Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
May 14, 2020

NYT Falsely Blames Russia For Cyberattack Committed By British Hacker

The New York Times continues its anti-Russia campaign with a report about an old cyberattack on German parliament which also targeted the parliament office of Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Merkel Is ‘Outraged’ by Russian Hack but Struggling to Respond
Patience with President Vladimir Putin is running thin in Berlin. But Germany needs Russia’s help on several geopolitical fronts from Syria to Ukraine.

NYT Berlin correspondent Katrin Bennhold writes:

Chancellor Angela Merkel used strong words on Wednesday condemning an “outrageous” cyberattack by Russia’s foreign intelligence service on the German Parliament, her personal email account included. Russia, she said, was pursuing “a strategy of hybrid warfare.”

But asked how Berlin intended to deal with recent revelations implicating the Russians, Ms. Merkel was less forthcoming.

“We always reserve the right to take measures,” she said in Parliament, then immediately added, “Nevertheless, I will continue to strive for a good relationship with Russia, because I believe that there is every reason to always continue these diplomatic efforts.”

That alleged attack happened in 2015. The attribution to Russia is as shoddy as all attributions of cyberattacks are.

Intelligence officials had long suspected Russian operatives were behind the attack, but they took five years to collect the evidence, which was presented in a report given to Ms. Merkel’s office just last week.

Officials say the report traced the attack to the same Russian hacker group that targeted the Democratic Party during the U.S. presidential election campaign in 2016.

This is really funny because we recently learned that the company which investigated the alleged DNC intrusion, CrowdStrike, had found no evidence, as in zero, that a Russian hacker group had targeted the DNC or that DNC emails were exfiltrated over the Internet:

CrowdStrike, the private cyber-security firm that first accused Russia of hacking Democratic Party emails and served as a critical source for U.S. intelligence officials in the years-long Trump-Russia probe, acknowledged to Congress more than two years ago that it had no concrete evidence that Russian hackers stole emails from the Democratic National Committee’s server.
[CrowdStrike President Shawn] Henry personally led the remediation and forensics analysis of the DNC server after being warned of a breach in late April 2016; his work was paid for by the DNC, which refused to turn over its server to the FBI. Asked for the date when alleged Russian hackers stole data from the DNC server, Henry testified that CrowdStrike did not in fact know if such a theft occurred at all: "We did not have concrete evidence that the data was exfiltrated [moved electronically] from the DNC, but we have indicators that it was exfiltrated," Henry said.

The DNC emails were most likely stolen by its local network administrator, Seth Rich, who provided them to Wikileaks before he was killed in a suspicious 'robbery' during which nothing was taken.

The whole attribution of case of the stolen DNC emails to Russia is based on exactly nothing but intelligence rumors and CrowdStrike claims for which it had no evidence. As there is no evidence at all that the DNC was attacked by a Russian cybergroup what does that mean for the attribution of the attack on the German Bundestag to the very same group?

While the NYT also mentions that NSA actually snooped on Merkel's private phonecalls it tries to keep the spotlight on Russia:

As such, Germany’s democracy has been a target of very different kinds of Russian intelligence operations, officials say. In December 2016, 900,000 Germans lost access to internet and telephone services following a cyberattack traced to Russia.


Ahem. No!

That mass attack on internet home routers, which by the way happened in November 2016 not in December, was done with the Mirai worm:

More than 900,000 customers of German ISP Deutsche Telekom (DT) were knocked offline this week after their Internet routers got infected by a new variant of a computer worm known as Mirai. The malware wriggled inside the routers via a newly discovered vulnerability in a feature that allows ISPs to remotely upgrade the firmware on the devices. But the new Mirai malware turns that feature off once it infests a device, complicating DT’s cleanup and restoration efforts.
This new variant of Mirai builds on malware source code released at the end of September. That leak came a little more a week after a botnet based on Mirai was used in a record-sized attack that caused KrebsOnSecurity to go offline for several days. Since then, dozens of new Mirai botnets have emerged, all competing for a finite pool of vulnerable IoT systems that can be infected.

The attack has not been attributed to Russia but to a British man who offered attacks as a service. He was arrested in February 2017:

A 29-year-old man has been arrested at Luton airport by the UK’s National Crime Agency (NCA) in connection with a massive internet attack that disrupted telephone, television and internet services in Germany last November. As regular readers of We Live Security will recall, over 900,000 Deutsche Telekom broadband customers were knocked offline last November as an alleged attempt was made to hijack their routers into a destructive botnet.
The NCA arrested the British man under a European Arrest Warrant issued by Germany’s Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) who have described the attack as a threat to Germany’s national communication infrastructure.

According to German prosecutors, the British man allegedly offered to sell access to the botnet on the computer underground. Agencies are planning to extradite the man to Germany, where – if convicted – he could face up to ten years imprisonment.

The British man, one Daniel Kaye, plead guilty in court and was sentenced to 18 month imprisonment:

During the trial, Daniel admitted that he never intended for the routers to cease functioning. He only wanted to silently control them so he can use them as part of a DDoS botnet to increase his botnet firepower. As discussed earlier he also confessed being paid by competitors to takedown Lonestar.

In Aug 2017 Daniel was extradited back to the UK to face extortion charges after attempting to blackmail Lloyds and Barclays banks. According to press reports, he asked the Lloyds to pay about £75,000 in bitcoins for the attack to be called off.

The Mirai attack is widely known to have been attributed to Kaye. The case has been discussed at length. IT security journalist Brian Krebs, who's site was also attacked by a Mirai bot net, has written several stories about it. It was never 'traced to Russia' or attributed it to anyone else but Daniel Kaye.

Besides that Kennhold writes of "Russia’s foreign intelligence service, known as the G.R.U.". The real Russian foreign intelligence services is the SVR. The military intelligence agency of Russia was once called GRU but has been renamed to GU.

The New York Times just made up the claim about Russia hacking in Germany from absolutely nothing. The whole piece was published without even the most basic research and fact checking.

It seems that for the Times anything can be blamed on Russia completely independent of what the actually facts say.

Posted by b on May 14, 2020 at 14:38 UTC | Permalink

next page »

Good article!

Along the same lines, it always bothered me that among all the (mostly contrived) arguments about who might have been responsible for the alleged "hacking" of DNC as well as Clinton's emails, we never heard mentioned one single time the one third party that we absolutely KNOW had intercepted and collected all of those emails--the NSA! Never a peep about how US intelligence services could be tempted to mischief when in possession of everyone's sensitive, personal information.

Posted by: J Swift | May 14 2020 15:05 utc | 1

The "Fancy Bear" group (also knowns as advanced persistent threat 28) that is claimed to be behind the hacks is likely little more than the collection of hacking tools shared on the open and hidden parts of RuNet or Russian-speaking Internet. Many of these Russian-speaking hackers are actually Ukrainians.

Some of the Russian hackers also worked for the FSB, like the members of Shaltai Boltai group that were later arrested for treason. George Eliason claims Shaltai Boltai actually worked for Ukrainians. For a short version of the story read this:

Cyberanalyst George Eliason Claims that the “Fancy Bear” Who Hacked the DNC Server is Ukrainian Intelligence – In League with the Atlantic Council and Crowdstrike

Cyberanalyst George Eliason has written some intriguing blogs recently claiming that the "Fancy Bear" which hacked the DNC server in mid-2016 was in fact a branch of Ukrainian intelligence linked to the Atlantic Council and Crowdstrike. I invite you to have a go at one of his recent essays...

Posted by: Petri Krohn | May 14 2020 15:26 utc | 2

Wow! You've done it again. I was just writing my Sitrep and thinking what an amazing coincidence it is that, just as the Russian pipelaying ship arrived to finish Nord Stream, Merkel is told that them nasty Russkies are doing nasty things. I come here and you've already solved it. Yet another scoop. Congratulations.

Posted by: Patrick Armstrong | May 14 2020 15:27 utc | 3

The NYT has removed that sentence about the attack on internet/phone access:

"Correction: May 14, 2020

An earlier version of this article incorrectly attributed responsibility for a 2016 cyberattack in which 900,000 Germans lost access to internet and telephone services. The attack was carried out by a British citizen, not Russia. The article also misstated when the attack took place. It was in November, not December. The sentence has been removed from the article. "

That was there for at least 13 hours from yesterday evening onwards. The page was archived this morning though before that edit:

Posted by: Brendan | May 14 2020 15:41 utc | 4

From this we can learn that anything can be blamed by MSM, completely independent of what the facts are. It is not limited to allegations related to Russia or China, but any and all claims by MSM that have no direct reference to provable fact.

Posted by: Norwegian | May 14 2020 15:45 utc | 5

great coverage b... thank you... facts don't matter.. what matters is taking down any positive image of russia, or better - putting up a constantly negative one... of this the intel and usa msm are consistent... the sad reality is a lot of people will believe this bullshit too...

i was just reading paul robinsons blog last night -#DEMOCRACY RIP AND THE NARCISSISM OF RUSSIAGATE.. even paul is starting to getting pissed off on the insanity of the media towards russia which is rare from what i have read from him!

@ 3 patrick armstrong.. keep up the good work!! thanks for your work..

Posted by: james | May 14 2020 15:45 utc | 6

OK I don't know how to fix the formatting in my last link but you can look up on for 10:46 May 14 2020

Posted by: Brendan | May 14 2020 15:48 utc | 7

There is already a correction made to the DT attack - someone reads MofA! Shame they don't get more of their new interpretation form here.

Whole piece reads here like it started as a Merkel gets close to Russia piece, shown around to colleagues and politicians for feedback, and a ton of fake "why Merkel actually hates the Russians" nonsense was added in.

After all pretty much everyone has tapped Merkel's phone by now.

Posted by: m droy | May 14 2020 15:51 utc | 8

Fairy tales told by Danny Kaye....

Posted by: tucenz | May 14 2020 16:22 utc | 9

There was an article in "Der Spiegel" this week about this topic which has more details. Basically, they found the hackers user name (scaramouche) somewhere in the source code and based on that claim to have linked it to a guy who, according to Bellingcat, has the same address as some GRU unit. FBI was also involved and is searching for the same guy: The hackers sent an infected attachment which somebody opened and they got access to the network. The reason this topic pops up now, 5 years later: the BGH put out an arrest warrant in Germany.

