Russische hack van DNC en Podesta’s e-mail: ‘het bewijs’ daarvoor zakt als een soufflé in elkaar

Het was al lang duidelijk dat de bewering voor het Russische hacken van het DNC (Democratic National Committee) en het e-mail account van Podesta was gefundeerd op los zand en vooral was gebaseerd op de wil Rusland aan te wijzen als de grote boosdoener voor het verlies van de Democratische Partij in de VS presidentsverkiezingen, november vorig jaar.

Zeer tegen de zin van de VS, heeft Rusland zich internationaal (‘uiteraard’ niet in het westen) een positie verworven, die als betrouwbaar wordt gezien, dit i.t.t. de VS, als gevolg van VS inmenging in diverse buitenlanden en de grootscheepse terreur o.a. middels illegale oorlogen, die dit ‘land’ o.a. in het Midden-Oosten en Afrika begon.

Anti-Media bracht afgelopen zaterdag een artikel, waaruit duidelijk is op te maken, hoe de vork echt in de steel steekt, en dat (nogmaals: zoals bekend), Rusland niets met hacken of andere manipulaties van de verkiezingen te maken had!!

Het cyberbeveiligingsbedrijf dat de gegevens gaf voor de bewering dat het DNC en de mail van Podesta door de Russen zijn gehackt, Crowdstrike, heeft prutswerk geleverd en dat in één dag tijd..!!! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Crowdstrike heeft de zaak uitgelegd in de context van ‘de Russen hebben ‘t gedaan…..’ Lullig genoeg was juist de democratische presidentskandidaat Sanders, het slachtoffer van smerige manipulaties binnen de Democratische Partij, door de top van die partij!!

ESET, een ander cyberbeveiligingsbedrijf legt in het artikel uit wat Crowdstrike (expres) fout heeft gedaan. Het malware ‘programma’ X-Agent, dat volgens Crowdstrike werd gebruikt, is NB in handen gekomen van ESET, na onderzoek van TV5 Monde, de Bundestag en het DNC…….

Nogmaals, de conclusie van het volgende artikel is geen verrassing, de inhoud is dat echter wel degelijk!!

Oordeel zelf:

The
Evidence That Russia Hacked the DNC Is Collapsing

The Evidence That Russia Hacked the DNC Is Collapsing

(ANTIWAR Op-Ed) The
allegation – now accepted as incontrovertible fact by the
“mainstream” media – that the Russian intelligence services
hacked the Democratic National Committee (and John Podesta’s
emails) in an effort to help Donald Trump get elected recently
suffered a blow from which it may not recover.

Crowdstrike
is the cybersecurity company hired by the DNC to determine who hacked
their accounts: it took them a single day to determine the identity
of the culprits – it was, 
they
said
,
two groups of hackers which they named “Fancy Bear” and “Cozy
Bear,” affiliated 
respectively with
the GRU, which is Russian military intelligence, and the FSB, the
Russian security service.

How
did they know this?

These
alleged “hacker groups” are not associated with any known
individuals in any way connected to Russian intelligence: instead,
they are identified by the tools they use, the times they do their
dirty work, the nature of the targets, and other characteristics
based on the history of past intrusions.

Yet
as Jeffrey Carr and 
other
cyberwarfare experts
 have
pointed out, this methodology is fatally flawed. “It’s important
to know that the process of attributing an attack by a cybersecurity
company has nothing to do with the scientific method,” 
writes
Carr
:

Claims
of attribution aren’t testable or repeatable because the hypothesis
is never proven right or wrong. Neither are claims of attribution
admissible in any criminal case, so those who make the claim don’t
have to abide by any rules of evidence (i.e., hearsay, relevance,
admissibility).”

Likening
attribution claims of hacking incidents by cybersecurity companies to
intelligence assessments, Carr notes that, unlike government agencies
such the CIA, these companies are never held to account for their
misses:

When
it comes to cybersecurity estimates of attribution, no one holds the
company that makes the claim accountable because there’s no way to
prove whether the assignment of attribution is true or false unless
(1) there is a criminal conviction, (2) the hacker is 
caught in
the act, or (3) a government employee 
leaked the
evidence.”

This
lack of accountability may be changing, however, because
Crowdstrike’s case for attributing the hacking of the DNC to the
Russians is falling apart at the seams like a cheap sweater.

To
begin with, Crowdstrike initially gauged its certainty as to the
identity of the hackers with “
medium
confidence
.”
However, a later development, announced in late December and touted
by the 
Washington
Post
,
boosted this to “high confidence.” The reason for this newfound
near-certainty was their discovery that “Fancy Bear” had also
infected an application used by the Ukrainian military to target
separatist artillery in the Ukrainian civil war. As
the 
Post reported:

While
CrowdStrike, which was hired by the DNC to investigate the intrusions
and whose findings are described in a new report, had always
suspected that one of the two hacker groups that struck the DNC was
the GRU*, Russia’s military intelligence agency, it had only medium
confidence.

Now,
said CrowdStrike co-founder Dmitri Alperovitch, ‘we have high
confidence’ it was a unit of the GRU. CrowdStrike had dubbed that
unit ‘Fancy Bear.’”

Crowdstrike published an
analysis that claimed a malware program supposedly unique to Fancy
Bear, X-Agent, had infected a Ukrainian targeting application and,
using GPS to geo-locate Ukrainian positions, had turned the
application against the Ukrainians, resulting in huge losses:

Between
July and August 2014, Russian-backed forces launched some of the
most-decisive attacks against Ukrainian forces, resulting in
significant loss of life, weaponry and territory.

Ukrainian
artillery forces have lost over 50% of their weapons in the two years
of conflict and over 80% of D-30 howitzers, the highest percentage of
loss of any other artillery pieces in Ukraine’s arsenal.”

Alperovitch told the
PBS News Hour that “Ukraine’s artillery men were targeted by the
same hackers, that we call Fancy Bear, that targeted DNC, but this
time they were targeting cell phones to try to understand their
location so that the Russian artillery forces can actually target
them in the open battle. It was the same variant of the same
malicious code that we had seen at the DNC.”

He told NBC
News that this proved the DNC hacker “wasn’t a 400-pound guy in
his bed,” 
as
Trump had opined
 during
the first presidential debate – it was the Russians.

The
only problem with this analysis is that is isn’t true. It turns out
that Crowdstrike’s estimate of Ukrainian losses was based on a 
blog
post
 by
a pro-Russian blogger eager to tout Ukrainian losses: the
Ukrainians 
denied it.
Furthermore, the hacking attribution was based on the hackers’ use
of a malware program called X-Agent, supposedly unique to Fancy Bear.
Since the target was the Ukrainian military, Crowdstrike extrapolated
from this that the hackers were working for the Russians.

All
somewhat plausible, except for two things: To begin with, as Jeffrey
Carr 
pointed
out
 in
December, and now others are beginning to realize, X-Agent isn’t
unique to Fancy Bear.

Citing
the findings of ESET, another cybersecurity company, he wrote:

Unlike
Crowdstrike, ESET doesn’t assign APT28/Fancy Bear/Sednit to a
Russian Intelligence Service or anyone else for a very simple reason.
Once malware is deployed, it is no longer under the control of the
hacker who deployed it or the developer who created it. It can be
reverse-engineered, copied, modified, shared and redeployed again and
again by anyone. In other words  –  malware deployed is malware
enjoyed!

In
fact, the source code for X-Agent, which was used in the DNC,
Bundestag, and TV5Monde attacks, was obtained by 
ESET as
part of their investigation!

During
our investigations, we were able to retrieve the complete Xagent
source code for the Linux operating system….”

If
ESET could do it, so can others. It is both foolish and baseless to
claim, as Crowdstrike does, that X-Agent is used solely by the
Russian government when the source code is there for anyone to find
and use at will.”

Secondly,
the estimate Crowdstrike used to verify the Ukrainian losses was
supposedly based on data from the respected International Institute
for Strategic Studies (IISS). But now IISS is disavowing
and 
debunking
their claims
:

[T]he International
Institute for Strategic Studies
 (IISS)
told [Voice of America] that CrowdStrike erroneously used IISS data
as proof of the intrusion. IISS disavowed any connection to the
CrowdStrike report. Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense also has claimed
combat losses and hacking never happened….

“’The
CrowdStrike report uses our data, but the inferences and analysis
drawn from that data belong solely to the report’s authors,” the
IISS said. “The inference they make that reductions in Ukrainian
D-30 artillery holdings between 2013 and 2016 were primarily the
result of combat losses is not a conclusion that we have ever
suggested ourselves, nor one we believe to be accurate.’

One
of the IISS researchers who produced the data said that while the
think tank had dramatically lowered its estimates of Ukrainian
artillery assets and howitzers in 2013, it did so as part of a
‘reassessment” and reallocation of units to airborne forces.’

No,
we have never attributed this reduction to combat losses,” the IISS
researcher said, explaining that most of the reallocation occurred
prior to the two-year period that CrowdStrike cites in its report.

The
vast majority of the reduction actually occurs … before
Crimea/Donbass,’ he added, referring to the 2014 Russian invasion
of Ukraine.”

The
definitive “evidence” cited by Alperovitch is now effectively
debunked: indeed, it was debunked by Carr late last year, but that
was ignored in the media’s rush to “prove” the Russians hacked
the DNC in order to further Trump’s presidential ambitions. The
exposure by the Voice of America of Crowdstrike’s falsification of
Ukrainian battlefield losses – the supposedly solid “proof” of
attributing the hack to the GRU – is the final nail in
Crowdstrike’s coffin. They didn’t bother to verify their analysis
of IISS’s data with IISS – they simply took as gospel the
allegations of a pro-Russian blogger. They didn’t contact the
Ukrainian military, either: instead, their confirmation bias dictated
that they shaped the “facts” to fit their predetermined
conclusion.

Now
why do you suppose that is? Why were they married so early – after
a single day – to the conclusion that it was the Russians who were
behind the hacking of the DNC?

Crowdstrike
founder Alperovitch is a 
Nonresident
Senior Fellow
 of
the Atlantic Council, and head honcho of its “Cyber Statecraft
Initiative” – of which his role in promoting the “Putin did it”
scenario is a Exhibit A. James Carden, 
writing in The
Nation
,
makes the trenchant point that “The connection between Alperovitch
and the Atlantic Council has gone largely unremarked upon, but it is
relevant given that the Atlantic Council – which 
is
funded in part
 by
the US State Department, NATO, the governments of Latvia and
Lithuania, the Ukrainian World Congress, and the Ukrainian oligarch
Victor Pinchuk – has been among the loudest voices calling for a
new Cold War with Russia.” Adam Johnson, 
writing on
the FAIR blog, adds to our knowledge by noting that the Council’s
budget is also supplemented by “a consortium of Western
corporations (Qualcomm, Coca-Cola, The Blackstone Group), including
weapons manufacturers (Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman)
and oil companies (ExxonMobil, Shell, Chevron, BP).”

