing with files [that] limit civil liberties online, the EU has a proven track record of acting fast: The Data Retention
Directive was negotiated by Ministers in less than six months. It is time for the Council to prove it can act with the same speed
and determination on a file [that] strengthens such rights."
It's not entirely clear from that statement whether stronger data protection rules can preclude the sort of monitoring of EU citizens
that we're talking about here. With member states having the final say on national security, that may not be possible.
The path taken now by those member states will of course depend on their existing cooperation with the U.S. on Prism. This is
only starting to come out, and of course it raises huge questions about governments using a U.S. scheme to accomplish what their
own national laws might forbid them from doing.
By RICK GLADSTONE, WILLIAM NEUMAN and MELISSA EDDY 8:08 AM ET
After rumors that Edward J. Snowden was aboard, the Bolivian president's plane landed in Vienna and stayed there overnight before
taking off Wednesday morning, an airport spokesman said.
In as a seemingly offhand remark by the president of Bolivia, who suggested during a visit to Moscow that he might be happy to
host Edward J. Snowden, the fugitive former security contractor who is desperate to find asylum. It escalated into a major diplomatic
scramble in which the Bolivian president's plane was rerouted on Tuesday, apparently because of suspicions that Mr. Snowden was aboard.
Evo Morales, president of Bolivia, was attending an energy conference in Moscow when he was asked in an interview if he would
consider giving asylum to Edward J. Snowden.
By day's end, outraged Bolivian officials, insisting that Mr. Snowden was not on the plane, were accusing France and Portugal
of acting under American pressure to rescind permission for President Evo Morales's plane to traverse their airspace on the way back
to Bolivia. Low on fuel, the plane's crew won permission to land in Vienna.
"They say it was due to technical issues, but after getting explanations from some authorities we found that there appeared to
be some unfounded suspicions that Mr. Snowden was on the plane," the Bolivian foreign minister, David Choquehuanca, told reporters
after the plane touched down in Vienna, where Mr. Morales was spending the night.
"We don't know who invented this big lie," the foreign minister said at a news conference in La Paz, Bolivia. "We want to express
our displeasure because this has put the president's life at risk."
Rubén Saavedra, the defense minister, who was on the plane with Mr. Morales, accused the Obama administration of being behind
the action by France and Portugal, calling it "an attitude of sabotage and a plot by the government of the United States."
There was no immediate response by officials in Paris, Lisbon or Washington.
"We were in flight; it was completely unexpected," Mr. Saavedra said on the Telesur cable network. "The president was very angry."
Speaking by phone with Telesur, Mr. Saavedra said that Mr. Snowden was not on the plane. Later, Reuters cited an unidentified
Austrian Foreign Ministry official as saying the same thing.
Bolivian officials said they were working on a new flight plan to allow Mr. Morales to fly home. But in a possible sign of further
suspicion about the passenger manifest, Mr. Saavedra said that Italy had also refused to give permission for the plane to fly over
its airspace. Later he said that France and Portugal had reversed course and offered to allow the plane to fly through their airspace
after all.
On Monday, Mr. Morales, who was attending an energy conference in Moscow, was asked in an interview on the Russia Today television
network if he would consider giving asylum to Mr. Snowden, 30, who has been holed up at Moscow's Sheremetyevo Airport for more than
a week, his passport revoked by the United States.
"Yes, why not?" Mr. Morales responded. "Of course, Bolivia is ready to take in people who denounce - I don't know if this is espionage
or monitoring. We are here."
He said, though, that Bolivia had not received a request from Mr. Snowden, despite news reports to the contrary.
It was already clear by then that the Moscow conference had been overshadowed by the drama of Mr. Snowden and his disclosures
about American intelligence programs, which have deeply embarrassed the Obama administration.
President Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela, who was also at the conference, had suggested he might offer Mr. Snowden asylum but did
not plan to fly him to Venezuela.
But Mr. Morales's remarks appeared to open the door. At least that was the way they were interpreted.
The problems began even before Mr. Morales left Moscow, Mr. Choquehuanca said. On Monday, Portugal, without explanation, had withdrawn
permission for Mr. Morales's plane to stop in Lisbon to refuel, the foreign minister said. That required Bolivian officials to get
permission from Spain to refuel in the Canary Islands.
The next day, after taking off from Moscow, Mr. Morales's plane was just minutes from entering French airspace, according to Mr.
Saavedra, when the French authorities informed the pilot that the plane could not fly over France.
There was also plenty of confusion in Moscow over how Mr. Snowden could possibly have left undetected on a government aircraft.
Government planes carrying foreign officials to diplomatic meetings in Moscow typically arrive and depart from Vnukovo Airport,
which is also the main airfield used by the Russian government, rather than from Sheremetyevo, where Mr. Snowden arrived from Hong
Kong on June 23 hours after American officials had sought his extradition there.
The speculation that Mr. Snowden would hitch a ride on a government jet was discounted by the fact that the plane would have to
first make a quick flight from one Moscow airport to the other.
In an interview with the television station Russia Today, Mr. Maduro said he would consider any request by Mr. Snowden. Then,
ending the interview with a dash of humor, he said, "It's time for me to go; Snowden is waiting for me."
Irrespective of whether Mr Snowdon is a hero or villain, his actions have exposed to what extent US government agencies collect
and analyse data, which those who produced them thought personal and private. We now know that they are not. To suggest we knew
about this all along is confusing hypothesis with established knowledge, which Mr Snowdon seems to have provided.
The ongoing debate of what will happen to Mr Snowdon only seems to distract from the questions that should be posed.
First the ethical question, to what degree can the breach of trust by the US agencies towards individuals and foreign governments
be justified in the light of national security?
Second the practical question. Given the national and international outrage about the agencies' activities and the associated
degradation of US esteem, trust and influence, should we not question the competence of these agencies to enhance our national
security.