Posted by: moritz | May 14 2020 16:40 utc | 10

Welcome back, b! I see you are back on form. I hope you enjoyed your holiday! ;)

Posted by: BM | May 14 2020 16:41 utc | 11

The NYT and Western MSM's lies and assertions backed by no evidence are propaganda repeated endlessly to a population of gullible simpletons who regurgitate it as "indisputable facts" in comments on MSM sites.
Because the "MOST LIKED" comments themselves reinforce the propaganda, they are always allowed on articles bashing Russia or China at CBC (which often posts Associated Press articles). Example:
By contrast, articles that report blatant attacks by the USA on Venezuela (for example) either do not appear at all on CBC, or do not allow reader comments because doing so might weaken the established narrative of propaganda.

Posted by: Mark Mosby | May 14 2020 17:29 utc | 12

Great report!! One that I can forward to those fearful folks who want to 'trust the MSM' and accuse me of sending out 'conspiracy theories' on occasion :) (I think we have to get the truth out beyond the choir!)

Posted by: Nancy | May 14 2020 17:33 utc | 13

The F.B.I. two years ago issued an arrest warrant for Dmitriy Sergeyevich Badin, a member of the hacker group known as APT 28, or “Fancy Bear,” which is attached to Russia’s foreign intelligence service, known as the G.R.U.

Do we have experts here? I recall that the German services were much less convinced at the time, if you followed links in American media. Neither was the scene over here. But now they are?

How are events concerning Kasperky on American ground? Weren't they somewhat suspicousl too:

Sofacy APT hits high profile targets with updated toolset
By GReAT on December 4, 2015. 10:59 am

Sofacy (also known as “Fancy Bear”, “Sednit”, “STRONTIUM” and “APT28”) is an advanced threat group that has been active since around 2008, targeting mostly military and government entities worldwide, with a focus on NATO countries. More recently, we have also seen an increase in activity targeting Ukraine.

Back in 2011-2012, the group used a relatively tiny implant (known as “Sofacy” or SOURFACE) as its first stage malware. The implant shared certain similarities with the old Miniduke implants. This led us to believe the two groups were connected, at least to begin with, although it appears they parted ways in 2014, with the original Miniduke group switching to the CosmicDuke implant.

Posted by: moon | May 14 2020 17:38 utc | 14

sorry next time I'll proofread. This feels crazy

Posted by: moon | May 14 2020 17:39 utc | 15

Wasn't it Obama?

Search on "nsa merkle hack telephone 2015"

Posted by: Bart Hansen | May 14 2020 17:49 utc | 16

Hey B.

Any views on the Obama/General Flynn breaking story for the past 3 days?

Posted by: Skeletor | May 14 2020 17:50 utc | 17

Bryan MacDonald writing at RT today asks some good questions related to the defunct Russiagate and the attempt to ressurect it; this one for example:

"The crazy thing is that many of its [Russiagate] chief architects work for Washington think tanks funded by the US government. Given Trump has taken no obvious steps to curtail public funding for these lobby groups, it means the president’s own cabinet has been effectively bankrolling activists who are out to smear and destroy him" [My Emphasis, the implied question being why?].

The op/ed reveals a bit more that most barflies already know. But why continue funding your enemies? That's similar to a question I had during Mueller's fiasco: Why were so many members of Obama's admin, particularly at Justice, now members of Trump's admin? They were clear partisans, so why weren't they fired or quit? So much still doesn't add up; but then, has it ever?

Posted by: karlof1 | May 14 2020 18:44 utc | 18

The last time Merkel was hacked, her personal cell phone was the hacking target. That was done by the US. The Germans were angry about that one too.

Posted by: Mark Thomason | May 14 2020 19:15 utc | 19

Hilarious In The Now Video "America You Don't Like Me Anymore?" 1min20sec showing just in time delivery still functions.

Posted by: karlof1 | May 14 2020 19:16 utc | 20

In the meantime, Julian Assange languishes in an actual dungeon, for shedding light on the darkness. They are hoping he will die there.

Posted by: Imagine | May 14 2020 21:13 utc | 21

@Posted by: H.Schmatz | May 14 2020 21:24 utc | 25

A link, amongst the ammount, went wrong, you canalso search for it since the head of the article is correct, but, anyway, to facilitate you the issue...

From the First World War to the Second: Without Lenin There Would Have Been No Victory

Posted by: H.Schmatz | May 14 2020 21:38 utc | 22

Senate Votes to Allow FBI to Look at Your Web Browsing History Without a Warrant

The government just got even more power to spy on your internet habits as millions remain quarantined at home.

Posted by: Mao | May 14 2020 22:01 utc | 23

I am not so naive to believe intelligence services do not hack other nations for information, but normally try to do so undetected. We know from Snowden that the US conducts hacks to purposely attribute the action to other nations for political reasons. The US government or MSM blaming other countries for a hack can be compared to someone farting in an elevator and immediately looking around at others to blame for the foul emission.

Posted by: Dick | May 14 2020 22:06 utc | 24

@Posted by: augusto | May 14 2020 20:49 utc | 23

Yeah...but the guy asks many legitimate questions many of us have or have had none MSM have asked so far, and btw, why your nickname links to an advertise from Microsoft?

Posted by: H.Schmatz | May 14 2020 22:17 utc | 25

Mao @27--

NSA already had that capability and was using it along with FBI. Congress merely legalized what was previously and still remains unconstitutional. IMO, what we're doing in relation to what we write here at MoA is classified as Citizen Oversight of Government and entirely legal--and required--unless you're unfortunate and reside in a nation that makes such oversight illegal.

Posted by: karlof1 | May 14 2020 22:22 utc | 26

With respect Patrick Armstrong @3, by reading his SitReps, I always get astonished they are published at SST, due his obvious favourable view of Putin´s system and all the criticism he makes, all along, of the US one.

I find it strange since, if any of us would try to publish such criticism on the US policy at that blog, we would be immediately banned...

This, along with the report of events in Syria, is why many of us got misdirected to that blog, thinking that people could be part of somehow resistance, to then discover they are full inside the system and the owner is not but a far-righter rabid anti-communist way too comfortable living and profitting under the US system through these past decades....

Another point to add to the suspictions pointed out by Great Sequoia´s post.
Why an obvious pro-Trump US blog would promote such favourable view of Putin´s Russia?

Posted by: H.Schmatz | May 14 2020 22:28 utc | 27

"its local network administrator, Seth Rich"

Nonsensical made up stuff. Just keep the facts straight! 99,9% of all serious media report about his polling and strategy expertise, some data science and perhaps some work on software development around connecting voting. Not some "network administrator". Why he was murdered? As for motive there's not much to choose from. The DNC was indeed heavily targeted online which was discovered by Dutch AIVD first. They even brag about knowing the exact building they did it from in Moscow, including having camera footage of the entrance and then alerted American counter parts. To deny that is to believe in a giant tentacled monster controlling the minds of cyber-departments in many nations at the same time (cuckoo!)

As for Seth's untimely death, if not a tragic coincidence, I'd look for some organization who knew about the hack and wanted to have it look like an insider was involved in a "leak". A ruthless, mindless kill to gain 1% advantage and impress the masses with a mystery. Welcome to the real cynical world. Do you think it worked?

Posted by: John Dowser | May 14 2020 22:30 utc | 28

John Dowser @32

You are not even beginning to be cynical. Recall that Rich was chatting with police after they found him. Police were not even in a hurry to get him to ER. Twenty other circumstances that make no sense. Rich was not killed, he merely took a new assignment. With excellent cover.

Posted by: oldhippie | May 14 2020 22:37 utc | 29

karlof1 @ 19

Why “Obamagate” Will Never Lead To Anything Of Significance

Posted by: Desert Foxx | May 14 2020 22:43 utc | 30

@Posted by: Mao | May 14 2020 22:01 utc | 27

Well, what´s new, since Trump rised to power, it is known that when entering the US you could see your mobile phone requisitioned for them to test what your acitivity is on social networks, one guess the web history browsing is included in the pack, when lost from view, how do you know what they are doing with your phone?

A sound reason to not visit the US I have decided to do since the raising of Fascist International to power...

Posted by: H.Schmatz | May 14 2020 22:44 utc | 31

BM #11

Welcome back, b! I see you are back on form. I hope you enjoyed your holiday! ;)

My thoughts too as I got to the second paragraph. YAY!

I hope they didn't leave cigarette butts everywhere and drink all b's grog.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | May 14 2020 23:03 utc | 32

"... The DNC emails were most likely stolen by its local network administrator, Seth Rich, who provided them to Wikileaks before he was killed in a suspicious 'robbery' during which nothing was taken ..."

Well at this stage we don't really know that Rich and Rich only stole the DNC emails, despite he may or may not have thought about Hillary Clinton's actions in using a private email server to store and pass classified government documents, and that he gave them to Wikileaks even though Wikileaks did offer a reward for information about Rich's murder. Rich was dead before the ex-British ambassador Craig Murray made his trip to Washington DC (in the autumn of 2016; Rich died 10 July 2016) to receive a package containing leaked DNC emails from a clandestine source.

It may very well be that Rich could have been set up to take the fall for someone or for other people, to divert attention away from that person or those individuals, and then somehow the narrative that was supposed to have happened itself got twisted into something entirely different.

It is not like B to make assertions such as saying that Rich likely stole the DNC emails without providing proper supporting evidence other than a Wikipedia source that itself does not make such a claim.

Posted by: Jen | May 14 2020 23:07 utc | 33

Mark Mosby #12

Along with NYT you can add the dreaded FT. Take a read of Roula Khalaf's Financial Times Hides the Veils at John Helmer.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | May 14 2020 23:09 utc | 34

augusto #23

The multipolar world does not depend on you, but on BRI, on the Yuan, on the country that can
build 10 (ten) warships at the same time. The US is as dwarfed as a minion fart.

Bravo augusto! well said. Poor old giant sequoia should stick to watching steve pieczenic who is dropping great dummy spits these days as the world changes before his eyes. One day they will realise that the 'president show' has been just like a pro wrestling match for decades. The real game is elsewhere as the last gush of a few $Trillion evidenced. Follow the money trail.... even the Venetians knew that 500 years ago.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | May 14 2020 23:22 utc | 35

karlof1 #30

IMO, what we're doing in relation to what we write here at MoA is classified as Citizen Oversight of Government and entirely legal--and required--unless you're unfortunate and reside in a nation that makes such oversight illegal.