Johnson
also notes that CrowdStrike currently has a 
$150,000
/ year, no-bid contract
 with
the FBI for “systems analysis.”

Nice
work if you can get it.

This
last little tidbit gives us some insight into what is perhaps the
most curious aspect of the Russian-hackers-campaign-for-Trump story:
the FBI’s complete dependence on

Crowdstrike’s
analysis. Amazingly, the FBI did no independent forensic work on the
DNC servers before Crowdstrike got its hot little hands on them:
indeed, 
the
DNC denied the FBI access to the servers
,
and, as far as anyone knows, the FBI 
never
examined them
.
BuzzFeed 
quotes an
anonymous “intelligence official” as saying “Crowdstrike is
pretty good. There’s no reason to believe that anything they have
concluded is not accurate.”

There
is now.

Alperovitch
is 
scheduled
to testify
 before
the House Intelligence Committee, and one wonders if our clueless –
and technically challenged – Republican members of Congress will
question him about the debunking of Crowdstrike’s rush to judgment.
I tend to doubt it, since the Russia-did-it meme is now the Accepted
Narrative and no dissent is permitted – to challenge it would make
them “Putin apologists”! (Although maybe Trey Gowdy, the only
GOPer on that panel who seems to have any brains, may surprise me.)

As I’ve been saying for months,
there is 
no
evidence
 that
the Russians hacked the DNC: 
nonezilchnada.
Yet this false narrative is the entire basis of a campaign launched
by the Democrats, hailed by the Trump-hating media, and fully
endorsed by the FBI and the CIA, the purpose of which is to “prove”
that Trump is “Putin’s puppet,” as Hillary Clinton 
put
it
.
Now the investigative powers of the federal government are being
deployed to confirm that the Trump campaign “colluded” with the
Kremlin in an act the evidence for which is collapsing.

This
whole affair is a vicious fraud. If there is any justice in this
world – and there may not be – the perpetrators should be
charged, tried, and jailed.

Opinion
by 
Justin
Raimondo
 /
Republished with permission / 
AntiWar.com / Report
a typo

=======================

* GRU in Nederland GROe (label veranderd op 5 oktober 2018)

Voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, klik op één van de labels, die u onder dit bericht terug kan vinden, dit geldt niet voor de labels: Alperovitch, Crowdstrike, Gowdy, GRU, IISS en Pinchuk.

Comey (FBI) kwam zoals verwacht niet met bewijzen, of u hem maar ‘gewoon’ wilt geloven >> BNR’s Hammelburg is geheel overtuigd….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

De directeur van de FBI, de republikein James Comey gaf afgelopen maandag uitgebreid uitleg aan de Inlichtingencommissie van het Huis van Afgevaardigden, over ‘de link tussen Rusland en het beest Trump’. Dit middels manipulaties die de verkiezingscampagne van Clinton en daarmee haar kansen op het presidentschap hebben getorpedeerd….. Voorts liet hij zich uit over de aantijging van het beest Trump, dat zijn toren zou zijn afgeladen met afluisterapparatuur en andere troep van de inlichtingendiensten.

Dat laatste deed Comey af als onzin, dit op basis van een FBI onderzoek……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Om nog eens een cliché aan te halen: de slager die zijn eigen vlees keurt……. Wat betreft de andere aantijging stelde Comey dat hij al in juli vorig jaar een onderzoek heeft ingesteld……..

Over het feit dat Comey ‘openheid van zaken’ gaf, is men het in het volgzame westen eens: ‘uitermate betrouwbaar’, immers de FBI laat nooit iets los, over welke onderzoeken gaande zijn. Daaruit destilleerde men meteen, dat er dus voldoende bewijzen tegen Rusland zijn, zoals de ‘politiek deskundigen’ gisteren voor het grootste deel oplepelden….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

De Volkskrant had het gore lef te zeggen, dat de bewijzen tegen Rusland zich opstapelen…… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Welke bewijzen? Nog niet een nanometer bewijs is er in al de voorgaande maanden getoond!! Het woord ‘adembenemend’ over de verklaringen van Comey viel een aantal keren te lezen, in dit afhankelijke VK prut blad…… Dat zegt wel iets over degenen, die deze woorden schreven en hoe ze Comey inschatten: volkomen betrouwbaar…… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Dat ‘betrouwbaar’ in samenhang met Comey viel dan ook op meerdere plekken te te lezen in de VK……..

Comey loog herhaaldelijk dat het gedrukt stond! Zo stelde deze opperhufter dat RT een verlengstuk is van het Kremlin en desinformatie, plus anti-VS samenzweringstheorieën verspreidt……. Uiteraard, kan ook Comey daar geen bewijs voor opvoeren, sterker nog: RT is wat nieuwsgaring en achtergrond informatie betreft, beter te vertrouwen dan de (andere) reguliere westerse massamedia!!

Nog zo’n ‘deskundige’, al is het bij deze figuur op buitenlandgebied: BNR’s volvette oliebol Hammelburg was gistermorgen op die zender over Comey te horen (na het nieuws van 8.00 u.). Nog nooit in zijn leven had Hammelburg meegemaakt, dat een FBI directeur openbaar bekend maakte met een diepgravend onderzoek naar de link tussen Rusland en Trump bezig te zijn……… Goed hè, ‘dat hij dit zo mooi heeft gezegd?’

Nou ‘niet helemaal’, Hammelburg denkt dat de BNR luisteraar alleen naar deze zender voor nieuws en informatie luistert. Immers het was Comey zelf, die aan de inlichtingencommissie toevertrouwde, dat hij dit normaal gesproken nooit zou doen…… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Zoals gezegd: onder andere in die uitspraak, ziet men een bewijs voor de kwade Russische bedoelingen…. Knettergek!!

Na het nieuws van 9.00 u. was Hammelburg uitermate verbaasd over het feit dat Tillerson, de VS minister van BuZa, een afspraak met de NAVO had afgezegd, maar wel tijd had om met de Chinezen en de Russen te praten…….. Ja verbazingwekkend hè Hammelburg, dat de slangenkuil NAVO even geen voorrang krijgt… Daarnaast kan de NAVO nog geen scheet laten, zonder toestemming van de VS, wat zeg ik: zonder de regie van de VS!!

Hammelburg durfde voorts overigens te zeggen, dat Rusland een lange geschiedenis heeft van manipulaties van verkiezingen in andere landen, ook wat betreft cyberaanvallen op andere landen (en op industrieën)…… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Nu snap ik het: Hammelburg haalt de VS en Rusland door elkaar!!! Uiteraard stelde de zak nog, dat Rusland de laatste jaren twee landen is binnengevallen; zoals u wellicht weet: gelul van een dronken aardbei!! Wel is de VS alleen deze eeuw al tegen 4 landen een illegale oorlog begonnen en daarvoor is ongeveer 100 kilo aan bewijslast……

Ook het feit, dat de NSA en de CIA tot dezelfde bevindingen zijn gekomen als de FBI, was voor een andere ‘deskundige’, Kees Jan Dellebeke* , reden te zeggen, dat dit wel het bewijs is, dat e.e.a. waar is……. Zeker even vergeten, wat deze diensten in het verleden allemaal bij elkaar hebben gelogen, neem alleen al de leugens die de aanleiding voor de illegale oorlog tegen Irak waren, een oorlog die intussen aan meer dan 1,5 miljoen Irakezen het leven heeft gekost…….. Nee, uiterst betrouwbaar!! Toevallig ook, dat het militair-industrieel complex er alles bij te winnen heeft, als de spanningen tussen de VS en Rusland verder worden opgevoerd, daar is men niet bang voor atoomwapens…….

Volgens Dellebeke en andere ‘deskundigen’ in dit BNR programma, is de CIA een organisatie die alleen bezig is, in het buitenland uit te zoeken, waar de vijanden van de VS mee bezig zijn…… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Oh, dus Merkel en andere VS bondgenoten zijn ook vijanden……. -dus de CIA regelt nooit illegale acties tegen regeringen die de VS niet welgevallig zijn……. -dus de CIA produceert niet een ongelofelijk aantal leugens, om de VS een vrijbrief te geven, om in te grijpen waar het wil…… -dus de CIA zet geen opstanden in andere landen op poten……. -dus de CIA coördineert geen geheime bloedige acties met VS commandotroepen in het buitenland……… -dus de CIA (en de NSA) spioneren niet op grote schaal in het buitenland, waar geen middel ongemoeid wordt gelaten en waarbij niemand wordt ontzien (inclusief bedrijven), zelfs niet bevriende staatshoofden en regeringen, zoals u hierboven kon lezen……….

Als je Dellebeke moet geloven, is alles wat Comey zei de waarheid, volgens deze VS flapdrol heeft Rusland documenten gelekt naar Wikileaks….. Geen greintje bewijs voor, maar Dellebeke doet net alsof het de ultieme waarheid is…….. Comey heeft een onkreukbaar verleden, behalve dan een kleine smet, die hij opliep voorafgaand de VS presidentsverkiezingen, aldus Dellebeke….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Daar Comey alles onder ede verklaarde en dat in feite ten overstaan van de wereld, was voor Dellebeke voldoende om te weten, dat Comey de waarheid sprak (wat dan meteen alweer een bewijs is voor de kwade Russische bedoelingen…)…….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Alsof de VS moeite heeft om de wereld voor te liegen, nogmaals, neem de massavernietigingswapens van Saddam Hoessein in Irak, daarover loog de VS zelfs in de VN!!! (de VN, waar Colin Powell destijds het vuile werk opknapte**)

Raymann is niet echt een licht, dus die dacht een inbeller af te kunnen zeiken, die betoogde dat de FBI niet te vertrouwen is, waarop Raymann middels een lullige vraag liet weten, dat de FBI uiterst betrouwbaar is….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

*  Dellebeke is een ex-AIVD’er en wasd ‘s middags in het BNR programma ‘Ask (‘Esk’) me anything’ te horen.

** Powell heeft daar intussen enorm spijt van……

Voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, klik op één van de labels, die u onder dit bericht terug kan vinden, dit geldt niet voor de labels: Comey en Dellebeke.