They seem to enjoy spying for spying's sake and not consider the implications when found out?
BFNY, NY
For every article about Snowden, that's one less articlee about the spying programs. This dysfunctional congress will change
nothing and the public continues to yawn. How far we've fallen since the post-Watergate era when people were shocked and politicians
made responded with corrective action.
MJCalifornia
What is interesting to me as a foreigner is that everybody is down on america and its government on the NSA issue. Where have
you been people: Where were you when it mattered?
1. The patriot act had widespread public support at the time. So do not say you did not see it coming. Blame yourselves, not the
government or at least take part of the responsibility.
2. People stil believe we go to war to "save the people against oppression" and never not protest against going to war because
"America is always right" attitude.
RLS
Jennifer wrote,
"[S]urveillance isn't about Big Brother, it's about trying to contain terrorism using an alternate way to war."
It's stunning that some people are willing to allow the government to violate their Fourth Amendment rights. If folks think
that the electronic data collection of 300 million innocent people (and everyone abroad) is about finding "a terrorist," think
again.
"This executive fiat of 2001 violated not just the fourth amendment, but also Fisa rules at the time, which made it a felony
– carrying a penalty of $10,000 and five years in prison for each and every instance. The supposed oversight, combined with
enabling legislation – the Fisa court, the congressional committees – is all a KABUKI DANCE, predicated on the national security
claim that we need to find a threat.
"The reality is, they just want it all, period.
"To an NSA with these unwarranted powers, we're all potentially guilty; we're all potential suspects until we prove otherwise.
That is what happens when the government has all the data.
"The NSA is wiring the world; they want to own internet. I didn't want to be part of the dark blanket that covers the world,
and Edward Snowden didn't either.
"What Edward Snowden has done is an amazingly brave and courageous act of civil disobedience."
CathySan Jose, Costa Rica
"Low on fuel" ? The Bolivian plane was denied airspace. Snowden must have incredible information for the US government to
be this desperate!
jjames at replicountsPhiladelphia, PA
In the U.S. in 21st century so far, terrorists have killed fewer than 1% of the people killed in traffic accidents -- and
this comparison includes all of the murders on September 11, 2001. We must protect ourselves, but not out of all proportion
to the risk.
NSA spying and other security excesses are not harmless if you have nothing to hide. This level of spying and infrastructure
can easily result in a tiny, secret, self-interested group controlling the real direction of this society, with no serious
accountability.
LONDON (AP) -- The saga of Edward Snowden and the NSA makes one thing clear: The United States'
central role in developing the Internet and hosting its most powerful players has made it the global leader in the surveillance game.
Other countries, from dictatorships to democracies, are also avid snoopers, tapping into the high-capacity fiber optic cables
to intercept Internet traffic, scooping their citizens' data off domestic servers, and even launching cyberattacks to win access
to foreign networks.
But experts in the field say that Silicon Valley has made America a surveillance superpower, allowing its spies access to
massive mountains of data being collected by the world's leading communications, social media, and online storage companies.
That's on top of the United States' fiber optic infrastructure - responsible for just under a third of the world's international
Internet capacity, according to telecom research firm TeleGeography - which allows it to act as a global postmaster, complete with
the ability to peek at a big chunk of the world's messages in transit.
"The sheer power of the U.S. infrastructure is that quite often data would be routed though the U.S. even if it didn't make
geographical sense," Joss Wright, a researcher with the Oxford Internet Institute, said in a telephone interview. "The current
status quo is a huge benefit to the U.S."
The status quo is particularly favorable to America because online spying drills into people's private everyday lives in a way
that other, more traditional forms of espionage can't match. So countries like Italy, where a culture of rampant wiretapping means
that authorities regularly eavesdrop on private conversations, can't match the level of detail drawn from Internet searches or email
traffic analysis.
"It's as bad as reading your diary," Wright said. Then he corrected himself: "It's FAR WORSE than reading your diary. Because
you don't write everything in your diary."
Although the details of how the NSA's PRISM program draws its data from these firms remain shrouded in secrecy, documents leaked
by spy agency systems analyst Edward Snowden to the Guardian and The Washington Post newspapers said its inside track with U.S. tech
firms afforded "one of the most valuable, unique, and productive" avenues for intelligence-gathering. How much cooperation America's
Internet giants are giving the government in this inside track relationship is a key unanswered question.
Whatever the case, the pool of information in American hands is vast. Redmond, Washington-based Microsoft Corp. accounts for more
than 90 percent of the world's desktop computer operating systems, according to one industry estimate. Mountain View, California-based
Google Inc. carries two-thirds of the world's online search traffic, analysts say. Menlo Park, California-based Facebook Inc. has
some 900 million users - a figure that accounts for a third of the world's estimated 2.7 billion Internet-goers.
The pool of information in American hands is vast. Redmond, Washington-based Microsoft Corp. accounts for more than 90 percent
of the world's desktop computer operating systems, according to one industry estimate. Mountain View, California-based Google Inc.
carries two-thirds of the world's online search traffic, analysts say. Menlo Park, California-based Facebook Inc. has some 900 million
users - a figure that accounts for a third of the world's estimated 2.7 billion Internet-goers.
Electronic eavesdropping is, of course, far from an exclusively American pursuit. Many other nations pry further and with less
oversight.
China and Russia have long hosted intrusive surveillance regimes. Russia's "SORM," the Russian-language acronym for System for
Operational-Investigative Activities, allows government officials to directly access nearly every Internet service provider in the
country. Initially set up to allow the FSB, the successor organization to the KGB, unfettered access to Russia's Internet traffic,
the scope of SORM has grown dramatically since Vladimir Putin took power in 2000 and now allows a wide range law enforcement agencies
to monitor Russians' messages.