Thank you karlof1: or live in a country that doesn't give a sh!t for the rule of law or rights of its citizens. Thankfully there are not too many in that category ;)

Posted by: uncle tungsten | May 14 2020 23:32 utc | 36

H.Schmatz #25

Thus, yes, what that guy describes is the objective reality, but, recall that, as former Kremlin aide, V.I.Surkov, we are witnessing reality as they shape for us.... then, another objective fact is that the Chinese have brought back many millions of Chinese from poverty and they use to plan long term...and you just do not know what to the meantime the oligarchs live the great life since the fall of the USSR, oth in Russian and China,

and we are waiting for Godot...

Yes waiting for godot.. I note they are still waiting for just a simple high speed rail link in the UKUSA regime lands.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | May 14 2020 23:42 utc | 37

@ 38 jen... regarding your last lines about b's statement "The DNC emails were most likely stolen by its local network administrator, Seth Rich, who provided them to Wikileaks before he was killed in a suspicious 'robbery' during which nothing was taken." which includes a wikipedia link - you have a point... however the way this has been sold since it's inception is that russia was responsible... that evidence was used for a very long time to cast a pale over usa-russia relations, while blaming russia for hilarys election loss and etc. etc. etc... why is it that really sketchy claims can be constantly held up, while other avenues are immediately shut down?? you may be right - seth rich was set up.. that to my mind would point back to the usa intel agencies, or another state actor intent on framing russia for what has become clear was not valid... to me it casts a very bad light on the news and intel agencies that they were so intent on framing russia, that any other possible scenario was written off so quickly... now they there bullshit scenarios have fallen apart - it remains an open question who was behind all this, doesn't it?

but i think when we focus on these details we miss the larger context that b provides in his article here... we can quibble about the details and how b has presented them, but in the context of the broader article, i don't think an author can go into all of the details to the length that some would like... that is my take... thanks for your comments!

Posted by: james | May 14 2020 23:43 utc | 38

@Posted by: james | May 14 2020 23:47 utc | 47

What both have in common is that both mention Donkeytale...strange....

Posted by: H.Schmatz | May 15 2020 0:09 utc | 39

okay... thanks guys!

@ g sequoia... alternative viewpoints are good... i think most folks are cool with that... i am not sure, but b has his own methodology for deciding if some posters cut the mustard or not.. generally i think b is pretty fair... maybe others can chime in..

@ h. schmatz... might just be a coincidence, lol...

@ king lear... thanks... anything is possible.. it becomes a question of what one wants to believe.. seth rich as cia-mossad operative. possible.. assange as cia plant - i see this as very low odds for a number of reasons... regarding the perpetual trump-hillary conversation - fortunately not everyone at moa is totally enamoured on the usa political circus.. i believe the saker lives in the usa, even though he focuses on russia more... for me - good guys/bad guys - it is mostly a distraction to keep people away from taking a closer look it all... once some folks label something a certain way, they close their mind too... btw - my apologies to you and giant sequoia, as i only saw your post @ 45 after i said what i said..

Posted by: james | May 15 2020 0:24 utc | 40

Seven decades after WWII, Germany is still occupied by circa 25K US troops and thus, is little more than a US vassal. The US has been tapping the phones of German Government officials, including Angela Merkel for over a decade. This piece in paper of record is little more than the proverbial ‘pot calling the kettle black’. Utter nonsense. See- Barack Obama 'approved tapping Angela Merkel's phone 3 years ago' By Philip Sherwell and Louise Barnett 27 Oct 2013; Link:

Posted by: Paul | May 15 2020 0:57 utc | 41

Excellent as always, b; many thanks.

Dick @28 Great analogy, and entirely appropriate to the situation.

Jen @38 I recall coming across a supposition that Seth's brother may have been involved as well; perhaps the wrong brother was targeted...? At any rate, all this is just hypothesizing on our respective parts; Wikileaks is adamant in not revealing their sources, though they have consistently affirmed that it was a leak from the inside. They (including Craig Murray) have never been more specific, which has led to speculation that the leak could have come from someone(s) within the DNC, or the Clinton campaign itself, or even the State department. It's alot like the old question about trees falling in the woods without anyone on site to hear; rephrased, the question could run " if something happens and the NYT doesn't report it, did it in fact happen (although as b has pointed out in this post, the question could just as easily be "if the NYT reports something happened, did it in fact happen)?

Interesting times, barflies; stay safe and healthy, and thanks again for being there, b.

Posted by: robjira | May 15 2020 0:59 utc | 42

The right wing Hydroxychloroquine obsession

It may have some influence in the first 48 hours (not a given), but wingnuts have really run with this one.

Posted by: Duncan Idaho | May 15 2020 1:13 utc | 43

"Half of America has reverted to medievalism. Or maybe they were always this way and we just didn’t know it. Either way, it’s a very, very bad sign."

Posted by: Duncan Idaho | May 15 2020 1:15 utc | 44

another reason b will delete posts is if they are off topic... that is also something to keep in mind.. the open threads are used for most anything someone wants to post..

Posted by: james | May 15 2020 1:17 utc | 45

oldhippie @ May14 2020 22:37

You are not even beginning to be cynical...


IMO the entirety of Russiagate - including such things as the DNC "hack" and Trump's hiring of Manafort - was fabricated. Much as other fabrications such as the "White Helmets", Russia's supposed attack on the Skripals, and Chinagate.

Anyone that has looked into Seth Rich - the weak investigations and phony family concern - knows it just doesn't smell right.

= =

Desert Foxx @ May14 22:43

Why “Obamagate” Will Never Lead To Anything Of Significance


Are you not entertained? LOL.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | May 15 2020 1:22 utc | 46

Mad King/donkey pushing the "Putin is a Zionist" Hasbara line.

Mad King/donkey deliberately ignores the Thucydides Trap. The rising power doesn't want conflict. It's the established power that needs to accept the rising power or act to counter them. This explains why China and Putin have been trying to get along with USA/NATO while touting a sovereign world order that constrains USA/NATO. And why USA/NATO has brushed aside those constraints with it's "rules-based order" rhetoric.

Don't fall for Mad King/donkey Hasbara games.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | May 15 2020 1:29 utc | 47

Someone here on MoA asked a while back what benefits China gave to deal with COVID-induced unemployment. I got some detailed info from Eric Li, writing for the Financial Times:

In addition to direct subsidies to companies, the government adjusted the enforcement practices of the labor law so companies could be relieved of their obligations to pay employees full salaries when there was no business. In exchange, companies were asked not to lay off employees and to keep them on the payroll with minimum wage and health benefits. Businesses were entitled to have their rents reduced or even waived if their landlords were state-owned enterprises.

The role of state-owned enterprises -- instead of for-profit private companies -- was enormous:

So who did these things? The doctors and nurses who were sent to Hubei from around the country were mostly state employees working in state-operated hospitals. The companies that built the hospitals and produced most of the masks were state-owned enterprises.

Posted by: occupatio | May 15 2020 2:04 utc | 48

Woops, the above article is at Foreign Policy, not the Financial Times. I confused FP with FT.

Posted by: occpatio | May 15 2020 2:12 utc | 49

Well, I read through essay or statement above by our host, Herr 'b'.

It's cogent, and I believe 'b' is correct, NYT does falsely attribute..etc.

Naturally this begs a question: Why?

Ok, the answer that that seems fairly obvious. There's a a campaign running to create consent, and also probably to divert our attention. (In some measure this effort is producing the unintended result that each day fewer people believe anything in the NYT... a paper Wally quit reading decades ago...)

The difficult David Irving tells a story that's revealing, one his mother explained to him as a boy. The BBC was blathering on for days about a sinking ship, and young David was focused on that topic - until his mother pointed out that the focus on the "dramatic" affair was due to the probably, she thought sure, fact that it was diversion from some other affair - one that their Lordships would prefer was not noticed.

What, in the present world, might our masters prefer we not notice?

Why, in the present world, would our masters desire to curate consent, antipathy, toward Russia?

Why is the US Navy "patrolling" the Barents Sea?

Add up your own list, Tomorrow being Friday, there may be a quiz...

Posted by: Walter | May 15 2020 2:14 utc | 50

Posted by: Jen | May 14 2020 23:07 utc | 38 Well at this stage we don't really know that Rich and Rich only stole the DNC emails... It is not like B to make assertions such as saying that Rich likely stole the DNC emails without providing proper supporting evidence other than a Wikipedia source that itself does not make such a claim.

The evidence for Rich being the source or one of the sources lies in a set of *circumstantial* evidence:

1) Fox News reported that the FBI had investigated Rich's death on a request from the Washington, D.C., police department which had examined Rich's computer but could not break the encryption, so they brought in the FBI. The FBI *allegedly* had a report written that showed Rich had been in contact with Wikileaks and had a Dropbox account which had been accessed *by* Wikileaks.

2) Then Sy Hersh got involved, calling and asking Ed Butowsky about the Fox News report. The audio tape Butowsky made of that conversation went viral because it appeared to show Hersh saying *he* knew of the FBI report. Note that according to Colonel Pat Lang, *he* was the one who put Hersh on to Bukowski. Lang then later denied that Hersh ever meant to suggest that he knew of any such FBI report. That was the issue over why *I* got banned at SST - because I argued with Lang over that issue.

3) Butowsky and other parties are involved in a lawsuit with various other parties including Fox News - which retracted their report IIRC - and the Rich family. As part of court filings in that case, it is alleged that Julian Assange *explicitly told* Fox News analyst Ellen Ratner that the DNC emails came from Seth Rich, during a visit by her to Assange (which visit has been confirmed as occurring, although not the conversation.)

4) Among other details, according to the Butowsky court filing and Ratner's (alleged) statement, Aaron Rich - Seth's brother - was involved in the DNC hack. This would explain Wikileaks' reluctance to reveal the source of the DNC emails. Even though Seth Rich is dead, his brother is still alive - and if he was a source, the Wikileaks "no reveal" policy would presumably be in effect.

5) Assange's and Wikileaks' lawyers have previously offered a deal to the US Department of Justice, whereby they would provide what was described as "technical evidence" that the DNC emails did *not* come from Russia in exchange for considerations over Assange. Allegedly when James Comey heard of this, he tried to get a US Senator to derail the DoJ process. While the DoJ allegedly refused that influence effort, Wikileaks allegedly got cold feet and backed away from the deal.