‘Russische bemoeienis’ met de Nederlandse verkiezingen….. Waaruit blijkt nu die manipulatie, gezien de verkiezingsuitslag?

De laatste maanden (overigens al bijna een half jaar) veel hysterische geouwehoer over Russische bemoeienis met onze verkiezingen en die in de VS, o.a. door de AIVD. ‘Alle bewijzen’ daarvoor geven aan dat het om leugens, ofwel gecreëerd nepnieuws (‘fake news’) gaat, desondanks wordt dit nog steeds volgehouden door het overgrote deel van westerse politici, gesteund door de geheime diensten (zoals bij ons de AIVD) en de reguliere westerse, zogenaamd onafhankelijke, massamedia…… Nu de verkiezingen in Nederland achter ons liggen, is het de hoogste tijd om de rekening op te maken.

Waaruit blijkt die Russische manipulatie nu, een paar dagen na de verkiezingen??? Of had men dit alleen weer opgerakeld, als de fascistische PVV en de andere fascistische kleine partijen, meer dan 70 zetels hadden behaald???

Zoals gezegd: voor alle beschuldigingen, o.a. door de waardeloze geheime diensten AIVD en MIVD, is er geen nanometer bewijs, alles berust op van horen zeggen en echte bewijzen kunnen zogenaamd uit hoofde van de staatsveiligheid niet openbaar gemaakt worden. Hetzelfde geldt overigens voor de situatie in de VS, waar dit verhaal over ‘Russische inmenging’ werd gecreëerd. Het team van hare kwaadaardigheid Clinton (en daarmee H. Clinton zelf) hebben de voorverkiezingen in de democratische partij schandelijk gemanipuleerd ten nadele van Bernie Sanders, dit lekte uit en de schuld daarvoor schoof men in de schoenen van de Russen……. Heel handig overigens, daardoor werd de aandacht afgeleid van oorlogsmisdadiger Clinton en haar uiterst smerige spel…….

Uit de ‘Vault 7’ documenten, blijkt juist dat de CIA er alles aan doet, om de boel wereldwijd naar de VS hand te zetten, geen (digitaal) middel blijft daarbij ongemoeid……..

Gezien de uitslag van de Nederlandse verkiezingen, zou je je eerder kunnen afvragen, of de AIVD en MIVD niet erg hun best hebben gedaan, om de uitslagen van de verkiezingen te manipuleren…….. Zeker gezien het desastreuze beleid van de VVD, had die partij veel meer moeten verliezen….. Overigens zijn ook de anti-EU  kiezers amper terug te vinden in deze uitslagen, terwijl ze meer dan de helft van de bevolking vertegenwoordigen!! Daarover gesproken: alle gelul over een economische neergang van Groot-Brittannië na de Brexit, blijkt op angstzaaierij te berusten. Afgelopen week werd bekendgemaakt, dat de Britse economie er na de Brexit beter voorstaat, dan in de laatste decennia werd gemeten……..

Wat betreft het angstzaaien: dat geldt zeker ook voor de leugens over Russische inmenging, sterker nog, de bevolking wordt daarmee zelfs opgezet tegen de Russen, m.a.w., het is tevens haatzaaien tegen de Russen. Met dit alles kan men de aandacht van veel belangrijker zaken afleiden, dat geldt ook voor Nederland…… Ach ja, ‘zo oud als de weg naar Rome…..’

Laar u niet foppen, niet de Russen zijn bezig de boel elders te manipuleren, maar de VS. Daar zijn vele duizenden pagina’s bewijs voor en niet alleen via Wikileaks (zo klapte er onlangs een oud-CIA medewerker uit de school, over CIA manipulaties met regeringen van andere landen….).

Zie ook: ‘CIA de ware hacker en manipulator van verkiezingen, ofwel de laatste Wikileaks documenten……...’

       en: ‘CIA speelt zoals gewoonlijk vuil spel: uit Wikileaks documenten blijkt dat CIA zelf de verkiezingen manipuleerde, waar het Rusland van beschuldigde……..

       en: ‘CIA malware voor manipulaties en spionage >> vervolg Wikileaks Vault 7

       en: ‘Eichelsheim (MIVD) ‘waarschuwt voor agressie CIA en NAVO……….’

       en:  ‘WikiLeaks: Seth Rich Leaked Clinton Emails, Not Russia

       en: ‘Campagne Clinton, smeriger dan gedacht…………‘ (met daarin daarin opgenomen de volgende artikelen: ‘Donna Brazile Bombshell: ‘Proof’ Hillary ‘Rigged’ Primary Against Bernie‘ en ‘Democrats in Denial After Donna Brazile Says Primary Was Rigged for Hillary‘)

       en: ‘Murray, ex-ambassadeur van GB: de Russen hebben de VS verkiezingen niet gemanipuleerd

      en: ‘‘Russische manipulaties uitgevoerd’ door later vermoord staflid Clintons campagneteam Seth Rich……… AIVD en MIVD moeten hiervan weten!!

      en: ‘Obama gaf toe dat de DNC e-mails expres door de DNC werden gelekt naar Wikileaks….!!!!

      en: VS ‘democratie’ aan het werk, een onthutsende en uitermate humoristische video!

      en: ‘Democraten VS kochten informatie over Trump >> Forgetting the ‘Dirty Dossier’ on Trump

      en: ‘Hillary Clinton moet op de hoogte zijn geweest van aankoop Steele dossier over Trump……..

      en: ‘Flashback: Clinton Allies Met With Ukrainian Govt Officials to Dig up Dirt on Trump During 2016 Election

      en: ‘FBI Director Comey Leaked Trump Memos Containing Classified Information

      en: ‘Publicly Available Evidence Doesn’t Support Russian Gov Hacking of 2016 Election

      en: ‘Russia Is Trolling the Shit out of Hillary Clinton and the Mainstream Media

      en: ‘CIA chef Pompeo waarschuwt voor complot van WikiLeaks om de VS op alle mogelijke manieren neer te halen……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

      en: ‘Russische ‘hacks’ door deskundigen nogmaals als fake news doorgeprikt >> Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence

      en: ‘Rusland krijgt alweer de schuld van hacken, nu van oplichters Symantec en Facebook……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

      en: ‘Russiagate, of: hoe de media u belazeren met verhalen over Russische bemoeienis met de VS presidentsverkiezingen……..

       en: ‘CIA deed zich voor als het Russische Kaspersky Lab, aldus Wikileaks Vault 8…..‘ (zie ook de andere links onder dat bericht)

       en: ‘Kajsa Ollongren (D66 vicepremier): Nederland staat in het vizier van Russische inlichtingendiensten……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, klik op één van de labels, die u onder dit bericht terug kan vinden.

Hillary Clinton en geheime dienst achter ontslag Flynn, en naar voren schuiven Pence, aldus Assange…….

Afgelopen dinsdag ontving ik het volgende artikel van Anti-Media, die het overnam van ZeroHedge. In dit artikel de beschuldiging van Assange, dat de Clinton-kliek in samenwerking met geheime diensten, de positie van Flynn onmogelijk hebben gemaakt…..*

Flynn was voorstander van vriendschapsbanden met Rusland, een enorme fout, in ‘een land’ dat o.a. wordt geregeerd door de geheime diensten en het militair-industrieel complex. Als vervanging voor Flynn schoof men Pence naar voren, een oorlogshitser van formaat en een enorme Rusland hater.

Tyler Durden, de schrijver van het artikel vraagt zich volkomen terecht af, wat er tegen is, om de banden met Rusland te vernieuwen >> hoe kan dit het leven van ‘Amerikaanse burgers’ in gevaar brengen..??? (inderdaad te belachelijk voor woorden!!)

Durden betoogt dat Trump onder druk werd gezet, om Flynn te dwingen af te treden, daar hij anders zelf de kans zou lopen afgezet te worden (‘impeachment’)……… Dat Trump heeft toegegeven blijkt wel uit het feit, dat de VS meer troepen naar Syrië heeft gestuurd, dit om uiteindelijk Assad af te zetten, aldus Durden…… Waar ik aan toe zou willen voegen , dat de VS nog meer troepen naar Europa heeft gestuurd en nog wil sturen, dit tegen het zogenaamde Russische gevaar……..

Hier het artikel, zoals geplaatst op Anti-Media:

Assange:
Hillary, Intel Officials ‘Quietly Pushing A Pence Takeover’ of
the White House

Mike Pence

March
14, 2017 at 10:38 am

Written
by 
Anti-Media
News Desk

(ZHELast
week we noted chatter that some saw 
Mike
Pence as “the Deep State’s insurance policy,”
 and
now, judging by tweets from Wikileaks’ Julian Assange, that may
well be the Clinton/Intelligence Officials plan…

Julian Assange @JulianAssange

Clinton stated privately this month that she is quietly pushing for a Pence takeover. She stated that Pence is predictable hence defeatable.

Adding that…

Julian Assange @JulianAssange

Two IC officials close to Pence stated privately this month that they are planning on a Pence takeover. Did not state if Pence agrees.

As The
Daily Caller notes,
 Assange’s
claims appear to come in response to reports that President Trump
authorized the CIA to perform drone strikes on terrorists Monday
evening…

Julian Assange @JulianAssange

By handing unilateral power to the CIA over its drone strikes at this time White House signals that bullying, disloyalty & incompetence pays

As
we concluded previously,
 if
Trump doesn’t adopt the Cold War 2.0 approach of Barack Obama and
Hillary Clinton
 and
is forced out of his own administration in the same manner as Flynn,
it will become clear 
why once
we learn who would replace him: 
Mike
Pence.

No
matter what one makes of Trump – or his administration and the
policies that have been initiated thus far – the fact remains that
Trump won the U.S. election. 
The
people working behind the scenes to oust him are not subject to
democratic controls, nor are they working in the best interests of
the American public. We are left to ask ourselves exactly how
renewing relations with Russia –  a nuclear power –  could
possibly endanger American lives.

Either
way, we are more or less left with two paths ahead of us.
 The
first path involves Trump giving in and adopting an anti-Russian
agenda, as is already apparent in his decision to send more 
ground
troops to Syria
 alongside Saudi
troops
,
who will intentionally oppose the Syrian regime (a close ally of
Russia). The second involves the possibility of another direct coup
within the Trump administration, this time one that may ultimately
force Trump out of the White House so he can be replaced by Mike
Pence, a war hawk who will be more than happy to do the job Hillary
Clinton wanted to do.