In China, surveillance is "pervasive, extensive, but perhaps not as high-tech" as in the United States, said Andrew Lih, a professor
of journalism at American University in Washington. He said major Internet players such as microblogging service Sina, chat service
QQ, or Chinese search giant Baidu were required to have staff - perhaps as many as several hundred people - specially tasked with
carrying out the state's bidding, from surveillance to censorship.
What sets America apart is that it sits at the center of gravity for much of world's social media, communications, and online
storage.
Americans' "position in the network, the range of services that they offer globally, the size of their infrastructure, and the
amount of bandwidth means that the U.S. is in a very privileged position to surveil internationally," said Wright. "That's particularly
true when you're talking about cloud services such as Gmail" - which had 425 million active users as of last year.
Many are trying to beat America's tech dominance by demanding that U.S. companies open local branches - something the Turkish
government recently asked of San Francisco-based Twitter Inc., for example - or by banning them altogether. Santa Clara, California-based
WhatsApp, for example, may soon be prohibited in Saudi Arabia.
Governments are also racing to capture traffic as it bounces back and forth from California, importing bulk surveillance devices,
loosening spy laws, and installing centralized monitoring centers to offer officials a one-stop shop for intercepted data.
"Eventually, it won't just be Big Brother," said Richard J. Aldrich, the author of a book about Britain's GCHQ eavesdropping agency.
"There will be hundreds of little brothers."
But the siblings have a lot of catching up to do if they want to match surveillance powers of the United States, and some have
turned to cyberespionage to try to even the playing field. A high-profile attack on Gmail users in 2010, for example, was blamed
on Chinese hackers, while suspicion for separate 2011 attack on various U.S. webmail services fell on Iran.
But even in the dark arts of cyberespionage, America seems to have mastered the field. Washington is blamed for launching the
world's first infrastructure-wrecking super worm, dubbed Stuxnet, against Iran and for spreading a variety of malicious software
programs across the Middle East. One U.S. general recently boasted of hacking his enemies in Afghanistan.
In his comments to the South China Morning Post, Snowden said Americans had broken into computer systems belonging to a prominent
Chinese research university, a fiber optic cable company and Chinese telecoms providers.
"We hack everyone everywhere," Snowden said.
U.S. officials haven't exactly denied it.
"You're commuting to where the information is stored and extracting the information from the adversaries' network," ex-NSA chief
Michael Hayden told Bloomberg Businessweek earlier this year. "We are the best at doing it. Period."
Politicians in Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Belgium, and Romania are among those to have called for an investigation
into PRISM at a European level. German privacy chief Peter Schaar has demanded that the U.S. government "provide clarity" regarding
what he described as "monstrous allegations of total monitoring of various telecommunications and Internet services." And Schaar
has been backed up by German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who plans to raise the issue when she meets in Berlin with President Obama
next week. Further afield, Canadian and Australian officials have also been voicing their concerns-with Ontario privacy chief Ann
Cavoukian calling the disclosures about PRISM "breathtaking" and "staggering."
For decades, spy agencies have conducted surveillance of overseas communications as part of their intelligence-gathering mission.
But as the U.N. special envoy on free speech noted in an unprecedented report published last week, new technologies have changed
the game. Tools available to governments today enable a more ubiquitous form of surveillance than ever before-all happening under
a veil of intense secrecy and beyond public oversight-and that is precisely the danger with PRISM. U.S. companies have been strong-armed
into complying with U.S. espionage, undermining the civil liberties of everyone who uses these services. No longer is foreign surveillance
targeted at specific channels of diplomatic communication or aimed at particular suspects-it is much broader than that, capable of
sweeping up data on millions or even billions of citizens' communications. Edward Snowden, the NSA whistle-blower behind the disclosure
of PRISM, has alleged that the agency "specifically targets the communications of everyone."
Clapper, the U.S. director of national intelligence, said Thursday that the intelligence community was "committed to respecting
the civil liberties and privacy of all American citizens." But the U.S. government claims to endorse the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights, which makes it clear that all citizens-not just American citizens-have a right not to be subjected to "arbitrary interference"
with "privacy, family, home or correspondence." And that is exactly the problem with the NSA's PRISM: it puts the universal right
to privacy through the shredder, and encourages other governments to do the same.
Angela Merkel and Barack Obama: 'It is the responsibility of the German government to see to it that the programmes of the NSA and
GCHQ no longer process the data of German citizens.' Photograph: Breul-Bild/Juri Reetz/dpa/Corbis
"Germany's security is being
defended in the Hindu Kush, too," said Peter Struck, who was Germany's defence minister at the time,
in 2002. If that's true, then the government
should also be expected to defend the security of its people at their own doorstep. Because the massive
sniffing out and saving
of data of all kinds – that of citizens and businesses, newspapers, political parties, government agencies – is in the end just
that: a question of security. It is about the principles of the rule of law. And it is a matter of national security.
We live in changing times. At the beginning of last week, we thought after the announcement of the American Prism programme that
President Barack Obama was the sole boss of the largest and most extensive control system in human history. That was an error.
Since Friday, we have known that the British intelligence agency GCHQ is "worse
than the United States". Those are the words of Edward Snowden, the IT expert who uncovered the most serious surveillance scandal
of all time. American and British intelligence agencies are monitoring all communication data. And what does our chancellor do? She
says: "The internet is uncharted territory for us all."
That's not enough. In the coming weeks, the German government needs to show that it is bound to its citizens and not to an intelligence-industrial
complex that abuses our entire lives as some kind of data mine. The justice minister, Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, hit the
right note when she said she was shocked by this "Hollywood-style nightmare".
We have Snowden to thank for this insight into the interaction of an uncanny club, the
Alliance of Five Eyes. Since the second world war, the five Anglo-Saxon countries of Great Britain, the United States, Australia,
New Zealand and Canada have maintained close intelligence co-operation, which apparently has got completely out of control.
It may be up to the Americans and the British to decide how they handle questions of freedom and the protection of their citizens
from government intrusion. But they have no right to subject the citizens of other countries to their control. The shoulder-shrugging
explanation by Washington and London that they have operated within the law is absurd. They are not our laws. We didn't make them.