Notice I use the term "allegedly" all over the place because there is absolutely *nothing* concrete about any of this (also leaving aside oldhippie's "spook paranoia" about Assange, a long-time hacker.)

Also note that *all* of the Sy Hersh denials on this matter which I had read have been extremely *weak* denials or "non-denials denials." In my view, Hersh considers this issue toxic and dangerous to his well-being. Consider what it means if he or Butowsky is right about the FBI *knowing* that Seth Rich was the DNC leaker *and* has kept this information secret for *four years.* The FBI goes down. *Everyone* at the FBI who knew about that report goes to prison. What actions would you think the FBI would be willing to take against anyone - including a respected journalist like Sy Hersh - to prevent that from happening?

But let's assume the more prosaic and likely explanation - Butowsky misunderstood Hersh's statements on that audio tape, which means the only evidence for Seth Rich's involvement is the Fox News report and an alleged conversation with a Fox News individual.

There is still the question of the coincidence of a DNC staff being murdered on the street, with no money taken. Sure, it could have been a robbery gone bad. Even Sy Hersh acknowledged that in the audio tape.

The problem is that, as the William Binney, the ex-NSA Technical Director who is a member of the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity organiztion, has pointed out, the NSA has *complete and total* knowledge of everything going over the Internet. Therefore is someone hacked the DNC - or leaked the emails over the Internet to Wikileaks - the NSA would know. Even assuming an adequate level of encryption was used, the *connection* could be established by records in the NSA's possession.

The only exception would be if the data was extracted by a local wireless connection and then hand-carried on removable storage - neither of which could be surveilled by the NSA. This is how I would have done it - and likely how any Russian intelligence agents (if not Russian criminal hackers) would have done it, operating out of the Russian Embassy or Consulates in Washington.

So *someone* is *hiding* who really did the DNC "hack" or leak. The evidence that it was *ever* a "hack" is so weak as to be utterly pathetic. A number of infosec professionals, notably Jeffrey Carr, simply don't buy the Russian attribution and don't respect Crowdstrike's capabilities (or integrity given their connections to the Atlantic Council.)

The other problem is the analysis of the alleged Guccifer 2.0, which many people suspect was thrown in the mix to obfuscate the issue and support the Russian attribution. But this post is already too long to go into that mess. Sorry about that, b!

Posted by: Richard Steven Hack | May 15 2020 2:26 utc | 51

King Lear @ 43:

Why should it be in Russia's interest to aid or defend Russian-speaking Ukrainian citizens in Donetsk and Lugansk provinces? This is Ukraine's problem and the problem of those who back the Nazi government in that country. How is this issue a reflection of whether Russia is a threat or not to US hegemony?

The fact that the US itself views Russia's (non-existent) presence in eastern Ukraine as a threat to its own interests in Ukraine might provide the answer as to whether Russia poses a threat to US global hegemony.

The situation in Idlib may be rather more complicated than it at first appears. Russia and Syria are waiting for Turkey to either corral or move the jihadis out of Idlib. It is not in Syria's interest to attack the Turkish-aided jihadis in case there are actual Turks or other foreigners from NATO countries among them. Such an attack could be creatively interpreted by Turkey as an attack on Turkish forces that "happen" to be in Idlib and thus bring NATO countries into the conflict (which the US and the UK have been itching for, for ages). That would be the last thing Syria and Russia want: an unnecessary potential global war. You sound as though you actually support US / UK ambitions for a war.

You haven't proved that the various "Zionist oligarchs" named are controlling Putin or the Kremlin, and that as a result Putin is not willing to "counter" US interests. Some of these "oligarchs" (Deripaska, the Rotenberg brothers) have been sanctioned by the US. All you've done is demonstrate a bias against a number of Russian business magnates for having a particular ethno-religious background in common.

That the US has its fingers in so many pies around the world and wants to be dominant everywhere might be an indication of weakness and insecurity, rather than an indication of strength. Strong powers choose their fights.

Posted by: Jen | May 15 2020 2:29 utc | 52

Richard Steven Hack @ 65:

No, your post is not long at all and the information as well as your conclusion is very interesting.

"... The only exception would be if the data was extracted by a local wireless connection and then hand-carried on removable storage - neither of which could be surveilled by the NSA. This is how I would have done it - and likely how any Russian intelligence agents (if not Russian criminal hackers) would have done it, operating out of the Russian Embassy or Consulates in Washington ..."

Not only is this how you would have done it but it seems to me this is how it actually was done: the data or some of it anyway was passed on to Craig Murray in Washington DC in secret.

Posted by: Jen | May 15 2020 2:39 utc | 53

Jackrabbit @ May15 2020 1:22

fabricated ... Trump's hiring of Manafort

I should explain this.

Trump's hiring of Manafort as campaign manager is a fact (not fabricated). But why Trump hired him is very very suspicious.

Prior to being hired by Trump for a Presidential campaign, Manafort was working in Ukraine for many years (7 or more, I think) and most of that work was working for Russia-friendly political parties/candidates. So Manafort didn't exactly fit with Trump's "America First" nationalistic thrust. In fact, he was a rather poor fit.

There's some evidence (look in the moa archies!) for CIA unhappiness with Manafort's work in Ukraine. It seems to be that he may have been setup for a fall just as Gen. Flynn was. As we now know, each of Manafort's and Flynn's involvement and subsequent prosecution helped to further Russiagate.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | May 15 2020 2:42 utc | 54

A solid piece by our host, but I always find it weird when this claim is left unchallenged that "the DNC didn't allow the FBI to examine their server". If I have a meth lab in my kitchen, will I skate because I don't "allow the Feds to examine" it? To ask the question is to answer it. Obviously, and with tons of supporting evidence that has meanwhile become public, the senior political leadership (at a minimum) of the FBI was in on the joke from the beginning.

Posted by: Ma Laoshi | May 15 2020 3:38 utc | 55

Ma Laoshi | May 15 2020 3:38 utc | 69 I too always find it weird "DNC did not..."

This is an obvious "tell", an indication that there's a misc en scene, a set stage, a "gun on the wall" and a dog that does not bark in the night... Sure signals of a fairy-tale.

See Brother McGovern (vide supra) in re his subpoena, and in the body of that essay by Ray McGovern, his YT presentation in re the matter of who did the email "theft".. (Wally does not agree that anything was stolen, as it cannot be a crime to reveal a crime, can it?)

See tinyurl[dot]com/yakbch6v (Ray McGovern - Russia-gate: Can You Handle the Truth?)


Mind y'all...Wally's interests are much as Victor Klemperer's were....He witnesses. He does not advocate except to say that we do not need anyone to tell us what is good, and what is not good, as is said in the Phaedrus. And that it is good to speak truth. (though the latter is his own a-priori assumption, probably a genetic disposition Wally inherited.

Posted by: Walter | May 15 2020 3:53 utc | 56

@ 69 ma laoshi.. good analogy! i share yours and wallys view on that... doesn't pass the smell test...

Posted by: james | May 15 2020 4:06 utc | 57

Thank you, b, for pointing out that the New York Times in its behavior very much resembles the manner in which US politicians themselves have behaved, so that reporting what is actually taking place becomes buried in 'if it bleeds it leads' pseudojournalism. I suppose in future the actual facts may be pointed out as having been reported, so what's the problem? The problem is they, the facts, are like the needle in the haystack, and one might (I do) recognize that one is completely behind the 8 ball as far as knowing what on earth is going on.

For whatever reason, I too am completely at sea concerning the discussions on this thread. I will just have to leave it to everyone else, and I do apologize for not understanding. As an OT addendum I am at least very happy that the governor of my state has finally taken the reins and ordered everyone to wear masks (while masked herself) when out in the public arena. That cannot but help, so thank you, Governor Grisham.

Posted by: juliania | May 15 2020 4:24 utc | 58

"... The only exception would be if the data was extracted by a local wireless connection and then hand-carried on removable storage..."
Not only is this how you would have done it but it seems to me this is how it actually was done: the data or some of it anyway was passed on to Craig Murray in Washington DC in secret.
Posted by: Jen | May 15 2020 2:39 utc | 67

The first problem with this is that WiFi at that time would not - I believe - support the data transfer rates that Binney proved were used when writing to the USB stick - the data would have to have been copied in a direct hard disk to USB stick transfer. [However, there are too many problems with the statement I have just made to be absolutely sure, including that Binney in his analysis didn't directly address any issue of WiFi as it is not relevant to getting the data out of the building; also I am not sure exactly what WiFi transfer rate would have been available at the time. Nevertheless, I believe WiFi was at least implicitly excluded by Binney's analysis.

The second problem is that doing the copying over WiFi presumably introduces (I am not an expert) too many extra and unnecessary hurdles in terms of system security etc. Direct administrator access to the fileserver (as opposed to user-access) would almost certainly possible over ssh via WiFi but presumably with costs such as audit trails and fingerprints, which one assumes the person involved wanted to minimise. It has been stated that Rich had physical access to the server - and Binney himself always emphasised physical access to the server not via WiFi - therefore in the absence of any evidence of any advantage of copying over Wifi rather than plugging the USB directly into the server computer itself, by Occam's razor, it didn't happen. I.e. the data was copied directly onto the USB without any intervening WiFi or other network.

Also I think - and I am on hazy ground here - there was also an issue of Unix vs. windows operating system involved in the evidence of how the time stamps were represented, but maybe I am confusing that with the Guccifer fakes.

Posted by: BM | May 15 2020 5:49 utc | 59

My spook paranoia concerning Assange? Fairly certain I have never posted a word about Assange anywhere. Very certain I never posted a word about Assange here. So that is purest fabrication.

Your method is showing.

Posted by: oldhippie | May 15 2020 7:23 utc | 60

Facebook has announced the launch of a “Hateful Memes Challenge” during which researchers will compete for a $100,000 prize pool by developing artificial intelligence that can successfully detect “hateful memes.”

The company has created 10,000 “hateful” customized memes as a data set for the challenge.

