Russia not our enemy afterall

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by DSK

A good way to describe our own government at times... "not-friends".

I won't disagree with that.

[CuteOldGuy]

We hack elections all over the world. Hell, China bought the Presidency for Clinton one term. Maybe the Democrats should take internet security more seriously. They play fast and loose with information, then cry foul when some nerd in his parent's basement hacks them and forwards them to Wikileaks. It's not Russia's fault, not Wikileaks' fault, they are just doing what everyone knows they do. It's the Democrats fault. Repeat after me: "Firewall"

[Old-T]

Another overly simplistic reply to a complicated problem. Firewalls do very little when the biggest weaknesses/threats are people, not the software. You don't stop people without increasing security, and you don't increase security without impinging some freedoms. There is the discussion people refuse to have.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Old-T

[I][COLOR="Blue"]I am sorry you feel so threatened ....

By YOU?

Keep babbling and self-deluding.

Are you the one who gets his inside information from camera crews?

[DSK]

Hillary is so clueless she tried to present the Russians liking Mr. Trump to the idea they were scared of her!!!

Putin just hates Hillary, not a hard concept to understand, really.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by DSK

Hillary is so clueless ....
Putin just hates Hillary, not a hard concept to understand, really.

His total, wholesale lack of respect for her probably appears to be "hate," although its more than likely a deeply etched perception of her as being a fat, ugly, ignorant wife of Bill, who can't keep Bill at home like a good wife should do....according to his mores...

..... like the Arab leaders....and has no business leading anything, but the wastepaper basket crew at home.

She's simply despicable.....and irreparably damaged goods.

The ladies at the prison probably won't even want her.

[nwarounder]

All the FakeNews Sunday shows are leading with Russia this and that. It's really funny when it gets pointed out that if the fakenews, DNC, and Hillary wouldn't have been conspiring to rig primaries and the election and all the other crooked things they were doing, Russia would not have had anything to hack and expose.

I think they are so distraught they just can't think these things through anymore before they open their mouths and prove they are lying, again.

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

By YOU?

Keep babbling and self-deluding.

Are you the one who gets his inside information from camera crews?

That is part of your problem--your inability or unwillingness to accept that even those beneath your contempt, like the lowly camera man, has a point of view that can contain some useful information.

It is really odd that the same person who rants about how Trump is finally the hero of the common man is ecstatic about the billionaires he is nominating for his Cabinet, but has distain for blue collar camera crew.

Odd that you believe a camera crew isn't smart enough to knowledgably tell about a man's behavior towards them. Do you have some deep seeded resentment to camera crews? Or a technological phobia towards cameras? Or is this just a bit of your distain for laborers in general?

[IIFFOFRDB]

Craig gets it on Fake News Horse Shit...

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/

Facebook Suppresses Truth
11 Dec, 2016

So far 564 people believe they have shared on Facebook my article conclusively refuting the CIA’s invention of lies about Russia hacking the DNC, using the share button on this site. Another 78 have tried to share it from my Facebook page. Between them those 650 people will have. according to the Facebook average, about 200,000 friends. The total amount of incoming traffic from these 200,000 friends? 22 people. Almost nobody can currently reach this site through Facebook, as the “came from” interface on my statcounter below shows. Nothing from Facebook. Facebook are actively colluding in preventing social media from contradicting the mainstream media lies about Russian involvement in the US election campaign.



Don’t believe me? If you think you shared the article on Facebook, phone one of your Facebook friends and ask if it appeared for them.

The only way to defeat this is to republish the article yourself. I waive any copyright. If you have access to a blog, copy and paste it there and post a link to that blog on Facebook. Or simply cut and paste my whole article and copy it to your Facebook page, in sections if required.

I am similarly ghost banned on twitter. The work round to this, which plenty of people have found, is to create a new tweet yourself with a link to my site, rather than retweet one of my tweets. As with the Facebook share, if you do retweet you will be unaware it doesn’t work.