We shouldn't be subject to them.
The totalitarianism of the security mindset protects itself with a sentence: if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing
to fear. But first, that contains a presumption: we have not asked the NSA and GCHQ to "protect" us. And second, the sentence
is a stupid one: because we all have something to hide, whether it pertains to our private lives or to our business secrets.
Thus the data scandal doesn't pertain just to our legal principles, but to our security as well. We were lucky that Snowden, who
revealed the spying to the entire world, is not a criminal, but an idealist. He wanted to warn the world, not blackmail it. But he
could have used his information for criminal purposes, as well. His case proves that no agency in the world can guarantee the security
of the data it collects – which is why no agency should collect data in such abundance in the first place.
That is the well-known paradox of totalitarian security policy. Our security is jeopardised by the very actions that are supposed
to protect it.
So what should happen now? European institutions must take control of the data infrastructure and ensure its protection. The freedom
of data traffic is just as important as the European freedom of exchange in goods, services and money. But above all, the practices
of the Americans and British must come to an end. Immediately.
It is the responsibility of the German government to see to it that the programmes of the NSA and GCHQ no longer process the data
of German citizens and companies without giving them the opportunity for legal defense. A government that cannot make that assurance
is failing in one of its fundamental obligations: to protect its own citizens from the grasp of foreign powers.
Germans should closely observe how Angela Merkel now behaves. And if the opposition Social Democrats and Green party are still
looking for a campaign issue, they need look no further.
• This article originally appeared on
Spiegel International and is republished with permission
thereandaback
I think the standard state response is.
'Shut the F***! UP or we will black bag you and drag your arse off to Guantanamo'
Wrapped in a democratic wrapper. Report Share this comment on Twitter Share this comment on Facebook
ForTheEmpire
Good post except for the democratic bit.
I don't think anyone thinks that the USA is a democracy anymore.
It isn't one and it never has been as the constitution makes pretty clear.
Since 1941 the US has been more of an Empire and less of a Republic.
The Republic died sometime between the years 1962 and 1975.
Rapport
The US and Britain claim they have operated within the law. But they are not our laws and we shouldn't be subject to them This
is a punishable transgression and attempt to corrupt the relationship between 'LORDS' and vassals!
richmanchester
I vaugely recall reading that in some EU negotiaion or other, in the 80's, Britain's casue was helped by having a suspiciously
accurate insight into what the German position was.
bigcugglybear
F##k fibre interception. Time machines!
OrangeZonker
before Tempora there was Echelon
RueTheDay
I think that the majority of rational people in Western countries have rejected the Guardian/Greenwald base delusional perception
that a majority of people will be offended by this relatively unobtrusive intelligence gathering which is so clearly designed
to prevent terrorist atrocities.
Strange that The Guardian doesn't see that it is flogging a dead horse.
Strummered -> RueTheDay
I think you really must try harder. Look around you at the global response to these revelations, not least from national governments.
kagaka -> DavidC012
Its my technical understanding that snooping happened at data exchanges in the UK which are governed by EU law.
Same for us here in Canada but the Government is way to scared of the USA to do anything against USA laws. USA laws supercede
any International Laws.
bonbonniera
Anything 'we' do is intelligence gathering and necessary for self-defence. Anything 'they' do is spying.
Absolutely simple.
StephenStafford
The Germans may be a little more sensitive to Governments compiling information on them as the Stasi would have embraced the
internet and sought to monitor social networking sites.
However the problem is that the information is in free flow on the internet for anyone with access. PRISM is a little different
and the EU will probably be looking at how EU citizens' data might be better protected if stored in the EU and not anywhere else
and to which the USA et al couldn't have access.
No doubt China, Russia, etc will also be reviewing the state of play.
richmanchester
Can data be corralled that easily, or does it tend to slosh around the world willy nilly, flaunting itself for anyone who might
want a peep?
GM Potts
Data flows like water on the internet, so as best to avoid obstacles. It's perfectly possible for Germany to keep internal
German data within Germany, or for the rest of Europe to keep their internal data routed within Europe, away from the US and UK,
in the same way a company can keep it's communications internal. However they'd also have to set up internal alternative services
such as social media.
A better approach may be to teach encryption, computer security and privacy practices at school.
bujinin
To understand the full scope of this (it far exceeds "metadata") requires inclusion of the role of Britain's spy agency GCHQ
Essentially it is the greatest theft of property (communications are property) in human history.
"One key innovation has been GCHQ's ability to tap into and store huge volumes of data drawn from fibre-optic cables for up
to 30 days so that it can be sifted and analysed. That operation, codenamed Tempora, has been running for some 18 months.
GCHQ and the NSA are consequently able to access and process vast quantities of communications between entirely innocent people,
as well as targeted suspects.
This includes recordings of phone calls, the content of email messages, entries on Facebook and the history of any internet
user's access to websites – all of which is deemed legal, even though the warrant system was supposed to limit interception to
a specified range of targets."
His case proves that no agency in the world can guarantee the security of the data it collects – which is why no agency should
collect data in such abundance in the first place. Well, quite.
What's more amazing is the fact that they are calling him a spy -- for revealing the fact that the NSA and GCHQ have been,
for all intents and purposes, spying. It's rather sad that of all the people who had access to the stuff Snowdon had access to
over the past decade, he's the only one to have blown the whistle. Didn't George Orwell say something along the lines that when
you live in a time of universal deceit, even simple truth-telling becomes (or seems) an act of revolutionary insurgency? What
a world we live in.
simbasdad
If we really are spying on the Germans, we should be able to construct a profitable manufacturing sector
TucholskyfuerArme -> simbasdad
Remember, the UK has a service based economy. So your 1% are selling it to the highest bidder and then evade any taxes on it....