“In order for AI to become a more effective tool for detecting hate speech, it must be able to understand content the way people do: holistically,” writes Facebook. “When viewing a meme, for example, we don’t think about the words and photo independently of each other; we understand the combined meaning together. This is extremely challenging for machines, however, because it means they can’t just analyze the text and the image separately. They must combine these different modalities and understand how the meaning changes when they are presented together.”

The hateful memes challenge arrives on the back of Facebook announcing its new “content oversight board,” a censorship council that includes anti-Trump leftist activist Pamela Karlan and Muslim Brotherhood supporter Tawakkol Karman.

This isn’t the first time Facebook has declared war on memes.

Posted by: Mao | May 15 2020 8:07 utc | 61

A poll conducted by YouGov has found that more than two-thirds of Americans blame China for the global coronavirus pandemic.

The survey, commissioned by the Victims Of Communism Memorial Foundation, found a strong consensus view China as culpable.

An overwhelming majority of 69% believe China is somewhat or very much responsible for the coronavirus, with around 40% viewing China more negatively as a result of the pandemic.

The poll also found that 71% say China should be “penalized” for its role in the pandemic, with 41% of this subgroup believing there should be some kind of international sanctions, 33 percent supporting additional tariffs on Chinese goods, and 32 percent wanting the United States to refuse interest on Chinese-held federal bonds.

The survey also show revealed that roughly two-thirds of the public view China as an adversarial competitor, while just 6 percent see the communist state as an ally.

“It wasn’t until this poll that we saw the full extent by which a majority of Americans directly blame the Chinese government,” VOC Executive Director Marion Smith commented.

Posted by: Mao | May 15 2020 8:12 utc | 62

This kind of thing is well known in advertising business, where it doesn't matter how stupid advertisement is, as long it is repeated enough times, people just remember, they heard about the product somewhere!In this case it is important to keep repeating "Russia" or "China"!People will only remember, they heard it in connection with something bad!

Posted by: padre | May 15 2020 8:45 utc | 63

At 62 The obvious conclusion is that 69% of Americans are ignorant, racist, easily manipulated idiots. Sadly that's probably the same for the rest of the world too.

Posted by: Ike | May 15 2020 9:06 utc | 64

The Western Aristodictatorship Eleets have no ability whatsoever to 'go to war' with Russia or China. A new reason for this state of affairs has arisen. Back in the Middle Ages the implements of power (force and religion and custom), and wealth, were very primitive. But now in these Modern Ages, the implements of power and wealth have become highly complex and sophisticated. And the result of this development is that structures of power and wealth have become very nearly identical.

In order to win a war you must destroy more of your enemy's power than the enemy can destroy of yours. However, since power and wealth have become so profoundly entangled, the result will be not merely the taking of, but the actual mutual destruction of vast amounts of wealth. Obviously the eleets will not be eager to sustain such vast destructiveness of their wealth.

So I believe the manufacture of fake enemies is mere theater for the distraction of the masses. However, this sort of procedure could easily become out of control.

Posted by: blues | May 15 2020 10:44 utc | 65

Petri Krohn @2:
The Ukrainian connection in many of the anti-Russian allegations is clear to anyone who is a bit familiar with that environment. When you analyse content of the Steele dossier, the anti-FSB/GRU attacks by the British Bellingcat in the Skripal case, the supposed trails of Fancy Bear and the signature, the Integrity Initiative: you always find a mention of Ukraine, as if all of Russian foreign interest is always circles Ukraine. It is overt proof of the natural narcissism of (ex-)Ukrainian spy agencies who think everyone in Russia obsesses primarily about Ukraine.
Add to much of the above also the Assange misconduct allegations, you will almost just as often find a particularly English obsessive choice of perversion to grab interest: the use of excrement/piss in whatever tail is being concocted, and you get a mix of English MI5/6 with ex-Ukrainian spy contractors for hire filling up much of the content.

Posted by: Josh | May 15 2020 11:07 utc | 66

CrowdStrike co-founder Dmitri Alperovitch was interviwed for an Esquire article in October 2016 (the month before the US Presidential election). He made it clear that CrowdStrike had evidence to prove that Russia hacked the DNC. That included the company president Shawn Henry who, as we only now know, told the House Intelligence Committee in December 2017 that CrowdStrike did not have concrete evidence that the hack even occurred:

"A CrowdStrike security expert had sent the DNC a proprietary software package, called Falcon, that monitors the networks of its clients in real time. Falcon "lit up," the email said, within ten seconds of being installed at the DNC: Russia was in the network.

Alperovitch, a slight man with a sharp, quick demeanor, called the analyst who had emailed the report. "Are we sure it's Russia?" he asked.

The analyst said there was no doubt. (...)

Alperovitch then called Shawn Henry, a tall, bald fifty-four-year-old former executive assistant director at the FBI who is now CrowdStrike's president of services. Henry led a forensics team that retraced the hackers' steps and pieced together the pathology of the breach. Over the next two weeks, they learned that Cozy Bear had been stealing emails from the DNC for more than a year. Fancy Bear, on the other hand, had been in the network for only a few weeks.

(...) doubts were prompted by the appearance of a blogger claiming to be from Eastern Europe who called himself Guccifer 2.0. Guccifer said that the breach was his, not Russia's. (...)

Alperovitch was bewildered. In a career spanning nearly two decades, he had never made an incorrect attribution in public. "Did we miss something?" he asked CrowdStrike's forensics team. Henry and his staff went back over the evidence, all of which supported their original conclusion."

Posted by: Brendan | May 15 2020 11:24 utc | 67

Posted by: oldhippie | May 15 2020 7:23 utc | 60 #65 Fairly certain I have never posted a word about Assange anywhere.

Not my method. I appear to have mixed up in my mind a previous comment of yours on Tomas Pueyo with King Lear's suggestion that Assange was a CIA plant. Oh, well, one evidence-free assertion looks like any other. LOL

Posted by: Richard Steven Hack | May 15 2020 11:47 utc | 68

occupato @48--
That was me who wondered about how China dealt with the mass unemployment issue. Good find.

RSH @51--

I read somewhere an interesting theory that Seth Rich was Mossad and used to get the emails to discredit Hillary and help get Trump elected. He was then offed by Mossad. Possible I'd guess.

Posted by: arby | May 15 2020 12:14 utc | 69

Paul Craig Roberts

Truth in America R.I.P.

In “freedom and democracy” America there is only official truth, and it is a lie. A person or website that speaks real truth is shunted aside as a “conspiracy theorist,” “Russian agent,” “racist,” “anti-semite,” or other such name with the purpose of discrediting the message and the messenger.

Posted by: Mao | May 15 2020 12:37 utc | 70

Israel’s external spy organization Mossad and its internal espionage equivalent Shin Bet have reputations that are much larger than their actual successes, but the one area where they have excelled is electronic intelligence gathering. Recent electronic spying around the White House and other federal buildings in Washington carried out by the Israeli Embassy demonstrates that Israel does not differentiate much between friends and enemies when it conducts espionage. In fact, spying targeting the U.S. is probably its number one priority due to the fact that the Jewish state is so heavily dependent on American support that it feels compelled to learn what discussions relating to it are taking place behind closed doors.

Israeli penetration of U.S. telecommunications began in the 1990s, when American companies like AT&T and Verizon, the chief conduits of the National Security Agency (NSA) for communications surveillance, began to use Israeli-produced hardware, particularly for law enforcement-related surveillance and clandestine recording. The devices had a so-called back door, which meant that everything they did was shared with Israel. Israeli cyber-specialists even broke into classified networks with the NSA and FBI aware of what was going on but unwilling to confront “America’s best ally.” President Bill Clinton once quipped to Monica Lewinski that they should avoid using the Oval Office phone because someone might be listening in. He was referring to Israel.

Posted by: Mao | May 15 2020 12:41 utc | 71

Posted by: Brendan | May 15 2020 11:24 utc | 67 Alperovitch was bewildered.

It just occurs to me that perhaps it was Shawn Henry who was recruited by the anti-Trump crowd at the FBI to bamboozle CrowdStrike. It would have been easy for someone like him to convince someone like Alperovitch with the latter's antipathy to Putin and current Russia.

However, I still think that the whole affair - the alleged "hack" and the rest of Russiagate - was conceived by someone in the CIA or the FBI or the DNC and implemented by persons in the DNC and the Clinton campaign organization. Numerous persons have pointed to one Alexandra Chalupa, a Ukrainian-American with connections to right-wing nationalists in Ukraine and the Ukrainian Embassy, who in turn have connections to right-wing Ukrainian hacker groups. She reported an alleged "hack" by "Russians" sometime back in May of 2016 (before the DNC leak - allegedly - the article on this incident was not published until July, 2016) supposedly when Yahoo sent her an alert warning her of a "state-sponsored hack". I have long suspected that she was deeply involved in fabricating the entire DNC "hack" story.

In other words, once the DNC was aware that damaging emails were being exfiltrated out of their organization, they had to come up with a way to deflect the resulting negative press. Since they apparently had been planning to accuse Trump of being an agent of or at least soft on Russia as a campaign platform, what better way than to claim that Russia hacked the DNC because they wanted Trump to win the election. The only question at this point is who originated the concept of a "hack" to cover the leak.

I suspect that either Crowdstrike was hired to fake the evidence of Russian "hacking", or someone, perhaps Chalupa, arranged for Ukrainian hackers to fake a hack on the DNC that Crowdstrike could then be convinced was "Russians" - since Crowdstrike, because of its CEO Alperovitch, is known for seeing Russians under every bed. (One of the well-known problems with infosec companies these days is a tendency to latch onto "state-actor hacks" - whether Chinese, Russian, North Korea, or Iranian - as a promotional gimmick to ride the national news and get more business.) If Shawn Henry was clued in by either the anti-Trump operation at the FBI or by the DNC or perhaps John Brennan at the CIA, he could have convinced or recruited Alperovitch to go along with the operation. Another perhaps less likely possibility is that some Russian hackers (either Russian intelligence or more likely ordinary criminal hackers) actually did hack the DNC at some point, but the DNC decided to use those incidents to deflect from the Wikileaks release. I find the idea that Russian intelligence hackers could be so easily discovered and so sloppy in their methodology as to render the latter idea less likely. But Russian criminal hackers could have been involved.