There are profound implications for society in the compliance of the major social media corporations with establishment demands to prevent social media from effectively challenging the mainstream media narrative – and I cannot think of a more classic example than this case. I do urge you to take action as described above, to show that the people will not stand for it.

----------------------------------------------------------------

The CIA’s Absence of Conviction

11 Dec, 2016


I have watched incredulous as the CIA’s blatant lie has grown and grown as a media story – blatant because the CIA has made no attempt whatsoever to substantiate it. There is no Russian involvement in the leaks of emails showing Clinton’s corruption. Yes this rubbish has been the lead today in the Washington Post in the US and the Guardian here, and was the lead item on the BBC main news. I suspect it is leading the American broadcasts also.

A little simple logic demolishes the CIA’s claims. The CIA claim they “know the individuals” involved. Yet under Obama the USA has been absolutely ruthless in its persecution of whistleblowers, and its pursuit of foreign hackers through extradition. We are supposed to believe that in the most vital instance imaginable, an attempt by a foreign power to destabilise a US election, even though the CIA knows who the individuals are, nobody is going to be arrested or extradited, or (if in Russia) made subject to yet more banking and other restrictions against Russian individuals? Plainly it stinks. The anonymous source claims of “We know who it was, it was the Russians” are beneath contempt.

As Julian Assange has made crystal clear, the leaks did not come from the Russians. As I have explained countless times, they are not hacks, they are insider leaks – there is a major difference between the two. And it should be said again and again, that if Hillary Clinton had not connived with the DNC to fix the primary schedule to disadvantage Bernie, if she had not received advance notice of live debate questions to use against Bernie, if she had not accepted massive donations to the Clinton foundation and family members in return for foreign policy influence, if she had not failed to distance herself from some very weird and troubling people, then none of this would have happened.

The continued ability of the mainstream media to claim the leaks lost Clinton the election because of “Russia”, while still never acknowledging the truths the leaks reveal, is Kafkaesque.

I had a call from a Guardian journalist this afternoon. The astonishing result was that for three hours, an article was accessible through the Guardian front page which actually included the truth among the CIA hype:


The Kremlin has rejected the hacking accusations, while the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has previously said the DNC leaks were not linked to Russia. A second senior official cited by the Washington Post conceded that intelligence agencies did not have specific proof that the Kremlin was “directing” the hackers, who were said to be one step removed from the Russian government.
Craig Murray, the former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, who is a close associate of Assange, called the CIA claims “bullshit”, adding: “They are absolutely making it up.”
“I know who leaked them,” Murray said. “I’ve met the person who leaked them, and they are certainly not Russian and it’s an insider. It’s a leak, not a hack; the two are different things.
“If what the CIA are saying is true, and the CIA’s statement refers to people who are known to be linked to the Russian state, they would have arrested someone if it was someone inside the United States.
“America has not been shy about arresting whistleblowers and it’s not been shy about extraditing hackers. They plainly have no knowledge whatsoever.”

But only three hours. While the article was not taken down, the home page links to it vanished and it was replaced by a ludicrous one repeating the mad CIA allegations against Russia and now claiming – incredibly – that the CIA believe the FBI is deliberately blocking the information on Russian collusion. Presumably this totally nutty theory, that Putin is somehow now controlling the FBI, is meant to answer my obvious objection that, if the CIA know who it is, why haven’t they arrested somebody. That bit of course would be the job of the FBI, who those desperate to annul the election now wish us to believe are the KGB.

It is terrible that the prime conduit for this paranoid nonsense is a once great newspaper, the Washington Post, which far from investigating executive power, now is a sounding board for totally evidence free anonymous source briefing of utter bullshit from the executive.