GM Potts -> simbasdad
Given that Boeing had full access to Airbus communications then they must be really shit engineers to have built the Bad Dreamliner.
SantaMoniker
Is there no end to these articles that appeal to the hysteria and mob-think here?
In the USA the whole Snowden affair is largely being treated as a "where in the world is Waldo?" paper chase. Americans have
discovered that there is indeed life after the NSA reads - or doesn't read - their e-mails, and the whole overwrought response
is simply ludicrous.
All that remains to know now is whether (a) Snowden actually had access to information that could really result in significant
risk to others (b) if so, will he reveal it in a final flame-out?
In the meantime, his reliance on beacons of transparency, fair play, internet access, and democracy such as China, Russia,
Cuba (perhaps) and Ecuador (perhaps) has made him into a joke.
PeopleOverWallSt -> SantaMoniker
"This is old news and is not a threat - therefore Snowden should be prosecuted as a spy, because he revealed nothing that is
important at all! "
SantaMoniker -> PeopleOverWallSt
No - he should be prosecuted for revealing state secrets after he took an oath not to do so, regardless of the degree to which
his revelations are important.
So far, I have seen nothing that he has revealed that makes me feel less secure or that could have aided anyone interested
in attacking America.
Only an idiot - and there seem to be many of them on these threads - would assume that the spy agency (or agencies) was (were)
not spying.
Anyone able to mount a credible threat to the USA would certainly assume they are, and they could not care one way or another
whether the program was called PRISM or anything else, or what the Fisa documents say or permit. It is so reminiscent of the
Casablanca line - "I'm shocked - shocked" that it really quite funny.
The only question remaining is whether, in order to enhance his reputation as a danger to the US, he - or Greenwald - actually
reveals names of operatives or other information that could seriously endanger someone or impede security activity.
In the meantime - the media will simply play "where in the World is Waldo Snowden?" since there really isn't much else going
on except the slaughter in Syria and the riots in Brazil - the latter something I note that ex-pat Greenwald remains studiously
indifferent to.
LakerFan
Germans should closely observe how Angela Merkel now behaves. And if the opposition Social Democrats and Green party are
still looking for a campaign issue, they need look no further.
We read, here in America, that German luxury cars are given as gifts to especially pernicious spies.
Face it: all the governments of the world have declared war- against their own citizens.
Yosser
Well that may be so, LakerFan, and it's easy to poke fun at the Snowden affair from many angles, but I, for one, do not
like the idea of any Agency anywhere, governmental or private, reading my e-mails and monitoring my calls. The mantra 'If
something can be done it will be done' plus Moore's Law suggests to me that it may not be a bad idea to take President Obama up
on his 'Welcome a debate' remark.
Paul_lgnotus
So the British Empire never died - it just went online. Hurrah for the five eyes on which the sun never sets....
CC0564 -> Paul_lgnotus
They stopped gold digging and started data mining.
And for fun they shoot at paper tigers. Or maybe that is the whole point of this new empire: create new enemies. It is a great
money spinner.
Comrade2070
But they have no right to subject the citizens of other countries to their control.
The problem, though, is that this inference is actually an open question and has been since the Treaty of Westphalia ... especially
with respect to spying
While one can argue that the "binding customary principles of territorial sovereign equality and nonintervention, by the comity
of nations," as one Canadian court put it, prohibits the collection of intelligence by one nation-state against another without
its consent ... there are few treaties on the books where states have explicitly abrogated their powers to collect foreign intelligence.
More importantly, I'm not aware of any treaties that have established an enforcement mechanism to see to it that countries
are punished when they spy against one another.
Indeed most treaties that recognize the broad principal that "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with
his privacy, family, home or correspondence." See Article 12, Declaration of Human Rights and Article 8 of the ECHR also
recognize the broad principle that "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person." The tension between liberty
and security that we see in domestic law is right there in international law. Yet, that tension has come about without the member
states completely ceding their individual liberty to breach any of these rights that we see reflected in domestic law.
For example, the Rome Statute that established the ICC explicitly excludes delicts against privacy from its jurisdiction.
Which returns us to sovereignty--IT is the core problem here. In a system of international anarchy, governments are effectively
at liberty to keep secrets from one another and they are at liberty to try to discover each others' secrets. Until they are willing
to yield both liberties to a higher authority, your protestations against individual citizens getting caught up in the mix of
international espionage will not be remedied ...
truthpleasestoplies -> Comrade2070
And we come back to Adolf Hitler:
Right, Law, Justice, agreements are for the weak. The powerful one does not need them as he and his power authorize themselves.
(in the Nietzschean version of it adopted by Nazism)
But was then Nazism defeated only to occupy the ueberalles place it had outlined and the principles it had chosen? Was eventually
Adolf Hitler right in the concept but wrong in the identity of the one country which would incarnate it? The power-and-no-rights
followers and countries, though not me, are on his side and his heirs.
Is the truth even more simple and Nazism the real engine of the empires of 19th century which existed before and continued
after Hitler?
Just when the Snowden spy saga needs comic relief to counter Washington's bad-tempered diplomacy, in walks Russian president Vladimir
Putin with his own way of describing what might be in the whole deal for Moscow – "it's like shearing a pig – lots of screams,
but little wool."
Clearly the Russian leader thought he could indulge in such colourful language because for the benefit of the international throngs
following the story, he had just answered the 'where's Wally' question – indeed, Mr Snowden was still at Moscow's Sheremetyevo Airport;
though in the transit area which, technically, meant he was not in the country.
... ... ...
There were signs that Washington is issuing chill pills to senior officials.
Couching his words in the terms in which indignant Chinese and Russian officials used to reject his hot-headed comments of Monday,
a more measured US Secretary of State John Kerry told reporters in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia: "We're not looking for a confrontation.
We're not ordering anybody. We are simply requesting under a very normal procedure for the transfer of somebody.