One thing people don't understand is hacker psychology. People think that just because some high-profile organization gets hacked means that it "must be" a "state actor." But *any* hacker will hack *any* target as long as it is 1) a challenge, and/or 2) interesting, and/or 3) has either intellectual property or PII (Personal Identifying Information) which can be marketed on the Dark Web (or of course easily marketed things like credit cards.) So the nature of the target means nothing in determining whether a state actor is involved. There is also a lot of cross-over of state and criminal hacking - state actors recruit criminal hackers, criminal hackers sometimes sell information to state actors, and they all use each others' tools if they can get hold of them. This is true in the US as well - the FBI has been known to arrest criminal hackers, then put them to work for the FBI trying to catch other hackers - even as their "tame" hackers continue to commit crimes on their own. This is also a problem for the FBI in organized crime, as the Whitey Bulger case showed. And both the NSA and CIA have lost control of some of their tools.

Posted by: Richard Steven Hack | May 15 2020 12:42 utc | 72

Posted by: arby | May 15 2020 12:14 utc | 69 I read somewhere an interesting theory that Seth Rich was Mossad and used to get the emails to discredit Hillary and help get Trump elected. He was then offed by Mossad. Possible I'd guess.

Yup. One thing one has to always remember about either intelligence games or computer hacks - there is always so much misdirection, obfuscation, and deception that knowing what is going on is always next to impossible unless you are one of the instigators - and even then, your opponents may have turned your own operation against you so that even you don't know what's going on.

The usual difference between intelligence agencies and hacker groups is the degree of resources available. The alleged "sophistication" of the operation means nothing, especially in hacking. And some larger hacker groups have hundreds of thousands of dollars or even millions of dollars to put into an operation. Some hacks which initially were thought to be "state actors" due to the "sophistication" of the attack turned out to be actually one or two lone civilian hackers. The term "APT" - for Advanced Persistent Attacker - is pretty much a joke, as most of those groups use the same straight-forward hacking methods that have been around for years. It's the fact that computer security is bloody hard to do that allows most organizations to be as "secure" as sieves.

I'm inclined to doubt the Mossad theory, however, given all the hullabaloo over Butowsky's claims. Adding Mossad is sort of like "explaining the unknown by the still more unknown." But anything is possible.

Posted by: Richard Steven Hack | May 15 2020 12:57 utc | 73

Re: Seth Rich conspiracy theory

There are those who suggest that Seth Rich was actually in the know on the whole Russiagate farce and was a CIA/Deep State plant to confuse people. They point out odd behavior from his family, DC police, Seymour Hersh, the FBI, etc as proof. I suppose they are trying to convince people that the Russians did hack the emails and the CIA was trying to plant the narrative that the emails were actually leaked?

Apart from the fact that is bass-ackwards where motives are concerned, there is a very simple explanation for the behavior of people close to the case, and Richard Steven Hack @51 points it out: "Hersh considers this issue toxic and dangerous to his well-being." This would apply to everyone who may be in possession of pieces of the truth.

Consider a murder by a very powerful criminal gang. A gang so powerful that the local cops will not touch them. A gang that even has significant portions of the mass media in its pocket. A gang that even the FBI backs away from. That gang kills your brother/son/best friend. What do you do?

When considering how you, dear reader, would personally respond, do try to keep your self-examination in the realm of reality and not Hollywood action-drama nonsense. When the men in black who talk into their armpits show up at your door with "questions", you will foul your shorts and not only pretend to forget everything that you know, but you will convince yourself that you have forgotten and never speak of the matter again. You will keep your head down and go along with the official narrative, because that is the narrative manufactured by the criminal gang. There is nobody on Earth who can protect you and your loved ones from them, so you will kneel and say whatever they want. One might stand up for oneself before the police, or perhaps even the FBI, but deep down all Americans know that the CIA isn't about justice or rule of law. It's a criminal gang that "lies, cheats, and steals", but also murders whenever it feels like it with there never once in its history having ever been any repercussions. It is a criminal gang that tortures people to death in its "black site" dungeons like the Spanish Inquisition did for no other purpose than the sick enjoyment of the power rush it gives them (Bloody Gina has admitted in congressional testimony that there is no legitimate intelligence that can be gathered from torture, yet she still supervised torture... the evil of the Dark Ages didn't fade away, it just put on business suits).

There is no "odd behavior" from anyone close to Seth Rich's murder. That behavior is precisely what you would expect from people reacting to a gang hit by the most powerful criminal gang on the planet.

Posted by: William Gruff | May 15 2020 13:20 utc | 74

Richard Steven Hack @ May15 2020 12:57

knowing what is going on is always next to impossible

In real time, yes. But over time we can piece together what happened.

I'm inclined to doubt the Mossad theory

I'm inclined to believe it because IMO USA uses Mossad for false flags on a wink wink nod nod basis, just as they use MI6 to spy on US Citizens and promote propaganda that seems more genuine coming from a third country.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | May 15 2020 13:34 utc | 75

William Gruff @ May15 2020 13:20

I suppose they are trying to convince people that the Russians did hack the emails and the CIA was trying to plant the narrative that the emails were actually leaked?

No. The CIA wanted to tie Wikileaks to Russian election manipulation to turn public opinion against both.

A gang so powerful that the local cops will not touch them. A gang that even has significant portions of the mass media in its pocket.

And what gang would that be? CIA? Mossad?

There is no "odd behavior" from anyone close to Seth Rich's murder.

When a family member is killed, all bets are off. There are many people that pursue justice for a family member over decades.

Epstein victims faced a 'gang' and a justice system that was against them. They still pursued the matter.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | May 15 2020 13:46 utc | 76

@ Posted by: Walter | May 15 2020 2:14 utc | 50

The answer to your question is very simple and direct: the Western MSM was always like that, since its inception.

The difference is that, during the Cold War, it was deemed as acceptable (even if unconsciously) because there was a behemoth on the other side of the Atlantic and the Pacific that presented a direct existential threat to the West (the USSR). Western peoples simply accepted this was the price to pay for their worldview and found more comfortable to simply presuppose their worldview was on truth's side.

Of course, now we know it wasn't that black and white - but an American adult in 1970 didn't know that.

Posted by: vk | May 15 2020 13:50 utc | 77

: vk | May 15 2020 13:50 utc | 77 My "why"... Western MSM post WW2, yes...although during WW2 they were often stridently pro Soviet.

Some adults I knew in 1970 knew the score, but most as you say, went along. (Of course I knew Marxists and Communists.)

My "why" is of course a rhetorical device. What's the quote from Goering to prison psychologist and U.S. Army Captain Gustave Gilbert in Goering's jail cell?

This is why> "Here is the complete quote, with a comment by Gilbert that occurred
midway through it:

"Nazi leader Hermann Goering, interviewed by Gustave Gilbert during
the Easter recess of the Nuremberg trials, 1946 April 18, quoted in
Gilbert's book 'Nuremberg Diary.'

Goering: Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some
poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that
he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece.

Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in
England, nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is
understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who
determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the
people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or
a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.

Gilbert: There is one difference. In a democracy the people have some
say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the
United States only Congress can declare wars.

Goering: 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 danger. It works the same in
any country."

That's the Game, Consent for War...bald and bare. If we accept the NYT as a mouthpiece for the desperadoes running things just now, and pretty much since 1963...

Posted by: Walter | May 15 2020 14:53 utc | 78

@ 74 william gruff / jackrabbit 76.... there is a fair amount of truth in what both of you say.. i suppose the idea that 2 realities can collide like that from time to time is hard to wrap ones head around... i liked wg's description of the cia fwiw... could apply to mossad, m16 and etc as well... these intel agencies operate outside the law...

Posted by: james | May 15 2020 14:58 utc | 79

Beware the nonsense.

"The CIA wanted to tie Wikileaks to Russian election manipulation to turn public opinion against both."

This is what the CIA created the "Guccifer 2.0" Internet persona for. Seth Rich being the leaker of the DNC emails does not tie Wikileaks to Russians in any way whatsoever. The suggestion that it does is irrational nonsense.

"Epstein victims faced a 'gang' and a justice system that was against them."

Epstein's victims did not, and still do not, know that they are ultimately up against the CIA. They assumed, and still assume, that they are confronted with a garden variety oligarch. Rather than disabuse the victims of their misunderstanding, the CIA decided it would be most expeditious to simply remove the compromised intermediary to prevent the crimes from being traced back to the main criminal gang. This approach does not require that Epstein become deceased, but it is satisfied by his death as well if he couldn't be made to disappear. The gang has no loyalty to its underlings.

Seth Rich's family and associates are under no similar illusions. Seth was not murdered by a simple individual rich person with a couple hired underlings but by a globe spanning criminal organization. The justice system being predisposed to favor the wealthy is not remotely similar to the justice system actively collaborating with gangsters. Epstein and whoever he had for underlings did not have a history of casual murder. Despite the moral hysteria surrounding Epstein, he is a choirboy compared with the rest of the CIA. Confronting him would not in any way leave the confronters with the suspicion that they and their families might be in mortal danger. Unlike Epstein, the CIA kills presidents and gets away with it. Knowledge of that will influence people's decisions.

As any rational person can see, that poster's conspiracy theory regarding Seth Rich being an agent for the CIA is completely nonsensical.

Posted by: William Gruff | May 15 2020 15:23 utc | 80

This morning I was able to read the last comment by that "King Lear" before testing it has been deleted, along with the rest made by him, in which he was stating that "he was a far-left Marxist-Leninist who considered allies those at the far-right ".

I must say that eventhough I considered very valid the points and questions made by the other poster, "Great Sequoia", about Russia and China behavior in the geopolitical realm. and thus commented on those points and questions, seeing the obvious immediate coordination amongst the two, plus the absolute bad taste of "King Lear" coming in to invite commenters here going to his own blog, in a clear intent on provocation, became aware these two were obviously trolls.

But the definitive proof of that was the absolute contradictory assertion pointed above, since no real Marxist-Leninist, be it far-left, medium-left or mild-left, would ever ally its sworn enemy. The far-right by definition belongs always to the forces of reaction and constitute as attack dogs of the corporate state in its accelerated path to fascism.

The fact that these trolls were holding legitimate points of the left, and even the Russian left here, obeys to the strategy adopted by the "alt-right" through the last 2016 campaign, especially Bannon school ( in the US and in Europe ) on reading over there every blog or Twitter account of the left to then disguise themselves as leftists amongst the masses and net commentariat, so as to confuse people, get acceptation through which advance their real points once infiltrated, and, what is worst, most probably try to stablish contact with activists to then make lists for future elimination, the Ukrainian Mirotvorets style.