In the UK, one single article sums up the total abnegation of all journalistic standards. The truly execrable Jonathan Freedland of the Guardian writes “Few credible sources doubt that Russia was behind the hacking of internal Democratic party emails, whose release by Julian Assange was timed to cause maximum pain to Hillary Clinton and pleasure for Trump.” Does he produce any evidence at all for this assertion? No, none whatsoever. What does a journalist mean by a “credible source”? Well, any journalist worth their salt in considering the credibility of a source will first consider access. Do they credibly have access to the information they claim to have?

Now both Julian Assange and I have stated definitively the leak does not come from Russia. Do we credibly have access? Yes, very obviously. Very, very few people can be said to definitely have access to the source of the leak. The people saying it is not Russia are those who do have access. After access, you consider truthfulness. Do Julian Assange and I have a reputation for truthfulness? Well in 10 years not one of the tens of thousands of documents WikiLeaks has released has had its authenticity successfully challenged. As for me, I have a reputation for inconvenient truth telling.

Contrast this to the “credible sources” Freedland relies on. What access do they have to the whistleblower? Zero. They have not the faintest idea who the whistleblower is. Otherwise they would have arrested them. What reputation do they have for truthfulness? It’s the Clinton gang and the US government, for goodness sake.

In fact, the sources any serious journalist would view as “credible” give the opposite answer to the one Freedland wants. But in what passes for Freedland’s mind, “credible” is 100% synonymous with “establishment”. When he says “credible sources” he means “establishment sources”. That is the truth of the “fake news” meme. You are not to read anything unless it is officially approved by the elite and their disgusting, crawling whores of stenographers like Freedland.

The worst thing about all this is that it is aimed at promoting further conflict with Russia. This puts everyone in danger for the sake of more profits for the arms and security industries – including of course bigger budgets for the CIA. As thankfully the four year agony of Aleppo comes swiftly to a close today, the Saudi and US armed and trained ISIS forces counter by moving to retake Palmyra. This game kills people, on a massive scale, and goes on and on.

[Guest123018-4]

Yeah that greek bastard snuffalotofpuss is just about turning inside out.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Old-T

That is part of your problem--

There is YOUR PRIMARY PROBLEM ....

.. Liberals are like that, so I understand.

That's why your ass got handed to you in the 2016th election.

And why your ILK just signed up for some more self-punishment by a recount!

You all were so fucking worried about "everyone else's problems"...

.. you lost sight (or never had it in the first place) of your own!

Every Sunday afternoon in the Fall ... it's called .. "over confidence"!

You actually believe you are smarter than I and can lecture me! That's how dumb you are!

[LexusLover]

Go back to Obaminable posturing to "give away" the internet control ....

... now it's "control" Facebook content ...

The mantra of the Liberals is to make sure that any news contrary to the "officially approved version" is not circulated through any media, including social media ...

By controlling information they don't need to worry about the 2nd amendment.

The can't confiscate your firearm, but they can filter your information.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by nwarounder

I think they are so distraught they just can't think these things through anymore before they open their mouths and prove they are lying, again.

Hey, look at the posting on this board ....

.. name-calling, marginalizing, minimizing, insulting, ridiculing.....


... anything in an attempt to "quiet" the conservative voices.

It's been going on for YEARS!!!!!

Did you read that carefully .... "Old-Turd"!

[gary5912]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

There is YOUR PRIMARY PROBLEM ....

.. Liberals are like that, so I understand.

That's why your ass got handed to you in the 2016th election.

And why your ILK just signed up for some more self-punishment by a recount!

You all were so fucking worried about "everyone else's problems"...

.. you lost sight (or never had it in the first place) of your own!

Every Sunday afternoon in the Fall ... it's called .. "over confidence"!

You actually believe you are smarter than I and can lecture me! That's how dumb you are!

His people skills suck, but that is how liberals are. He lives in a fantasy world, his being in the bottom of a dumpster

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by gary5912

His people skills suck, ....

That's why I am happy to be a "Deplorable," as opposed to ...

... a DESPICABLE like HIM .. and the rest of his ILK.