By Tyler
Durden
 /
Republished with permission / 
Zero
Hedge
 / Report
a typo

================

* Flynn moest aftreden, daar hij al contact met de Russen zocht voor het aantreden van Trump. Een volkomen normale zaak. Zo hebben adviseurs en ministers van de ‘komende’ president, vrijwel altijd voor het aantreden, contact met Israël, maar ook met NAVO staten en andere landen, die er toe doen. De huidige gang van zaken is dan ook duidelijk gericht tegen de poging van Trump, de spanningen tussen de VS en Rusland weg te werken……….

Voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, klik op één van de labels, die u onder dit bericht terug kan vinden.

VN rapport over beschieting hulpkonvooi voor Oost-Aleppo totaal onder de maat, of wel ‘fake news’ met VN stempels……

Afgelopen maandag ontving ik van Information Clearing House o.a. een artikel, waarin het VN onderzoek naar het beschieten van een konvooi met hulpgoederen voor Oost-Aleppo (september vorig jaar), terecht als een waardeloos onderzoek de grond in wordt geschreven.

Zo heeft de VN getuigenissen van de White Helmets gebruikt, terwijl ieder mens met een gezond verstand kan weten, dat de White Helmets een verlengstuk zijn van terreurgroepen in Syrië (vooral functionerend onder Al Qaida/al-Nusra terreurbewind..)……

Fotomateriaal, zoals van satellieten (die ter beschikking stonden van de VN onderzoekscommissie), of zelfs van de White Helmets werden niet aan het rapport toegevoegd, logisch wat betreft de laatste foto’s, daar de foto’s van raketten die de White Helmets toevoegden, niet van Russische of Syrische gevechtsvliegtuigen kwamen, maar van raketten zijn, die vanaf de grond worden afgevuurd, zoals de White Helmets zelf hebben toegegeven……. De White Helmets, u weet wel het geteisem dat hier op handen wordt gedragen, niet alleen door politici, maar ook door de reguliere (afhankelijke) massamedia……..

Hier het artikel (u kunt onder dit artikel klikken voor een ‘Dutch vertaling’):

A
Flawed UN Investigation on Syria

U.N.
investigators increasingly make their conclusions fall in line with
Western propaganda, especially on the war in Syria, as occurred in a
distorted report about last year’s attack on an aid convoy,
explains Gareth Porter.
By
Gareth Porter



March
13, 2017 “Information
Clearing House
” –  The March 1 
report
by the United Nations’ “Independent International Commission of
Inquiry

asserted that the bloody attack on a humanitarian aid convoy west of
Aleppo City on Sept. 19, 2016, was an airstrike by Syrian government
planes. But an analysis of the U.N. panel’s report shows that it
was based on an account of the attack from the pro-rebel Syrian
“White Helmets” civil defense organization that was full of
internal contradictions.

The
UN account also was not supported by either the photographic evidence
that the White Helmets provided or by satellite imagery that was
available to the commission, according to independent experts.
Further undermining the UN report’s credibility, the White Helmets
now acknowledge that rockets they photographed were not fired from
Russian or Syrian planes but from the ground.

Like
last December’s summary of the UN’s 
Headquarters
Board of Inquiry report
 on
the same incident, the Commission’s report described the attack as
having begun with “barrel bombs” dropped by Syrian helicopters,
followed by further bombing by fixed-wing planes and, finally,
strafing by machine guns from the air.

The
March 1 report did not identify any specific source for its
narrative, citing only “[c]ommunications from governments and
non-government organizations.” But in fact the UN investigators
accepted the version of events provided by the White Helmets chief in
Aleppo province as well as specific evidence that the White Helmets
had made public.

The
White Helmets, which are heavily funded by Western governments and
operate only in rebel-controlled areas, are famous for using social
media to upload videos purporting to show injured children and other
civilian victims of the war.

Last
year, a well-organized campaign pushed the group’s nomination for a
Nobel Peace Prize and 
a
Netflix film about the group won an Oscar
 last
month. The United Nations and the mainstream Western news media have
frequently relied on White Helmet
s accounts
from war zones that are not accessible to outsiders. But the White
Helmets’ officials have pursued an obvious political agenda in
support of opposition forces in Al Qaeda-dominated zones in Aleppo
and Idlib where they have operated.

On
Sept. 19, immediately after the attack on the aid convoy, the chief
of the White Helmets organization in the Aleppo governorate, Ammar
al-Selmo, presented a dramatic narrative of a Russian-Syrian air
attack, but it was marked by obvious internal contradictions.

At
first, Selmo 
claimed
in an interview
 that
he had been more than a kilometer away from the warehouses where the
attack occurred and had seen Syrian helicopters dropping “barrel
bombs” on the site. But his eyewitness account would have been
impossible because it was already dark by the time he said the attack
began at about 7:15 p.m. He 
changed
his story
 in
a later interview, claiming that he had been right across the street
at the moment of the attack and had heard the “barrel bombs”
being dropped rather than seeing them.

Selmo
insisted in a video filmed that night that the attack began with
Syrian helicopters dropping 
eight
“barrel bombs,”
which
are described as large, crudely constructed bombs weighing from 250
kg to 500 kg or even more. Citing a box-shaped indentation in the
rubble, Selmo said the video is showing “the box of the barrel
bomb,” but the indentation is far too small to be a crater from
such a bomb.

Selmo
continued the account, “Then the regime also target this place with
cluster bombs two times, and also the aircraft of the Russians target
this place with C-5 and with bullets,” apparently referring to
Soviet-era S-5 rockets. The White Helmets photographed two such
rockets and sent it to media outlets, including the Washington Post,
which 
published
the picture
 in
the Post story with credit to the White Helmets.

Story
Contradictions

But
Hussein Badawi, apparently the White Helmet official in charge of the
Urum al Kubrah area, 
contradicted
Selmo’s story
.
In a separate interview, Badawi said the attack had begun not with
“barrel bombs” but with “four consecutive rockets” that he
said had been launched by government forces from their defense plant
in Aleppo province – meaning that it was a ground-launched attack
rather than an air attack.

In
an email response to a query from me, Selmo retracted his own
original claim about the S-5 rockets. “[B]efore aircraft’s attack
on the area,” he wrote, “many land to land missiles attacked the
place coming from the defense factories which [are] located in
eastern Aleppo [east of] the city, regime controlled area. [T]hen
aircraft came and attacked the place.”

But
such a rocket attack from that “regime controlled area” would not
have been technically possible. The Syrian government defense plant
is located in Safira, 
25
kilometers southeast
 of
Aleppo City and even farther from Urum al-Kubrah, whereas the S-5
rockets that the White Helmets photographed have a 
range
of only three or four kilometers.

Moreover,
the Russians and Syrian government forces were not the only warring
parties to have S-5s in their arsenal. According to a 
study
of the S-5 rocket by Armament Research Services
 consultancy,
Syrian armed opposition forces had been using S-5 rockets as well.
They had gotten them from the CIA’s covert program of moving
weapons from Libyan government stockpiles to be distributed to Syrian
rebels beginning in late 2011 or early 2012. Syrian rebels had used
improvised launch systems to fire them, as the ARS study documented
with a picture.

Significantly,
too, the explicit claim by Selmo that Russian planes were involved in
the attack, which was immediately echoed by the Pentagon, was
summarily dismissed by the UN panel report, which stated flatly,
without further explanation, that “no Russian strike aircraft were
nearby during the attack.”

Misplaced
Evidence

Yet,
despite the multiple discrepancies in the White Helmets’ story, the
UN investigators said they corroborated the account of the air attack
“by a site assessment, including analysis of remnants of aerial
bombs and rockets documented at the site, as well as satellite
imagery showing impact consistent with the use of air-delivered
munitions.”

The
UN Commission’s report cited a photograph of the crumpled tailfin
of a Russian OFAB-250 bomb found under some boxes in a warehouse as
evidence that it had been used in the attack. The White Helmets took
the photograph and circulated it to the news media, 
including
to the Washington Post
 and to
the Bellingcat website
,
which specializes in countering Russia’s claims about its
operations in Syria.

But
that bomb could not have exploded in that spot because it would have
made a crater many times larger than the small indentation in the
floor in the White Helmet photo – as 
shown
in this video
 of
a man standing in the crater of a similar bomb in Palmyra.

Something
other than an OFAB-250 bomb – such as an S-5 rocket – had caused
the fine shrapnel tears in the boxes shown in the photo, as a 
detail
from the larger scene
 reveals.
So the OFAB bomb tailfin must have been placed at the scene after the
attack.

Both
UN imagery analysts and independent experts who examined the
satellite images found that the impact craters could not have come
from the “aerial bombs” cited by the Commission.

The
analysis of the satellite images by United Nations specialists at
UNITAR-UNOSAT 
made
public
 by
the UN Office of Humanitarian Coordination on March 1 further
contradicts the White Helmet account, reflecting the absence of any
evidence of either “barrel bombs” or OFAB-250 bombs dropped on
the site.

The
UN analysts identified four spots in the images on pages five and six
of their report as “possible impact craters.” But a UN source
familiar with their analysis of the images told me that it had ruled
out the possibility that those impact points could have been caused
by either “barrel bombs” or Russian OFAB-250 bombs.

The
reason, the UN source said, was that such bombs would have left much
larger craters than those found in the images. Those possible impact
points could have been either from much smaller air-launched
munitions or from ground-based artillery or mortar fire, but not from
either of those weapons, according to the UN source.

Expert
Challenges

A
former U.S. intelligence official with long experience in analysis of
aerial photos and Pierre Sprey, a former Pentagon analyst, both of
whom reviewed the satellite images, agreed that the spots identified
by UNOSAT could not have been from either “barrel bombs” or
OFAB-250 bombs.

The
former intelligence official, who demanded anonymity because he still
deals with government officials, said the small impact points
identified by the UN team reminded him of impacts from “a multiple
rocket launcher or possibly a mortar.”

Sprey
agreed that all of those impact points could have been from artillery
or mortar fire but also noted that photographs of the trucks and
other damaged vehicles show no evidence that they were hit by an
airstrike. The photos show only extensive fire damage and, in the
case of one car, holes of irregular size and shape, he said,
suggesting flying debris rather than bomb shrapnel.

Sprey
further pointed to photographic evidence indicating that an explosion
that the UN Commission blamed on a Syrian airstrike came from within
the building itself, not from an external blast. The building across
the street from some of the trucks destroyed by an explosion
(in 
Figure
9
 of
a series of 
photos
on the Bellngcat website
)
clearly shows that the front wall of the building was blown outward
toward the road
whereas
the rear wall and the roof were still intact.