Posted by: H.Schmatz | May 15 2020 15:48 utc | 81

@ Posted by: H.Schmatz | May 15 2020 15:48 utc | 81

The very use of the term "Marxist-Leninist" already gives him away as a far-righter.

"Marxism-Leninism" doesn't exist. When Stalin was consolidating power, he sold himself as the imediate and unconditional continuation of Lenin. Since everybody and their mothers knew Lenin was died-in-the-wool Marxist, he codified Lenin's opus in the umbrella term "Marxism-Leninism" and elevated it, artificially, as the official ideology/doctrine of the USSR.

Lenin never considered himself as the philosopher or a theorist, and his works were never intended to be studied as philosophy or (political/sociological) theory. He always made clear he was just an "applied Marxist", and that it was Marx - and not him - that was the true theorist. He inequivocally pladed himself as simply a "Marxist".

Nowadays, the term "Marxist-Leninist" is a pejorative term used by the hard-right and the far-right to designate the communists. The social-democrats (center-left) prefer to use the term (also pejorative, to their point of view) "Stalinist" to designate the same group. Those two terms are rarely used anywhere else, and it is likely that the vast majority of today's world's population doesn't even know their meanings or even existence.

Posted by: vk | May 15 2020 16:07 utc | 82

@ RS Hack 51

Good summary of a lot of the "circumstantial" evidence. Two other items you might include would be (1) William Binney IIRC stated that there were telltale markers, I'm presuming imbedded timestamps of some kind, that essentially ruled out that the initial "hack" was an internet-based hack--the download speeds were simply too fast, indicating that it must have been a direct download in some manner; and (2) While Wikileaks would never directly confirm that they obtained the info from SR, it hinted so in every possible manner, to include promptly offering a reward for information leading to the arrest of the killer(s) of SR. Have they ever done that for anyone else?

@ William Gruff 74

Well written, and chilling. I think that was the biggest epiphany I had in my growing understanding of the intertwined actions of the US government, deep state, intelligence agencies, et al over the last several decades. General Smedley Butler was absolutely correct, if understated, and nothing has changed. When some veteran CIA agent says they are "serving their country," what does that even mean? They're doing what's best for some small farmer on 40 acres in the Ozarks? Or that cheerful young couple in apartment 304? Or the bar owner on Dixon Street? Not hardly. As you so well say, they are a blatantly criminal organization who will do absolutely anything to further the goals of those they DO consider important (and as George Carlin would say, IT AIN'T YOU), and the only thing that differentiates them from the Mob is that there is no higher power that they fear.

Posted by: J Swift | May 15 2020 16:16 utc | 83

William Gruff | May 15 2020 15:23

... that poster's conspiracy theory regarding Seth Rich being an agent for the CIA is completely nonsensical.

Most of us who are skeptical of Seth Rich think Mossad is more likely.

As I suggested @ May15 2020 13:34 : "wink wink nod nod".


Posted by: Jackrabbit | May 15 2020 17:03 utc | 84

Maybe Seth Rich was drawn into the plot similar to how the FBI draws their terrorists in. Usually disposed of after the job is done. My money would be on Mossad as the perps. Kind of fits very well with the Trump win and his main backers.

Posted by: arby | May 15 2020 17:09 utc | 85

@Posted by: vk | May 15 2020 16:07 utc | 82

Well, as working class peer who never belonged to any party discipline, only faithful and compromised to my union, and sometimes, even holding my doubts, especially when i find one of those rised to be cadre who never had to look for a job, I will never enter into those disquisitons and labelings more proper, in my view, of those purists in the alleged left, which are preciselly the main factors dividing, disbanding and destroying the left. In fact, people who make such ammount of divisions are highly likely Trostskyites or what I consider all the way fake-left. Those of Soros´ patronage scaring away the working masses from each other, sowing disunion and distrust.

Without having so wide theorethical background as you hold, I will tell in 0,5 seconds who is a leftist and who is not, in a face to face meeting, and would venture even in thses forums, being the most determinant factor for a real leftist being ALWAYS in the side of the working masses. The thing is that both, the far-right and the fake-left have managed, working as if in tandem, demonizing terms like "leftist" and "socialist", with great help by the Atlanticist institutionalized left who made themselves be called "socialists" in Europe and "Democrats" in the US.

An important factor for me to be aware that I am not talking with a real leftist, or real socialist, is the fact that it would be in favor of NATO. Another one would be that it favors liberal capitalism in any form. These two factors are anathema with being in the side of the working class, IMNSHO. Period.

I very doubt either Lenin or Stalin aimed to lead any faction in the left, since what they tried mainly was to try to unite a huge nation, first to liberate it from slavery and explotation through proletarian revolution, and second, once achieved victory and power, to preserve themselves from extermination by the forces of reaction allied into a coalituon of super powers. I can easily imagine myself in their shoes and understand that the urgency of perpetual war on them, once the revolution ended in victory, most probably blurred the theory leaving only the possible, and the hardships of the post-war period and continuous intends of subvertion and infiltration by the forces of reaction got away with some, and even many, utopian principles and hopes.

As happens in every human group, but especially amongs those who favor critical thinking, reasoning and honest discussion, they almost sure had differences of opinion on "what is to be done", and probably also on what they understood were the lines and points from the theoreticians, like Marx, but, in the end, what I value is the result of the actions of both, and those, resulted in great advance in rights and well being for the masses, not only in Russia, but also around the vast world, extending these benefits to this very day, affecting my life and that of millions for the best . In fact, if it had not been for Lenin and Stalin, for sure, I would even never had existed....

Hence my debt. This is why nobody will have me ever demonicing any of them so as to be accepted or considered a pure or authentic "leftist" or "socialist", less i am going to play along with the "alt-right" who ebenfit greatly from these distinctions stalished by them and their masters through their wide myriad of media, alt, governmental or MSM.

Posted by: H.Schmatz | May 15 2020 17:09 utc | 86

"..the only thing that differentiates them from the Mob is that there is no higher power that they fear.'
J Swift@83

Anyone who doubts this should check out Paul L Williams' book Operation Gladio.
The CIA is the culmination of all the local ruling class projects to confront dissent with muscle in US history. It is liberal thuggery nationalised and then rendered independent of the one aspect of 'democracy' or parliamentary government that works: the power of the purse, the ability of Congress to cut off funds. The CIA declared its independence of Congress by taking over and enormously expanding the international traffic in narcotics. It was this, essentially, which rendered the Church Committee's recommendations inoperative.
Thanks to William Gruff for his herculean work attempting to clean up the excrement left here by incontinent fools.

On the Russiagate subject, it is reassuring to learn that, just as seemed obvious at the time, the Russian government was actually hoping and expecting that Hillary would win the election. It always seemed to involve a considerable stretch of credulity to go along with the theory that the very conservative, careful and legalistic Kremlin would even want a loose cannon like Trump in the White House, let alone interfere in the internal politics of the United States.
Russia just doesn't do that. Americans, being so used to the constant interference of their government in the rest of the world, tend to forget that most of the rest of the world (puppets of Washington and Israel excepted) still abides by the rule that interfering with other states is against the law.

Posted by: bevin | May 15 2020 17:29 utc | 87


Don’t need to spell out the initials as everyone at the bar knows who is steamrolling the conversation.

So I am now a paranoid and a conspiracy theorist. And evidence free. Keep repeating that and it will be true. Repetition always works.

First evidence free assertion you are making is that anything appearing in MSM can be believed at face value. You claim to be an ex-con, I don’t know any ex-cons who automatically believe any story told them. They’ve heard a lot of stories. Pretty much all at the bar know that MSM have been tightly controlled for many decades.

Second evidence free assertion is that Seth Rich was murdered. What? Everyone knows Seth Rich was murdered. Seth Rich Murder appears dozens of times just in this thread. It must be true. Repetition works. Or look at the tiny amount of partial evidence we have. Rich leaves the bar at 1:40. Bartender does not recall he was drinking unusually heavy. Takes him until 4:20 to make it the 1.8 miles home. On foot. Through rough neighborhoods. Already makes no sense. At 4:20 the automatic gunfire locator alerts police. The auto gunfire locator that is a total scam and never works, merely costs a lot of money, magically works perfect this time. But no witnesses, no one saw anything, no one heard anything. Cops find Rich quickly. He is fully conscious, fully conversant. He does not know he has been shot. He is not all that drunk. He has a working cellphone on him and could have called it in himself. Police discover he is wounded but no big worry, no big hustle to ER. But he has been fatally shot. Right. Guy lives in an apartment that rents for more than his monthly check from DNC. But he’s a poor kid. The poor kid named Rich. His parents are complete nobodies. Right.

Then there is no police investigation. Because anonymous street life bozos committed the perfect crime. Perfect crimes just happen all the time. Bozos rarely make mistakes or leave evidence. And police are never interested in investigating murder.

I have no idea at all what happened to or with Seth Rich. The primary hypothesis is just rubbish. The carloads of silly theories lining up to be debunked are all silly theories. That they are circulated and promoted endlessly is just more reason to believe something is being hidden. The usual suspects that are always mentioned - CIA, Mossad, Clinton’s - are just that, the usual suspects. No one has anything. The police have nothing. The MSM have nothing. The conspiracy theorists have nothing. Case conjured out of thin air, case closed. Because that just happens. All the time. And saps and suckers believe whatever is told them. Including those who went to school in the Big House for nine years. Good place to learn to be a sap and a sucker.

Posted by: oldhippie | May 15 2020 17:45 utc | 88

Old Hippie-- I am no expert on Seth Rich but there are a couple of things that seem to point in his direction. There seems to be no argument that he worked for the DNC and that he was a very very patriotic American. (photos of him dressed in the flag from head to toe)
The Computer whizes say that the stuff was downloaded at speeds impossible over the net.
Assange offering a 20,000 dollar reward for evidence relating to the supposed death of Rich shortly after his demise.

Posted by: arby | May 15 2020 18:10 utc | 89

Richard S. Hack, 51, yes, all very complicated. Good to lay some of it out.

The two brothers were involved perhaps only tangentially, and (probably?) Aaron played the leading role. (I have never liked Seth alone for the ‘hacker’ role, against payment from wiki, makes no sense.)