"I would simply appeal for calm and reasonableness at a moment when we don't need to raise the level of confrontation over something
as frankly basic and normal as this."
With so many people in different time zones having their tuppence worth, it was though everyone was speaking at once. And in that
context Kerry's Russian counterpart Sergey Lavrov, wasn't buying the new Mr Kerry tone.
"We consider the attempts to accuse Russia of violations of US laws and even some sort of conspiracy which, on top of all that,
are accompanied by threats, as absolutely ungrounded and unacceptable," Mr Lavrov told reporters in Moscow.
"There are no legal grounds for such conduct [by] US officials."
Despite the formal explanation, Hong Kong officials also indicated displeasure over Mr. Snowden's revelation that the semi-autonomous
Chinese city had been a target of American hacking. The government noted that it asked the U.S. for more information on the issue,
suggesting it played some role in the decision.
Some observers believe the move to allow Mr. Snowden to leave Hong Kong was orchestrated by China to avoid a prolonged diplomatic
tussle with the U.S. over his extradition. Mr. Snowden also claimed that the U.S. accessed private text messages after hacking into
mobile phone companies in China. The U.S. has long complained that it has been a victim of Chinese computer-based attacks.
Hong Kong lawmaker and lawyer Albert Ho, who had represented Mr. Snowden, said an intermediary who claimed to represent the government
had relayed a message to Mr. Snowden saying he was free to leave and should do so.
"The entire decision was probably made in Beijing and Beijing decided to act on its best interests," he told reporters. "However,
Beijing would not want to be seen on stage because it would affect Sino-U.S. relations. That's why China has somebody acting in the
background."
What is Snowden's life like in hiding?
The cramped conditions of staying in the home of a local Hong Kong supporter didn't bother Mr. Snowden, his lawyer told The New
York Times – so long as he had access to his computer.
In fact, Mr. Ho said, the one thing that scares him most about the idea of prison is of losing his computer. "If you were to deprive
him of his computer, that would be totally intolerable," Mr. Ho said.
Was Snowden hiding in plain sight?
Though Mr. Snowden is going to great lengths to avoid detection (Mr. Ho told The New York Times, for example, that all visitors
are asked to hide their cellphones in the refrigerator to prevent eavesdropping), at least a few journalists have had better
luck.
Even while fleeing extradition, Mr. Snowden has granted interviews to The Guardian and The South China Morning Post newspapers
– essentially hiding in plain sight of officials.
For The Guardian, he even agreed to be filmed on video and then last week participated in a live "Q&A" session with Guardian readers.
"I believe in freedom of expression," he told the Post. "I acted in good faith but it is only right that the public form its own
opinion."
Journalists strike out on Aeroflot Flight 180
After word leaked that Mr. Snowden would fly from Moscow to Havana on Monday, journalists who had been searching for him at Sheremetyevo
International Airport rushed to book seats on Aeroflot Flight 180. However, he was not on board.
To make matters worse, there are no alcohol sales aboard the nearly 12-hour flight and the reporters must spend three days in
Cuba before they can leave because of the country's travel rules.
The WikiLeaks connection
The ongoing NSA drama has led to a strategic alliance between Mr. Snowden and the anti-secrecy activist group WikiLeaks.
The arrangement has allowed WikiLeaks – whose founder Julian Assange has been in refuge at the Ecuadorian embassy for over a year
– to share in Mr. Snowden's media spotlight, and also given Mr. Snowden access to the expertise and resources that the international
organization has gained over the years.
Mr. Assange said that Mr. Snowden had approached the activist group over a week ago for its help, and they have since been providing
legal and logistical support. On Sunday, Ecuadorean foreign minister Ricardo Patiño Aroca said the country had received an asylum
application from Mr. Snowden.
Before there was Edward Snowden, there was Mark Klein, a telecommunications technician who alleged that AT&T was allowing U.S.
spies to siphon vast amounts of customer data without warrants
In a new series, Comment is free
writers and editors want to highlight some of the best comments on the site. Each week, either an editor or the author of a recent
piece will pick a comment that they think contributes to the debate. Hopefully, it will give staff and readers an opportunity to
see how thought-provoking such contributions can be and allow great posts the chance to be seen by a wider audience.
Where is the outrage over Prism in Australia? In the same place as Australian outrage over Echelon. Next to the US, Australia
is probably the second most insular "western" democracy in the world. And even more ready to believe that it's all about foreigners,
which doesn't include them but does include anybody slightly brown tinged or with a funny accent on the continent, than the Americans.
I was talking to a (typically) frighteningly casual racist Australian yesterday. And he was genuinely convinced that NSA would
only be spying on "immigrant darkies" in Australia. He couldn't grasp the concept that TCP/IP and the ISO communications model
don't have an ethnic identification layer. And the NSA don't (can't) racially profile meta data.
Antony explains why he picked this comment:
One of the constant refrains about the Snowden revelations, from supporters of unaccountable surveillance, is that the state
and authorities would never peek into lives that have no connection to terrorism. Or that Washington has a watertight court oversight
(Glenn Greenwald
demolished
that lie recently). The commenter understands that the post 9/11 world has seen development of a massive, privatised system
of monitoring and gathering metadata on us all. Alas, I have to agree that insularity is an Australian speciality (not unique
to us, alas). These Prism revelations should alarm politicians and media but far too many of them are sucking on the drip-feed
of sanctioned US government and intelligence leaks and information to care. The online rage against the Obama administration recently
shows that many in the public are demanding action.
