Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) voiced
doubts about the veracity of the intelligence,
according to officials present.
U.S. official said there were minor disagreements
among intelligence officials about the agency’s
assessment, in part because some questions remain
example, intelligence agencies do not have specific
intelligence showing officials in the Kremlin
“directing” the identified individuals to pass the
Democratic emails to WikiLeaks ….
Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, has said
in a television interview that the “Russian
government is not the source.” [The former
intelligence analyst, British Ambassador to
Uzbekistan, and chancellor of the University of
Dundee (Craig Murray) – who is close friends with
Wikileaks’ Assange –
said he knows with
100% certainty that the Russians aren’t behind
be the first one to come out and point at Russia if
there’s clear evidence, but there is no
clear evidence — even now,” said Rep. Devin Nunes
(R-Calif.), the chairman of the House Intelligence
Committee and a member of the Trump
“There’s a lot of innuendo, lots of circumstantial
evidence, that’s it.”
claim that it’s impossible to ever know for
sure who is behind hacks of this nature.
In reality, it
would be child’s play to determine whether or
not the Russians really hacked the Dem emails and shared
them with Wikileaks.
Edward Snowden says the NSA could easily determine who
hacked the Democratic National Committee’s emails:
could publicly attribute responsibility for the DNC
hack certainly exists at
#NSA, but DNI traditionally objects to sharing.
executive who created the agency’s mass
surveillance program for digital information, who served
as the senior technical director within the
agency, who managed six thousand NSA employees,
the 36-year NSA veteran widely regarded as a “legend”
within the agency and the NSA’s best-ever
analyst and code-breaker, who mapped out the Soviet
command-and-control structure before anyone else knew
how, and so predicted Soviet invasions before they
happened (“in the 1970s, he decrypted the Soviet Union’s
command system, which provided the US and its allies
with real-time surveillance of all Soviet troop
movements and Russian atomic weapons”) – confirmed to
Washington’s Blog that the NSA would definitely
know who the hacker was.
have evidence that the Russians downloaded and later
forwarded those emails to wikileaks? Seems to me
that they need to answer those questions to be sure
that their assertion is correct.
tell from the network log who is going into a site.
I used that on networks that I had. I looked to see
who came into my LAN, where they went, how long they
stayed and what they did while in my network.
you needed to, you could trace back approaches
through other servers etc. Trace Route and Trace
Watch are good examples of monitoring software that
help do these things. Others of course exist …
probably the best are in NSA/GCHQ and the other Five
Eyes countries. But, these countries have no
monopoly on smart people that could do similar
the idiots in the intelligence community expect us
to believe them after all the crap they have told us
(like WMD’s in Iraq and “no we don’t collect data on
millions or hundreds of millions of Americans”) then
they need to give
clear proof of what they say. So far, they have
failed to prove anything.
Which suggests they don’t have proof and just want
to war monger the US public into a second cold war
with the Russians.
there’s lots and lots of money in that for the
complex of incestuous relationships.
recall, a few years ago they pointed to a specific
building in China that was where hacks on the US
were originating. So, let’s see the same from the
Russians. They don’t have it. That’s why they don’t
show it. They want to swindle us again and again and
again. You can not trust these intelligence agencies
officials “know how many people [beyond the
Russians] could have done this but they aren’t
telling us anything. All they’re doing is promoting
another cold war.”
compared allegations about Russian hacks to previous
U.S. fabrications of intelligence to justify the
invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the bombing of North
Vietnam in 1964.
“This is a
big mistake, another WMD or Tonkin Gulf affair
that’s being created until they have absolute proof”
of Russian complicity in the DNC hacks, he charged
during a Newsweek interview. He noted that
after the Kremlin denied complicity in the downing
of a Korean Airlines flight in 1983, the U.S.
“exposed the conversations where [Russian pilots]
were ordered to shoot it down.” Obama officials
“have the evidence now” of who hacked the DNC, he
charged. “So let’s see it, guys.“
If it were the Russians, NSA would
have a trace route to them and not equivocate
on who did it. It’s like using “Trace Route” to map
the path of all the packets on the network. In the
program Treasuremap NSA has hundreds of trace route
programs embedded in switches in Europe and hundreds
more around the world. So, this set-up should have
detected where the packets went and when they went
In other words,
there’s no need to speculate on whether the Russians
were the hackers. The NSA could easily determine who
was behind the hacks.
Of course, in
an era where challenging officials to provide evidence
may get one
labeled as a Russian propagandist, the question is
how many people will stand up for the all-American value
of questioning the proclamations of those in power:
Tucker Carlson DESTROYS Congressman Adam Schiff On
Russian Interference In U.S Election
expressed in this article are the author's own and do
not necessarily reflect Information Clearing House
It is unacceptable to slander, smear or engage in personal attacks on authors of articles posted on ICH.
Those engaging in that behavior will be banned from the comment section.
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no
affiliation whatsoever with the originator of
this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)