The
photograph (in Figure 10) taken from inside the remains of that same
building shows the debris from the blast was blown all the way across
the street to the damaged truck. Sprey said those pictures strongly
suggest that an IED (improvised explosive device) had been set in the
house to explode toward the trucks.

In
embracing the Syrian-air-strike narrative – although it falls apart
on closer examination – the UN“Commission of Inquiry” thus fell
into line with the dominant Western political bias in favor of the
armed opposition to the Syrian government, a prejudice that has been
applied to the Syrian conflict by UN organs since the beginning of
the war in 2011.

But
never has the evidence so clearly contradicted that line as it has in
this case – even though you will not learn that by reading or
watching the West’s commercial news media.

Gareth
Porter is an independent investigative journalist and winner of
the 2012 Gellhorn Prize for journalism. He is the author of the newly
published 
Manufactured
Crisis: The Untold Story of the Iran Nuclear Scare
.

Click
for
 SpanishGermanDutchDanishFrench,
translation- Note- 
Translation
may take a moment to load.

========================

Bijna nog sterker: gisteren maakte een VN commissie openbaar, dat het Syrische leger met opzet de watervoorziening van Damascus zou hebben gebombardeerd; dat zou in december vorig jaar zijn gebeurd*. Daardoor zouden meer dan 5 miljoen mensen verstoken zijn geweest van drinkwater in en rond Damascus….. Een ernstige oorlogsmisdaad aldus de onderzoekers……. Helaas, waarom zou het Syrische leger de eigen watervoorziening bombarderen, immers dat gebied was toen in handen van het reguliere Syrische leger..?? Bron voor deze toevoeging o.a.: BBC World Service 14 maart jl.    

* In een reactie van mij, gisteren gedaan onder dit artikel, geplaatst door Stan van Houcke op zijn blog, meende ik, dat dit september vorig jaar plaatsvond. Deze reactie ziet u direct voorafgaand aan: ‘Bron voor deze enz….’, al is het hier met een aangepast tijdspanne.

Voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, klik op één van de labels, die u onder dit bericht terug kan vinden, dit geldt (nog) niet voor de labels: al-Selmo, H, Badawi, Sprey en UNOSAT.

CIA speelt zoals gewoonlijk vuil spel: uit Wikileaks documenten blijkt dat CIA zelf de verkiezingen manipuleerde, waar het Rusland van beschuldigde……..

Naar aanleiding van de publicatie door Wikileaks van een aantal manieren waarop de CIA kan inbreken op telefoons, computers en zelfs tv’s*, bracht Anti-Media afgelopen woensdag een artikel waarin wordt betoogd, dat de CIA in staat is geweest Rusland te criminaliseren.

Middels software heeft de CIA zaken kunnen laten lekken, of berichten laten publiceren, die niet terug te voeren zijn op de CIA, of zelfs de VS, maar bijvoorbeeld Rusland aanwijzen als dader. Dit noemt men ‘false flag’ operaties, of zoals u al verwachtte ‘valse vlag operaties’.

Die aanwijzingen waren er al lang voordat Wikileaks deze week e.e.a. naar buiten bracht. Eén ding was zeker: Rusland zat niet achter het lekken van Clinton-mails en Rusland heeft de verkiezingen in de VS niet gesaboteerd, zaken die tot op de dag van vandaag worden volgehouden door westerse politici en hun hielenlikkers van de reguliere (afhankelijke) media……. Deze zaken waren terug te voeren naar de VS en nu heeft Wikileaks ook geopenbaard op welke manier dit kon gebeuren………

Zoals gewoonlijk: de VS was en is uiterst misdadig bezig, maar na enige opschudding in de westerse media en politiek, is de boel alweer overgewaaid…….. Als Rusland in deze zaak de schuldige was geweest, had men in de VS en de NAVO al gesproken over een gepaste reactie, waar men eerder een militaire vergelding niet uitsloot……… De reguliere, afhankelijke media in Nederland, hadden ondanks de komende verkiezingen, dit onderwerp nog minstens 1,5 maand uitgemolken………

Hier het artikel van Anti-Media, waar men nog enigszins voorzichtig is, terwijl de schuld voor smerige manipulaties door de CIA (plus NSA en FBI) er dik bovenop ligt:

CIA
Capable of Cyber ‘False Flag’ to Blame Russia

(MPN) Washington,
D.C. – 
Earlier
today, Wikileaks once again made headlines following 
its
release
 of
the 
largest
ever publication of U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
documents.” 
The
massive release – just the first batch in a trove of documents
code-named “Vault 7” by Wikileaks – details the CIA’s global
covert hacking program and its arsenal of weaponized exploits.

While
most coverage thus far has focused on the CIA’s ability to
infiltrate and hack smartphones, smart TVs and several encrypted
messaging applications, another crucial aspect of this latest leak
has been skimmed over – one with potentially far-reaching
geopolitical implications.

According
to
 a
Wikileaks press release
,
the 8,761 newly published files came from the CIA’s Center for
Cyber Intelligence (CCI) in Langley, Virginia. The release says that
the 
UMBRAGE
group
,
a subdivision of the center’s 
Remote
Development Branch
 (RDB),
has been collecting and maintaining a 
substantial
library
 of
attack techniques ‘stolen’ from malware produced in other states,
including the Russian Federation.”

As
Wikileaks notes, the UMBRAGE group and its related projects allow the
CIA to misdirect the attribution of cyber attacks by 
leaving
behind the ‘fingerprints’ of the very groups that the attack
techniques were stolen from.”

In
other words, the CIA’s sophisticated hacking tools all have a
“signature” marking them as originating from the agency. In order
to avoid arousing suspicion as to the true extent of its covert cyber
operations, the CIA has employed UMBRAGE’s techniques in order to
create signatures that allow multiple attacks to be attributed to
various entities – instead of the real point of origin at the CIA –
while also increasing its total number of attack types.

Other
parts of the release similarly focus on avoiding the attribution of
cyberattacks or malware infestations to the CIA during forensic
reviews of such attacks. In a document titled “
Development
Tradecraft DOs and DON’Ts
,”
hackers and code writers are warned 
DO
NOT leave data in a binary file that demonstrates CIA, U.S.
[government] or its witting partner companies’ involvement in the
creation or use of the binary/tool.”
 It
then states that 
attribution
of binary/tool/etc. by an adversary can cause irreversible impacts to
past, present and future U.S. [government] operations and equities.”

While
a major motivating factor in the CIA’s use of UMBRAGE is to cover
it tracks, events over the past few months suggest that UMBRAGE may
have been used for other, more nefarious purposes. After the outcome
of the 2016 U.S. presidential election shocked many within the U.S.
political establishment and corporate-owned media, the
CIA
 emerged claiming
that Russia mounted a “covert intelligence operation” to help
Donald Trump edge out his rival Hillary Clinton.

Prior
to the election, Clinton’s campaign 
had
also accused Russia
 of
being behind the leak of John Podesta’s emails, as well as the
emails of employees of the Democratic National Committee (DNC).

Last
December, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper – a man
known for 
lying
under oath
 about
NSA surveillance –
 briefed
senators in a closed-door meeting
 where
he described findings on Russian government “hacks and other
interference” in the election.

Following
the meeting, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), a ranking member of the House
Intelligence Committee, 
remarkedAfter
many briefings by our intelligence community, it is clear to me that
the Russians hacked our democratic institutions and sought to
interfere in our elections and sow discord.”

Incidentally,
the U.S. intelligence community’s assertions that Russia used
cyber-attacks to interfere with the election overshadowed reports
that the U.S. government had actually been responsible for several
hacking attempts that targeted state election systems. For
instance, 
the
state of Georgia reported
 numerous
hacking attempts on its election agencies’ networks, nearly all of
which were traced back to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Now
that the CIA has been shown to not only have the capability but also
the express intention of replacing the “fingerprint” of
cyber-attacks it conducts with those of another state actor, the
CIA’s alleged evidence that Russia hacked the U.S. election – or
anything else for that matter – is immediately suspect. There is no
longer any way to determine if the CIA’s proof of Russian hacks on
U.S. infrastructure is legitimate, as it could 
very
well be a “false flag” attack
.

Given
that accusations of Russian government cyber-attacks also coincide
with 
a
historic low
 in
diplomatic relations between Russia and the U.S., the CIA’s long
history of using covert means to justify hostile actions against
foreign powers – typically in the name of national security –
once again seems to be in play.

By Whitney
Webb
 /
Republished with permission / 
MintPress
News
 / Report
a typo

==========================

* Zie: ‘CIA de ware hacker en manipulator van verkiezingen, ofwel de laatste Wikileaks documenten……...’

Zie ook: ‘‘Russische bemoeienis’ met de Nederlandse verkiezingen….. Waaruit blijkt nu die manipulatie, gezien de verkiezingsuitslag?

       en: ‘CIA malware voor manipulaties en spionage >> vervolg Wikileaks Vault 7

       en: ‘Eichelsheim (MIVD) ‘waarschuwt voor agressie CIA en NAVO……….’

       en: ‘WikiLeaks: Seth Rich Leaked Clinton Emails, Not Russia

       en: ‘Campagne Clinton, smeriger dan gedacht…………‘ (met daarin daarin opgenomen de volgende artikelen: ‘Donna Brazile Bombshell: ‘Proof’ Hillary ‘Rigged’ Primary Against Bernie‘ en ‘Democrats in Denial After Donna Brazile Says Primary Was Rigged for Hillary‘)

       en: ‘Murray, ex-ambassadeur van GB: de Russen hebben de VS verkiezingen niet gemanipuleerd

      en: ‘‘Russische manipulaties uitgevoerd’ door later vermoord staflid Clintons campagneteam Seth Rich……… AIVD en MIVD moeten hiervan weten!!

      en: ‘Obama gaf toe dat de DNC e-mails expres door de DNC werden gelekt naar Wikileaks….!!!!

      en: VS ‘democratie’ aan het werk, een onthutsende en uitermate humoristische video!

      en: ‘Democraten VS kochten informatie over Trump >> Forgetting the ‘Dirty Dossier’ on Trump

      en: ‘Hillary Clinton moet op de hoogte zijn geweest van aankoop Steele dossier over Trump……..

      en: ‘Flashback: Clinton Allies Met With Ukrainian Govt Officials to Dig up Dirt on Trump During 2016 Election

      en: ‘FBI Director Comey Leaked Trump Memos Containing Classified Information

      en: ‘Publicly Available Evidence Doesn’t Support Russian Gov Hacking of 2016 Election

      en: ‘Russia Is Trolling the Shit out of Hillary Clinton and the Mainstream Media

      en: ‘CIA chef Pompeo waarschuwt voor complot van WikiLeaks om de VS op alle mogelijke manieren neer te halen……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

      en: ‘Russische ‘hacks’ door deskundigen nogmaals als fake news doorgeprikt >> Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence

      en: ‘Rusland krijgt alweer de schuld van hacken, nu van oplichters Symantec en Facebook……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

      en: ‘Russiagate, of: hoe de media u belazeren met verhalen over Russische bemoeienis met de VS presidentsverkiezingen……..

       en: ‘‘Russiagate’ een complot van CIA, FBI, Hillary Clinton en het DNC………..