Spatial
○ concerning the NSA revelations, media blackout has been very successful
only reporting on the US charging Snowden was allowed
you wouldn't be mistaken to assume that news outlets are run directly from NSA offices. technology is making this possibility
a piece of cake ○
in this 'free country' one is only free to acquiesce unquestionably to the instructions coming from Washington
ChaseChubby -> Spatial
in this 'free country' one is only free to acquiesce unquestionably to the instructions coming from Washington
Indeed. Not like the socialist paradises of Venezuela and Cuba. There a person can say what he thinks without fear. Report
Share this comment on Twitter Share this comment on Facebook
Spatial ChaseChubby
Not like the socialist paradises of Venezuela and Cuba. There a person can say what he thinks without fear
good on you! very 'rational' and adequate response. it doesn't stink of acquiescence at all.
discuz
Even accounting for the third party doctrine, how can FISA ordering call data on ALL US calls be squared with the Fourth Amendment,
statutory protections, common law privileges and the rights of the third parties themselves?
AngloSkeptic AngloSkeptic
As with the City, so with GCHQ:
Britain's feeble public institutions combined with the global reach of ambitious British-based interests menace the entire
world, not just the basic rights of the British population.
The poorly regulated activities of GCHQ appear to undermine the constitutional protections enjoyed by citizens in other
sovereign states.
The sudden loss of 'plausible deniability' creates for governments around the world a legal obligation to act.
AngloSkeptic AngloSkeptic
Voting is of no avail if the population is uninformed or if the activity emanates from another, 'sovereign' jurisdiction.
As Mr Snowdon put it, it is a case of 'turn-key tyranny', but on a global scale.
Meanwhile, Britain, with its lax constitutional arrangement, serves as the Loophole of the world, through which other governments
circumvent their constitutional protections.
MobiusLoop -> RueTheDay
I prefer to live in a safe society, free of criminals and terrorists. The trade off of allowing government snooping across
the board, to keep me safe is acceptable to me.
The central assumption here is that governments and their agencies always act in a benign manner yet this very story, the Hillsborough,
Lawrence and Tomlinson cases are all clear examples of areas where there is the danger of and actual misuse of power and where
public scrutiny is therefore essential. Looking at the history of Northern Ireland, Bloody Sunday with subsequent cover up then
internment can seen as examples of the misuse of powers that had the impact of taking a volatile situation and making it more
dangerous. In this case a far greater level of safety was achieved through open dialogue and an acknowledgement of the underlying
economic and political drivers.
For society to remain balanced and safe, there must be limits on power, scrutiny and accountability. Without checks there is
a tendency to drift towards an ever more draconian and I would argue truly dangerous world.
Sentinel001 -> libertarianSW
Good comments, they ( gove, media etc ) are still portraying using Microsoft Windows or Apple Mac OSX as viable business operating
systems.
This is where they capture all of your data from; remember, they ( Microsoft and Apple) gave the NSA / GCHQ, Five-Eyes Nations,
access to zero-day exploits and other Operating System errors to exploit for commercial gain before telling the public ( whole
world who use those operating systems for their businesses ) about these exploits.
The whole business community around the world need to remove the back-door enabled operating systems from Microsoft and Apple;
Windows and OSX, as this is the only way to guarantee their own data privacy locally.
Message needs to be spread
libertarianSW -> Sentinel001
Exactly, the US is facing a massive backslash, as you pointed, no body knows the extent and what else PRISM involved.
It's funny because the US was issuing security warnings about Chinese TELCO's and Chinese made equipment because of possible
back-doors and illegal data collection ...now the US seems to follow a similar pattern.
AhBrightWings
I was talking to a (typically) frighteningly casual racist Australian yesterday. And he was genuinely convinced that
NSA would only be spying on "immigrant darkies" in Australia.
This was a great post, and I particularly admire how the poster addressed head-on the most disturbing essence of this Orwellian
dynamic. The sad truth is that the racism expressed in the quotation is the purest distillation of Martin Niemöller's axiom about
who they come for first. Virtually everything that has unfolded in the post 9/11 world has been an invitation to pit "Us" against
"Them." As long as it is happening to them, the vast majority has not cared how outrageous the transgressions are or how horrendous
the suffering is. I am still struggling with my disappointment that it took having one's precious cellphone or Facebook page effected
to wake up the slumbering masses to what is going on, but keep coming back to the thought that at least they are waking up.
Many people use the future tense when talking about what "can" or "might" go wrong if we don't put a stop to this. That view
studiously ignores the thousands who have been tortured and imprisoned, without trial, and the hundreds of thousands killed in
an illegal war.
We should be outraged, but the source of that rage should be fueled by our awareness that others are already suffering in our
name. If we don't want them to come for us, we need to care passionately that they've already come for others.
mikedow
I'm always bemused when I see that NSA picture, with it's massive car park. A serious transportation breakdown would just about
scuttle the place. They call that security.
goodkurtz
AhBrightWings:
Virtually everything that has unfolded in the post 9/11 world has been an invitation to pit "Us" against "Them."
By now my dear AhBrightWings you should not be hide bound by that paradigm. I lectured you enough at Salon to get smart about
9/11Truth. So by now you should have realized that 9/11 was so arranged by Them, that yahoo nation would be happy with Them pitting
themselves against Us. And now what they were too stupid to see they were sowing - now must yahoo nation reap.
goodkurtz
Talk about yahoo, sure to appear:
RueTheDay
I prefer to live in a safe society, free of criminals and terrorists. The trade off of allowing government snooping
across the board, to keep me safe is acceptable to me. I will vote for someone who has my physical security as a primary
interest.
I didn't know whether to laugh, spit or cry with despair reading your garbage. The State doesn't give a flying fuck about your
"physical security." They sent many into war to be killed or maimed on false pretenses didn't they? They put the frightners on
you in order that you'll be happily stupid enough to keep up the protection payments.
There's one born every minute - but I really, really wish there wasn't.
American intelligence whistleblower Edward Snowden may expose top secret Australian intelligence gathering operations and embarrass
Australia's relations with neighbouring Asian countries, Australian intelligence officials fear.
Former Labor Defence Minister John Faulkner has confirmed that the heads of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation
and Australia's signals intelligence agency, the Defence Signals Directorate, David Irvine and Ian McKenzie, have briefed the federal
parliament's intelligence committee on the US PRISM internet surveillance program.