4) is right. Plus Craig Murray sorta hints at the fact that he knows who handed over the material / did the ‘hacking’ but he also has never been clear (not that the could or should 'reveal', other topic) somewhat contradicting himself, etc. Jen, did Craig ever say he had the data? I think not?

Some claim Seth didn’t die, and certainly what happened at the hospital is strange (as reported…by various sources..) Plus the attitude of his parents, but particularly the brother (grinning and making devil signs etc.) seem to show that something is ‘off’.

As for the ‘botched robbery’ - the aim may have been simply to retrieve a thumb drive, the ‘robbers’ neglecting to steal a wallet, phone, or to kill on the spot.

-- - for general interest.

Some photos of Seth’s funeral, top of the page from Bing image search (goog and others return nothing.) No cams / reporters were allowed in the synagogue.

His grave.

(this was less than 2 cents maybe .5 or so.)

Posted by: Noirette | May 15 2020 18:37 utc | 90

old hippy, arby

I agree with old hippy that the Seth Rich story makes no sense. I go a little further and link this 'nonsense' with other examples of nonsense that we've seen: the Skripals, the White Helmets, etc. Then I muse about WHY some intelligence service might want a result like what occurred, which was simply this: Almost overnight, Wikileaks was depicted a malignant force helping Putin to undermine Western democracy.

To get to that result, Wikileaks had to be convinced to publish information that appeared to be from a reputable source. What is more reputable than info that someone risks their life to deliver? Wikileaks was almost forced to publish the DNC emails after Seth Rich's "death". Imagine the reaction if Assange decided that it was not credible and/or not wise to publish the DNC emails.

And I would also note that it wasn't just Wikileaks/Assange that was targeted as part of MAGA/Russiagate. The settling of scores included Gen. Flynn, and Manafort too.

<> <> <> <>

But this is just speculation. As old hippy says, we know surprisingly little about Seth Rich and his supposed death.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | May 15 2020 19:01 utc | 91

: H.Schmatz | May 15 2020 17:09 utc | 86 (left right)

Yes it is so. If a policy and action align with what is good for working, ordinary, people and their families, it is "left.

If otherwise, is is "fascist", "rightist, wrong, bad.

We need no one to tell us the what is good.

I agree.

My once good union, a trade union, has "sold itself" now, like most unions in US. Our union had a coup. Now it facilitates big business, and we old men who remember all see what happened.

Posted by: Walter | May 15 2020 19:57 utc | 92

But...taking a general look at this thread, without reading everything, way too much centered on Seth Rich to my taste and interest, which seems to be an intrascendent part of the real plot, most commenters, including those amking an herculean effort, and even those who never suffer incontinence and thus never leave excrements anywhere, are focusing the blame only in one entity/actor, the CIA, who is obviously a main one.

But what about the US Army, and even the whole US nation as a whole, since it is ages that, except for the few bunch who risked their physical asses at the Venezuelan Embassy, nobody goes out in the streets to oppose your inumerable wars on everybody.... since the 60s....?

Some have pointed at Gladio, and Gladio is a NATO operation, thus mainly a military one, although civilian secret services were/are involved too. But it is not the CIA, or not alone, who trained De la Chiae, Breivik, the Azov Battallion and ISIS and its multiple franchises....

Some have pointed as the drug trafficking business as main artery of the CIA system, and I will say, yes, this is the Aorta of CIA, what gives it oxygen, along with arms trafficking, but, what would be of arteries without the whole reticulated web of more little arteries, veins and capilars which ramificate through the whole world, this is the financial banking system along with its derivated Tax Havens, all based on the dollar hegemony.

Pointing at the source of all evil at CIA was/is main Trump´s campaign, and i am seeeing the same narrative we suffered 4 years ago is being activated again, but you forget to mention Pentagon and its shenanigans, its substantious dissapeared portions of budget, and its role in keeping the system of "stealing, cheating, lying", and I would add "killing", alive, through its wars. This is the Porta system, carrying the dirt, through which you steal other nations assets and kill whomever stays in your way...

The rest of the nation just parasitize from all this. Your representatives at Congress are necessary accomplices, as well as your Senate and Judiciary, like all the corruption cases have proved so far.

Posted by: H.Schmatz | May 15 2020 20:15 utc | 93

Noirette @ 90:

In answer to your question, as far as I know, Craig Murray has never said he held or kept the data for longer than he needed to send to Wikileaks.

Posted by: Jen | May 15 2020 20:53 utc | 94

Posted by: oldhippie | May 15 2020 17:45 utc | 88 I have no idea at all what happened to or with Seth Rich.

You may be correct that what actually happened to Rich that night is completely unknown in an absolute sense and the available story *may* be rubbish.

Unfortunately to *assert* that it *is* rubbish is another evidence-free assertion. We simply don't know whether it is or not. Suspicious, certainly. But to what end?

The only alternative end I can see is that Rich may have been killed simply to muddle the situation - which is exactly what Guccifer 2.0 was evidently intended to do - and as I noted above, this is a common approach in intelligence operations. There is a toast or saying: "Confusion to the enemy." Another possibility is that he was killed simply because someone at the DNC or CIA or whoever was behind the operation to deflect the DNC leak *thought* that he was the source. Remember, once the leak was detected, the DNC and whoever else was involved in the conspiracy to link Trump to Russia had to come with a solution to deflect the negative impression and damage to the Clinton campaign that would occur - and they didn't have much time to do it. Mistakes could have been made.

The problem with that and all other theories is the Butowsky law suit. What we *know* as fact is that Sy Hersh was following a story about Seth Rich that originated in Fox News. That means there was at least *smoke* if not fire.

Extending any theorizing beyond that is not warranted at this time. We need someone either to *prove* Rich (either one) was the source by technical means, or prove that Assange actually did tell someone that Rich was the source. I agree that all other theories about the CIA, Mossad, or whoever are pointless because there are *no facts" to support them.

As for Aaron, once your brother is killed and you know you are - or are thought to be - one of the sources, you may well decide to fight any suggestion that he was involved, simply to protect yourself and your relatives. If I was in Aaron's position, that is probably what I would do. There are few heroes in the world willing to stand up to the state on a personal level, knowing you are likely to be destroyed. Most of the Founding Father, I have read, ended up in poor circumstances as a result of defying Britain. So again, without knowing the internal discussions of the Rich family, speculating on what they are doing and why is pointless.

Even my comment about Sy Hersh possibly backing away from the story is pure speculation, as I freely admit. The alternative explanation that he was merely pursuing the story about the alleged FBI report is equally possible. It just didn't *sound* that way based on the audio tape. Everyone is free to listen to the audio tape on Youtube and make up their own mind.

I have no agenda here except to point out that there is a lot of reason to not believe *anything* about the *official*, Mueller-report version of what happened concerning the DNC emails.

Posted by: Richard Steven Hack | May 15 2020 22:19 utc | 95


I have no knowledge whatever of the internal organization of the DNC office circa 2016. No idea who had access to what. The thumb drive hypothesis of course is far more plausible than the canard about a hack.

Craig Murray is an interesting man and writes very well. I read him. He is also utterly compromised, completely vulnerable, useless as a source. Even before that he is a Murray and a toff and therefore unreliable.

Posted by: oldhippie | May 15 2020 22:51 utc | 96

RSH @ May15 22:19

Unfortunately to *assert* that it *is* rubbish is another evidence-free assertion. We simply don't know whether it is or not.

IMO "rubbish"/fakery is like art (thus the term "con artist"). You know it when you see it.

And we've seen fakery so much (Russiagate, White Helmets, Skripals, Flynn, Obama's "fiscal cliff" dance with the Republicans, Obama's pretended desire for a public option, and more) that the possibility of fakery when things don't add up can't be waived away.

And, I might add, the strangeness of the Seth Rich matter is simply overwhelming (the details have been outlined by old hippy above as well as others).

The only alternative end I can see is that Rich may have been killed simply to muddle the situation ...

And here we see the result of your hand-waiving: establishing the starting point of any discussion as the acceptance of Seth Rich as a actual person who actually died.

LOL. The White Helmets are actually people too. And they actually want to 'help' people. But WHO are they helping? We've come to learn that who they are and who they're helping is very different than what Western media want us to believe.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | May 16 2020 1:02 utc | 97

Oldhippie @ 97:

Craig Murray currently having legal and financial issues at present. He faces a legal challenge (contempt of court, I think) over his reporting of Alex Salmond court case in which Salmond was found innocent of sexual harassment charges against him.

Murray's son runs an annual music festival called Doune The Rabbit Hole and the lockdown has created financial problems for him. Murray himself helps with operational aspects of the festival and is trying to get some financial relief for the festival. Seems that while bank staff are willing to help, govt financial assistance requires certain details and level of income or turnover that the festival can't meet. Methinks the Murray family is going to be tied up for quite a while.

Posted by: Jen | May 16 2020 2:53 utc | 98

@ 104 jen... i can't get why craig murray is tied up in this festival thing.. is that his sons project? running a festival for profit seems like a challenging proposition... it is an especially hostile environment at the moment thanks covid... i like murrays writing and where he is coming from, but crying the blues over a cancelled festival seems misplaced... that would be like me crying the blues over the fact i can't do gigs at present... it is the reality we find ourselves in.. it can't last forever, but large festivals will be the last to be given a green light.. i suppose they want a bail out too?

as i said previously - ticketmaster, live nation and these dinosaur rock bands can go screw themselves... in the case of ticketmaster and live nation, i hope they cease operation being the leeches they are on musicians and the general public.. if we had an actual democracy they would be the first corporations to be held to account.. craig murray has his work cut out for him.. they have put him in the same type of box as julian assange.. he has too much worthwhile shit to say and that is not allowed in the uk - police state that it is today... as you say - he is going to be tied up indefinitely until we see a different world devoid of police states like the uk... bit of a rant.. sorry!~

Posted by: james | May 16 2020 3:54 utc | 99

James @ 99:

Doune The Rabbit Hole is a small family-run alternative music festival. It has no corporate sponsorship as far as I know. The current problem is that bands have already been booked (Public Enemy was set to appear) and tickets sold for the July 2020 festival but the COVID-19 lockdown has kiboshed that and the organisers may not be in much position to refund tickets.

Posted by: Jen | May 16 2020 10:16 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.