Klik voor meer berichten n.a.v. het voorgaande, op één van de labels, die u onder dit bericht terugvindt, dit geldt niet voor de labels: DHS en Schiff.

Mijn excuus voor de vormgeving.

CIA de ware hacker en manipulator van verkiezingen, ofwel de laatste Wikileaks documenten………

Na alle nepnieuws (of ‘fake news’) over hacks en andere manipulaties ‘door Rusland gepleegd’ in het buitenland, bracht Wikileaks gisteren het bericht, waarin de echte grote smeerlap voor de zoveelste keer werd ontmaskerd: de VS en dan m.n. de CIA!!

Zo bracht de CIA o.a. besmette software op het net, waarmee niet alleen ‘slimme’ telefoons en computers kunnen worden gehackt, maar zelfs ‘slimme’ televisies’ zijn niet veilig (die als microfoon kunnen dienen, ook als ze uitgeschakeld zijn..)…….

Wikileaks publiceerde de eerste 8.000 pagina’s, met diverse handleidingen die de CIA en NSA gebruiken om in te breken. De CIA heeft een team van 500 mensen vrijgemaakt, die e.e.a. hebben uitgedokterd, waar de NSA bewust buiten werd gehouden.

De boel ‘was zo goed beveiligd’ door de CIA, dat niet alleen Wikileaks erbij kon, maar bijvoorbeeld ook misdaadorganisaties………..

U snapt natuurlijk, dat de zoveelste openbaring over smerige streken van de VS, niet dezelfde ophef geven in het westen, als de leugen over Russische hacks………..

Hieronder een artikel dat ik gisteren ontving van Anti-Media, met daaronder een aantal vragen over de nieuwste openbaarmakingen van Wikileaks, bedoeld voor de pers, waar uzelf, als niet journalist, ook baat bij kan hebben.

Wikileaks
Releases “Vault 7”: Reveals The CIA’s Hacking Tools

(ZHELast
night 
Wikileaks
announced 
that
it has released an encrypted torrent file which reportedly contains
information on the mysterious “Vault 7,” and which we now know is
the biggest “collection of material about CIA activities obtained
by WikiLeaks publication in history.” It can be downloaded 
now
at the following URL
,
and accessed using the
password: 
SplinterItIntoAThousandPiecesAndScatterItIntoTheWinds”

Wikileaks
had previously announced that it would hold an 8am Eastern press
conference, as part of the unveiling.

WikiLeaks 

@wikileaks

ANNOUNCE: WikiLeaks press conference in under five hours at 8am ET / 1pm UTC / 14:00 CET. Streamed live. 

However,
there appeared to have been some complications, with Wikileaks
tweeting that “
the
press conference is under attack: Facebook+Periscope video used by
WikiLeaks’ editor Julian Assange have been attacked
.
Activating contingency plans.”

WikiLeaks 

@wikileaks

Press conf under attack: Facebook+Periscope video used by WikiLeaks’ editor Julian Assange have been attacked. Activating contingency (1/2)

Wikileaks
then announced that “As Mr. Assange’s Perscipe+Facebook video
stream links are under attack his video press conference will be
rescheduled.”

WikiLeaks 

@wikileaks

NOTICE: As Mr. Assange’s Perscipe+Facebook video stream links are under attack his video press conference will be rescheduled.

In
a separate tweet, Wikileaks has just released the passphrase to
decrypt the torrent file: RELEASE: CIA Vault 7 Year Zero decryption
passphrase: 
SplinterItIntoAThousandPiecesAndScatterItIntoTheWinds

WikiLeaks 

@wikileaks

RELEASE: CIA Vault 7 Year Zero decryption passphrase:

SplinterItIntoAThousandPiecesAndScatterItIntoTheWinds

As
a result, since Assange appears to have been unable to launch his
previously scheduled press conference, he has gone ahead and issued
the press release on 
Vault
7 Part 1 “Year Zero, 
which
is titled: 
Inside
the CIA’s global hacking force
:

Press
Release

Vault
7: CIA Hacking Tools Revealed

Today,
Tuesday 7 March 2017, WikiLeaks begins its new series of leaks on the
U.S. Central Intelligence Agency. Code-named “Vault 7” by
WikiLeaks, it is the largest ever publication of confidential
documents on the agency.

The
first full part of the series, “Year Zero”, comprises 8,761
documents and files from an isolated, high-security network situated
inside the CIA’s 
Center
for Cyber Intelligence
 in
Langley, Virgina. It follows an introductory disclosure last month
of 
CIA
targeting French political parties and candidates in the lead up to
the 2012 presidential election
.

Recently,
the CIA lost control of the majority of its hacking arsenal including
malware, viruses, trojans, weaponized “zero day” exploits,
malware remote control systems and associated documentation. This
extraordinary collection, which amounts to more than several hundred
million lines of code, gives its possessor the entire hacking
capacity of the CIA. The archive appears to have been circulated
among former U.S. government hackers and contractors in an
unauthorized manner, one of whom has provided WikiLeaks with portions
of the archive.

Year
Zero” introduces the scope and direction of the CIA’s global
covert hacking program, its malware arsenal and dozens of “zero
day” weaponized exploits against a wide range of U.S. and European
company products, include Apple’s iPhone, Google’s Android and
Microsoft’s Windows and even Samsung TVs, which are turned into
covert microphones.

Since
2001 the CIA has gained political and budgetary preeminence over the
U.S. National Security Agency (NSA). The CIA found itself building
not just its now infamous drone fleet, but a very different type of
covert, globe-spanning force — its own substantial fleet of
hackers. The agency’s hacking division freed it from having to
disclose its often controversial operations to the NSA (its primary
bureaucratic rival) in order to draw on the NSA’s hacking
capacities.

By
the end of 2016, the CIA’s hacking division, which formally falls
under the agency’s 
Center
for Cyber Intelligence
 (CCI),
had over 5000 registered users and had produced more than a thousand
hacking systems, trojans, viruses, and other “weaponized”
malware. Such is the scale of the CIA’s undertaking that by 2016,
its hackers had utilized more code than that used to run Facebook.
The CIA had created, in effect, its “own NSA” with even less
accountability and without publicly answering the question as to
whether such a massive budgetary spend on duplicating the capacities
of a rival agency could be justified.

In
a statement to WikiLeaks the source details policy questions that
they say urgently need to be debated in public, including whether the
CIA’s hacking capabilities exceed its mandated powers and the
problem of public oversight of the agency. The source wishes to
initiate a public debate about the security, creation, use,
proliferation and democratic control of cyberweapons.

Once
a single cyber ‘weapon’ is ‘loose’ it can spread around the
world in seconds, to be used by rival states, cyber mafia and teenage
hackers alike.

Julian
Assange, WikiLeaks editor stated that “There is an extreme
proliferation risk in the development of cyber ‘weapons’.
Comparisons can be drawn between the uncontrolled proliferation of
such ‘weapons’, which results from the inability to contain them
combined with their high market value, and the global arms trade. But
the significance of “Year Zero” goes well beyond the choice
between cyberwar and cyberpeace. The disclosure is also exceptional
from a political, legal and forensic perspective.”

Wikileaks
has carefully reviewed the “Year Zero” disclosure and published
substantive CIA documentation while avoiding the distribution of
‘armed’ cyberweapons until a consensus emerges on the technical
and political nature of the CIA’s program and how such ‘weapons’
should analyzed, disarmed and published.

Wikileaks
has also decided to 
redact and
anonymise some identifying information in “Year Zero” for in
depth analysis. These redactions include ten of thousands of CIA
targets and attack machines throughout Latin America, Europe and the
United States. While we are aware of the imperfect results of any
approach chosen, we remain committed to our publishing model and note
that the quantity of published pages in “Vault 7” part one (“Year
Zero”) already eclipses the total number of pages published over
the first three years of the Edward Snowden NSA leaks.

* *
*

Analysis

CIA
malware targets iPhone, Android, smart TVs

CIA
malware and hacking tools are built by EDG (Engineering Development
Group), a software development group within CCI (Center for Cyber
Intelligence), a department belonging to the CIA’s DDI (Directorate
for Digital Innovation). The DDI is one of the five major
directorates of the CIA (see this
 organizational
chart
 of
the CIA for more details).

The
EDG is responsible for the development, testing and operational
support of all backdoors, exploits, malicious payloads, trojans,
viruses and any other kind of malware used by the CIA in its covert
operations world-wide.

The
increasing sophistication of surveillance techniques has drawn
comparisons with George Orwell’s 1984, but “Weeping Angel”,
developed by the CIA’s 
Embedded
Devices Branch (EDB)
,
which infests smart TVs, transforming them into covert microphones,
is surely its most emblematic realization.

The
attack against 
Samsung
smart TVs
 was
developed in cooperation with the United Kingdom’s MI5/BTSS. After
infestation, Weeping Angel places the target TV in a ‘Fake-Off’
mode, so that the owner falsely believes the TV is off when it is on.
In ‘Fake-Off’ mode the TV operates as a bug, recording
conversations in the room and sending them over the Internet to a
covert CIA server.

As
of October 2014 the CIA was also looking at 
infecting
the vehicle control systems used by modern cars and trucks
.
The purpose of such control is not specified, but it would permit the
CIA to engage in nearly undetectable assassinations.

The
CIA’s Mobile Devices Branch (MDB) developed 
numerous
attacks to remotely hack and control popular smart phones
.
Infected phones can be instructed to send the CIA the user’s
geolocation, audio and text communications as well as covertly
activate the phone’s camera and microphone.