The Australian government would not comment yesterday on whether Mr Snowden's exposés of top secret US and British intelligence
and surveillance programs have been the subject of diplomatic exchanges between Canberra and Washington. Foreign Minister Bob Carr's
office would not say whether he has had any exchanges with US Secretary of State John Kerry on the subject.
However Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus's office has confirmed that a high level interagency taskforce is monitoring events and
coordinating the government's response.
... ... ...
"Disclosure of highly sensitive collection operations and methodology will damage Australia's intelligence capabilities. It already
has done so. But there's also risk of serious complications in our relations with our neighbours," one official said.
"The US may be able to brush aside some of the diplomatic fallout from the Snowden leak, but that may not be the case for Australia.
China, Malaysia, other countries may respond to us in ways that they would not to Washington."
Nicho
Heh. The govt. was spying on their own people. Snowden's a traitor only if you regard your citizens as the enemy ..
Scooter
Nicho, the citizen is always the enemy of the State. The biggest weakness resides within. That is why a modern political State
will move to control the means and methods of violence, to minimise that risk.
The president arrives in Northern Ireland early Monday morning to begin an intense three days of behind-the-scenes diplomacy and
very-public speechmaking to culminate in what the White House hopes is a spectacular address at the eastern side of the historic
Brandenburg Gate in Berlin. The crowd for that could top 200,000. But more important for Obama may be the smaller one-on-one sessions
when he is expected to face tough questions about the surveillance disclosures and the evolving U.S. policy on Syria.
Those would come at Lough Erne Resort, a golf resort nestled between two lakes near Enniskillen in Northern Ireland, site of this
year's G-8 Summit. Obama is almost certain to hear complaints from several of the allied leaders upset at public disclosure that
the FBI and National Security Agency collected data on private calls made by citizens, including those using major internet servers
in Europe. Since the disclosure, the complaints have been loudest in Germany, France and Italy. But a nerve was struck across the
continent, with Europe long more concerned about privacy than the United States and long annoyed that Europeans had to rely on Internet
servers maintained by U.S. companies such as Google and Facebook.
Peter Schaar, Germany's freedom of information commissioner, told Reuters he wanted "clarity" from the United States "regarding
these monstrous allegations of total monitoring of various telecommunications and Internet services." Another German official
has called for a boycott of the companies. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who is running for reelection, has said she will raise
the issue with Obama this week either at Lough Erne or in Berlin.
"The most upset party in all of this, I think, is the Germans," said Michael J. Geary, an assistant professor at Maastricht University
in the Netherlands and an expert on Europe. "The Germans were the most snooped-upon country, apparently, in March. In a country where
memories of the former East German Stasi are still quite fresh, the response has been quite critical." Geary described Europeans
as "peeved" and "quite annoyed" at the U.S. actions and said they have the potential to set back sensitive trade negotiations and
do damage to transatlantic relations. "It's a major PR disaster for the administration," he said. "Now, they have really lost
the moral high ground."
Among the questions Obama will face, said Geary, is how much of this information was gathered "simply for security or is it
being used for economic advantage in the United States?"
Heather Conley, director of the Europe Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said she expects the European
leaders to be "extremely vocal about their concerns" privately. She said the disclosures could prove to be "a major stumbling block"
for successful trade talks and revive European concerns about privacy. "Public opinion on this is actually quite strong in Europe,"
she said.
The White House anticipates the questions. "We certainly understand that, like the United States, countries in Europe have significant
interests in privacy and civil liberties," said Ben Rhodes of the National Security Council.
"So we will want to hear their questions and have an exchange about these programs and other counterterrorism programs that
we pursue in the United States and in partnership." But Rhodes stressed to reporters at the White House that the president will
defend the program as "a tool that is essential to our shared security."
"He'll be able to discuss with the other leaders the importance of these programs in terms of our counterterrorism efforts
in particular, the constraints and safeguards that we place on these programs so that they have oversight against potential abuses."
No meeting with another leader at the summit is more eagerly anticipated than Obama's session with Vladimir Putin, who is back
as president of Russia and back at the G-8 summit for the first time since George W. Bush was the U.S. president. Putin and Obama
have had a particularly rocky relationship, with Putin never missing a chance to tweak or embarrass Obama. And when they sit down
Monday evening at Lough Erne, they will face a crowded agenda, including the surveillance program, Syria, Afghanistan, trade, human
rights and arms control.
In his comments this week, Putin has offered a modest defense of the surveillance program, suggesting it is understandable if
done legally. But he cast the Kremlin as more law-abiding and more sensitive to privacy concerns than his American counterparts.
"Such methods are in demand," Putin told RT, Russia's English-language satellite news channel.
"But you can't just listen to the phone call in Russia; you need a special order from court. This is how it should be done
in civilized society while tackling terrorism with the use of any technical means. If it is in the framework of the law, then
it's OK. If not, it is unacceptable."
Today was released that the National Security Agency and the FBI have access to audio, video calls, pictures, e-mails, documents
and connections. The information was revealed by The Washington Post, this is the first time that something of this scale has become
public. The announcement came, unfortunately for the White House, the same day that [...]
There is outrage over an NSA program that records billions of phone calls by wireless phone users. Some of the anger is from Congressmen
who approved the plan, but never believed it would be exposed. A far more invasive program, called PRISM, was created by George W.
Bush to obtain more power over the American [...]
The Last but not LeastTechnology is dominated by
two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt.
Ph.D
FAIR USE NOTICEThis site contains
copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically
authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available
to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social
issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such
copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which
such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.
This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free)
site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should
be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...
You can use PayPal to to buy a cup of coffee for authors
of this site
Disclaimer:
The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or
referenced source) and are
not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the Softpanorama society.We do not warrant the correctness
of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose. The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be
tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without
Javascript.