Despite
iPhone’s minority share (14.5%) of the global smart phone market in
2016, a specialized unit in the CIA’s Mobile Development Branch
produces malware to infest, control and exfiltrate data from 
iPhones
and other Apple products running iOS, such as iPads
.
CIA’s arsenal includes 
numerous
local and remote “zero days”
 developed
by CIA or obtained from GCHQ, NSA, FBI or purchased from cyber arms
contractors such as Baitshop. The disproportionate focus on iOS may
be explained by the popularity of the iPhone among social, political,
diplomatic and business elites.

similar
unit targets Google’s Android which is used to run the majority of
the world’s smart phones (~85%) including Samsung, HTC and Sony
.
1.15 billion Android powered phones were sold last year. “Year
Zero” shows that as of 2016 
the
CIA had 24 “weaponized” Android “zero days”
 which
it has developed itself and obtained from GCHQ, NSA and cyber arms
contractors.

These
techniques permit the CIA to bypass the encryption of WhatsApp,
Signal, Telegram, Wiebo, Confide and Cloackman by hacking the “smart”
phones that they run on and collecting audio and message traffic
before encryption is applied.

CIA
malware targets Windows, OSx, Linux, routers

The
CIA also runs a very substantial effort to infect and
control 
Microsoft
Windows users
 with
its malware. This includes multiple local and remote weaponized “zero
days”, air gap jumping viruses such as 
“Hammer
Drill”
 which
infects software distributed on CD/DVDs, 
infectors
for removable media such as USBs
,
systems to 
hide
data in images
 or
in covert disk areas (
 “Brutal
Kangaroo”
)
and to 
keep
its malware infestations going
.

Many
of these infection efforts are pulled together by the CIA’s 
Automated
Implant Branch (AIB)
,
which has developed several attack systems for automated infestation
and control of CIA malware, such as “Assassin” and “Medusa”.

Attacks
against Internet infrastructure and webservers are developed by the
CIA’s 
Network
Devices Branch (NDB)
.

The
CIA has developed automated multi-platform malware attack and control
systems covering Windows, Mac OS X, Solaris, Linux and more, such as
EDB’s “HIVE” and the related “Cutthroat” and “Swindle”
tools, which are 
described
in the examples section below
.

CIA
‘hoarded’ vulnerabilities (“zero days”)

In
the wake of Edward Snowden’s leaks about the NSA, the U.S.
technology industry secured a commitment from the Obama
administration that the executive would disclose on an ongoing basis
— rather than hoard — serious vulnerabilities, exploits, bugs or
“zero days” to Apple, Google, Microsoft, and other US-based
manufacturers.

Serious
vulnerabilities not disclosed to the manufacturers places huge
swathes of the population and critical infrastructure at risk to
foreign intelligence or cyber criminals who independently discover or
hear rumors of the vulnerability. If the CIA can discover such
vulnerabilities so can others.

The
U.S. government’s commitment to the 
Vulnerabilities
Equities Process
 came
after significant lobbying by US technology companies, who risk
losing their share of the global market over real and perceived
hidden vulnerabilities. The government stated that it would disclose
all pervasive vulnerabilities discovered after 2010 on an ongoing
basis.

Year
Zero” documents show that the CIA breached the Obama
administration’s commitments. Many of the vulnerabilities used in
the CIA’s cyber arsenal are pervasive and some may already have
been found by rival intelligence agencies or cyber criminals.

As
an example, specific CIA malware revealed in “Year Zero” is able
to penetrate, infest and control both the Android phone and iPhone
software that runs or has run presidential Twitter accounts. The CIA
attacks this software by using undisclosed security vulnerabilities
(“zero days”) possessed by the CIA but if the CIA can hack these
phones then so can everyone else who has obtained or discovered the
vulnerability. As long as the CIA keeps these vulnerabilities
concealed from Apple and Google (who make the phones) they will not
be fixed, and the phones will remain hackable.

The
same vulnerabilities exist for the population at large, including the
U.S. Cabinet, Congress, top CEOs, system administrators, security
officers and engineers. By hiding these security flaws from
manufacturers like Apple and Google the CIA ensures that it can hack
everyone &mdsh; at the expense of leaving everyone hackable.

Cyberwar’
programs are a serious proliferation risk

Cyber
‘weapons’ are not possible to keep under effective control.

While
nuclear proliferation has been restrained by the enormous costs and
visible infrastructure involved in assembling enough fissile material
to produce a critical nuclear mass, cyber ‘weapons’, once
developed, are very hard to retain.

Cyber
‘weapons’ are in fact just computer programs which can be pirated
like any other. Since they are entirely comprised of information they
can be copied quickly with no marginal cost.

Securing
such ‘weapons’ is particularly difficult since the same people
who develop and use them have the skills to exfiltrate copies without
leaving traces — sometimes by using the very same ‘weapons’
against the organizations that contain them. There are substantial
price incentives for government hackers and consultants to obtain
copies since there is a global “vulnerability market” that will
pay hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars for copies of such
‘weapons’. Similarly, contractors and companies who obtain such
‘weapons’ sometimes use them for their own purposes, obtaining
advantage over their competitors in selling ‘hacking’ services.

Over
the last three years the United States intelligence sector, which
consists of government agencies such as the CIA and NSA and their
contractors, such as Booze Allan Hamilton, has been subject to
unprecedented series of data exfiltrations by its own workers.

A
number of intelligence community members not yet publicly named have
been arrested or subject to federal criminal investigations in
separate incidents.

Most
visibly, on February 8, 2017 a U.S. federal grand jury indicted
Harold T. Martin III with 20 counts of mishandling classified
information. The Department of Justice alleged that it seized some
50,000 gigabytes of information from Harold T. Martin III that he had
obtained from classified programs at NSA and CIA, including the
source code for numerous hacking tools.

Once
a single cyber ‘weapon’ is ‘loose’ it can spread around the
world in seconds, to be used by peer states, cyber mafia and teenage
hackers alike.

U.S.
Consulate in Frankfurt is a covert CIA hacker base

In
addition to its operations in Langley, Virginia the CIA also uses the
U.S. consulate in Frankfurt as a covert base for its hackers covering
Europe, the Middle East and Africa.

CIA
hackers operating out of the Frankfurt consulate (
 “Center
for Cyber Intelligence Europe”
 or
CCIE) are given diplomatic (“black”) passports and State
Department cover. 
The
instructions for incoming CIA hackers
 make
Germany’s counter-intelligence efforts appear inconsequential:
“Breeze through German Customs because you have your
cover-for-action story down pat, and all they did was stamp your
passport”

Your
Cover Story (for this trip)

Q: Why are you
here?
A: Supporting technical consultations at the
Consulate.

Two
earlier WikiLeaks publications give further detail on CIA approaches
to 
customs and secondary
screening procedures
.

Once
in Frankfurt CIA hackers can travel without further border checks to
the 25 European countries that are part of the Shengen open border
area — including France, Italy and Switzerland.

A
number of the CIA’s electronic attack methods are designed for
physical proximity. These attack methods are able to penetrate high
security networks that are disconnected from the internet, such as
police record database. In these cases, a CIA officer, agent or
allied intelligence officer acting under instructions, physically
infiltrates the targeted workplace. The attacker is provided with a
USB containing malware developed for the CIA for this purpose, which
is inserted into the targeted computer. The attacker then infects and
exfiltrates data to removable media. For example, the CIA attack
system 
Fine
Dining
,
provides 24 decoy applications for CIA spies to use. To witnesses,
the spy appears to be running a program showing videos (e.g VLC),
presenting slides (Prezi), playing a computer game (Breakout2, 2048)
or even running a fake virus scanner (Kaspersky, McAfee, Sophos). But
while the decoy application is on the screen, the underlaying system
is automatically infected and ransacked.

How
the CIA dramatically increased proliferation risks

In
what is surely one of the most astounding intelligence own goals in
living memory, the CIA structured its classification regime such that
for the most market valuable part of “Vault 7” — the CIA’s
weaponized malware (implants + zero days), Listening Posts (LP), and
Command and Control (C2) systems — the agency has little legal
recourse.

The
CIA made these systems unclassified.

Why
the CIA chose to make its cyberarsenal unclassified reveals how
concepts developed for military use do not easily crossover to the
‘battlefield’ of cyber ‘war’.

To
attack its targets, the CIA usually requires that its implants
communicate with their control programs over the internet. If CIA
implants, Command & Control and Listening Post software were
classified, then CIA officers could be prosecuted or dismissed for
violating rules that prohibit placing classified information onto the
Internet. Consequently the CIA has secretly made most of its cyber
spying/war code unclassified. The U.S. government is not able to
assert copyright either, due to restrictions in the U.S.
Constitution. This means that cyber ‘arms’ manufactures and
computer hackers can freely “pirate” these ‘weapons’ if they
are obtained. The CIA has primarily had to rely on obfuscation to
protect its malware secrets.

Conventional
weapons such as missiles may be fired at the enemy (i.e into an
unsecured area). Proximity to or impact with the target detonates the
ordnance including its classified parts. Hence military personnel do
not violate classification rules by firing ordnance with classified
parts. Ordnance will likely explode. If it does not, that is not the
operator’s intent.

Over
the last decade U.S. hacking operations have been increasingly
dressed up in military jargon to tap into Department of Defense
funding streams. For instance, attempted “malware injections”
(commercial jargon) or “implant drops” (NSA jargon) are being
called “fires” as if a weapon was being fired. However the
analogy is questionable.

Unlike
bullets, bombs or missiles, most CIA malware is designed to live for
days or even years after it has reached its ‘target’. CIA malware
does not “explode on impact” but rather permanently infests its
target. In order to infect target’s device, copies of the malware
must be placed on the target’s devices, giving physical possession
of the malware to the target.

To
exfiltrate data back to the CIA or to await further instructions the
malware must communicate with CIA Command & Control (C2) systems
placed on internet connected servers. But such servers are typically
not approved to hold classified information, so CIA command and
control systems are also made unclassified.

A
successful ‘attack’ on a target’s computer system is more like
a series of complex stock maneuvers in a hostile take-over bid or the
careful planting of rumors in order to gain control over an
organization’s leadership rather than the firing of a weapons
system. If there is a military analogy to be made, the infestation of
a target is perhaps akin to the execution of a whole series of
military maneuvers against the target’s territory including
observation, infiltration, occupation and exploitation.

Evading
forensics and anti-virus

A
series of standards lay out CIA malware infestation patterns which
are likely to assist forensic crime scene investigators as well as
Apple, Microsoft, Google, Samsung, Nokia, Blackberry, Siemens and
anti-virus companies attribute and defend against attacks.

Tradecraft
DO’s and DON’Ts”
 contains
CIA rules on how its malware should be written to avoid fingerprints
implicating the “CIA, US government, or its witting partner
companies” in “forensic review”. Similar secret standards cover
the 
use
of encryption to hide CIA hacker and malware
communication
 (pdf), describing
targets & exfiltrated data
 (pdf)
as well as 
executing
payloads
 (pdf)
and 
persisting (pdf)
in the target’s machines over time.

CIA
hackers developed successful attacks against most well known
anti-virus programs. These are documented in 
AV
defeats
Personal
Security Products
Detecting
and defeating PSPs
 and PSP/Debugger/RE
Avoidance
.
For example, Comodo was defeated by 
CIA
malware placing itself in the Window’s “Recycle Bin”
.
While Comodo 6.x has a 
“Gaping
Hole of DOOM”
.

CIA
hackers discussed what the NSA’s “Equation Group” hackers did
wrong and 
how
the CIA’s malware makers could avoid similar exposure
.

Examples

The
CIA’s Engineering Development Group (EDG) management system
contains around 500 different projects (only some of which are
documented by “Year Zero”) each with their own sub-projects,
malware and hacker tools.

The
majority of these projects relate to tools that are used for
penetration, infestation (“implanting”), control, and
exfiltration.

Another
branch of development focuses on the development and operation of
Listening Posts (LP) and Command and Control (C2) systems used to
communicate with and control CIA implants; special projects are used
to target specific hardware from routers to smart TVs.

Some
example projects are described below, but see 
the
table of contents
 for
the full list of projects described by WikiLeaks’ “Year Zero”.

UMBRAGE

The
CIA’s hand crafted hacking techniques pose a problem for the
agency. Each technique it has created forms a “fingerprint” that
can be used by forensic investigators to attribute multiple different
attacks to the same entity.

This
is analogous to finding the same distinctive knife wound on multiple
separate murder victims. The unique wounding style creates suspicion
that a single murderer is responsible. As soon one murder in the set
is solved then the other murders also find likely attribution.

The
CIA’s 
Remote
Devices Branch
‘s UMBRAGE
group
 collects
and maintains 
a
substantial library
 of
attack techniques ‘stolen’ from malware produced in other states
including the Russian Federation.

With
UMBRAGE and related projects the CIA cannot only increase its total
number of attack types but also misdirect attribution by leaving
behind the “fingerprints” of the groups that the attack
techniques were stolen from.

UMBRAGE
components cover keyloggers, password collection, webcam capture,
data destruction, persistence, privilege escalation, stealth,
anti-virus (PSP) avoidance and survey techniques.

Fine
Dining

Fine
Dining comes with a standardized questionnaire i.e menu that CIA case
officers fill out. The questionnaire is used by the agency’s OSB
(
Operational
Support Branch
)
to transform the requests of case officers into technical
requirements for hacking attacks (typically “exfiltrating”
information from computer systems) for specific operations. The
questionnaire allows the OSB to identify how to adapt existing tools
for the operation, and communicate this to CIA malware configuration
staff. The OSB functions as the interface between CIA operational
staff and the relevant technical support staff.

Among
the list of possible targets of the collection are ‘Asset’,
‘Liason Asset’, ‘System Administrator’, ‘Foreign
Information Operations’, ‘Foreign Intelligence Agencies’ and
‘Foreign Government Entities’. Notably absent is any reference to
extremists or transnational criminals. The ‘Case Officer’ is also
asked to specify the environment of the target like the type of
computer, operating system used, Internet connectivity and installed
anti-virus utilities (PSPs) as well as a list of file types to be
exfiltrated like Office documents, audio, video, images or custom
file types. The ‘menu’ also asks for information if recurring
access to the target is possible and how long unobserved access to
the computer can be maintained. This information is used by the CIA’s
‘JQJIMPROVISE’ software (see below) to configure a set of CIA
malware suited to the specific needs of an operation.

Improvise
(JQJIMPROVISE)

Improvise’
is a toolset for configuration, post-processing, payload setup and
execution vector selection for survey/exfiltration tools supporting
all major operating systems like Windows (Bartender), MacOS (JukeBox)
and Linux (DanceFloor). Its configuration utilities like Margarita
allows the NOC (Network Operation Center) to customize tools based on
requirements from ‘Fine Dining’ questionairies.

HIVE

HIVE
is a multi-platform CIA malware suite and its associated control
software. The project provides customizable implants for Windows,
Solaris, MikroTik (used in internet routers) and Linux platforms and
a Listening Post (LP)/Command and Control (C2) infrastructure to
communicate with these implants.

The
implants are configured to communicate via HTTPS with the webserver
of a cover domain; each operation utilizing these implants has a
separate cover domain and the infrastructure can handle any number of
cover domains.

Each
cover domain resolves to an IP address that is located at a
commercial VPS (Virtual Private Server) provider. The public-facing
server forwards all incoming traffic via a VPN to a ‘Blot’ server
that handles actual connection requests from clients. It is setup for
optional SSL client authentication: if a client sends a valid client
certificate (only implants can do that), the connection is forwarded
to the ‘Honeycomb’ toolserver that communicates with the implant;
if a valid certificate is missing (which is the case if someone tries
to open the cover domain website by accident), the traffic is
forwarded to a cover server that delivers an unsuspicious looking
website.

The
Honeycomb toolserver receives exfiltrated information from the
implant; an operator can also task the implant to execute jobs on the
target computer, so the toolserver acts as a C2 (command and control)
server for the implant.

Similar
functionality (though limited to Windows) is provided by the
RickBobby project.

See
the classified 
user and developer guides
for HIVE.

* *
*

FREQUENTLY
ASKED QUESTIONS

Why
now?

WikiLeaks
published as soon as its verification and analysis were ready.

In
Febuary the Trump administration has issued an Executive Order
calling for a “Cyberwar” review to be prepared within 30 days.

While
the review increases the timeliness and relevance of the publication
it did not play a role in setting the publication date.

Redactions

Names,
email addresses and external IP addresses have been redacted in the
released pages (70,875 redactions in total) until further analysis is
complete.

  1. Over-redaction: Some
    items may have been redacted that are not employees, contractors,
    targets or otherwise related to the agency, but are, for example,
    authors of documentation for otherwise public projects that are used
    by the agency.

  2. Identity
    vs. person:
     the redacted names are replaced by user IDs
    (numbers) to allow readers to assign multiple pages to a single
    author. Given the redaction process used a single person may be
    represented by more than one assigned identifier but no identifier
    refers to more than one real person.

  3. Archive
    attachments (zip, tar.gz, …)
     are replaced with a PDF
    listing all the file names in the archive. As the archive content is
    assessed it may be made available; until then the archive is
    redacted.

  4. Attachments
    with other binary content
     are replaced by a hex dump of the
    content to prevent accidental invocation of binaries that may have
    been infected with weaponized CIA malware. As the content is
    assessed it may be made available; until then the content is
    redacted.

  5. The tens
    of thousands of routable IP addresses references
     (including
    more than 22 thousand within the United States) that correspond to
    possible targets, CIA covert listening post servers, intermediary
    and test systems, are redacted for further exclusive investigation.

  6. Binary
    files of non-public origin
     are only available as dumps to
    prevent accidental invocation of CIA malware infected binaries.

Organizational
Chart

The organizational
chart
 corresponds
to the material published by WikiLeaks so far.

Since
the organizational structure of the CIA below the level of
Directorates is not public, the placement of the EDG and its branches
within the org chart of the agency is reconstructed from information
contained in the documents released so far. It is intended to be used
as a rough outline of the internal organization; please be aware that
the reconstructed org chart is incomplete and that internal
reorganizations occur frequently.

Wiki
pages

Year
Zero” contains 7818 web pages with 943 attachments from the
internal development groupware. The software used for this purpose is
called Confluence, a proprietary software from Atlassian. Webpages in
this system (like in Wikipedia) have a version history that can
provide interesting insights on how a document evolved over time; the
7818 documents include these page histories for 1136 latest versions.

The
order of named pages within each level is determined by date (oldest
first). Page content is not present if it was originally dynamically
created by the Confluence software (as indicated on the
re-constructed page).

What
time period is covered?

The
years 2013 to 2016. The sort order of the pages within each level is
determined by date (oldest first).

WikiLeaks
has obtained the CIA’s creation/last modification date for each
page but these do not yet appear for technical reasons. Usually the
date can be discerned or approximated from the content and the page
order. If it is critical to know the exact time/date contact
WikiLeaks.

What
is “Vault 7”

Vault
7” is a substantial collection of material about CIA activities
obtained by WikiLeaks.

When
was each part of “Vault 7” obtained?

Part
one was obtained recently and covers through 2016. Details on the
other parts will be available at the time of publication.

Is
each part of “Vault 7” from a different source?

Details
on the other parts will be available at the time of publication.

What
is the total size of “Vault 7”?

The
series is the largest intelligence publication in history.

How
did WikiLeaks obtain each part of “Vault 7”?

Sources
trust WikiLeaks to not reveal information that might help identify
them.

Isn’t
WikiLeaks worried that the CIA will act against its staff to stop the
series?

No.
That would be certainly counter-productive.

Has
WikiLeaks already ‘mined’ all the best stories?

No.
WikiLeaks has intentionally not written up hundreds of impactful
stories to encourage others to find them and so create expertise in
the area for subsequent parts in the series. They’re there. Look.
Those who demonstrate journalistic excellence may be considered for
early access to future parts.

Won’t
other journalists find all the best stories before me?

Unlikely.
There are very considerably more stories than there are journalists
or academics who are in a position to write them.

WikiLeaks 

@wikileaks

RELEASE: Vault 7 Part 1 “Year Zero”: Inside the CIA’s global hacking force https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1 

By Tyler
Durden
 /
Republished with permission / 
Zero
Hedge
 / Report
a typo

=========================

Vanmorgen bracht Anti-Media het bericht, dat n.a.v. de laatste Wikileaks documenten geconcludeerd kan worden, dat de CIA heel goed mogelijk de bron kan zijn geweest voor het (hysterische) nepnieuws, waarin wordt gesteld dat Rusland achter het lekken van de Clinton mails en het manipuleren van de VS presidentsverkiezingen zou zitten………. Zie voor dat laatste ook: ‘CIA speelt zoals gewoonlijk vuil spel: uit Wikileaks documenten blijkt dat CIA zelf de verkiezingen manipuleerde, waar het Rusland van beschuldigde……..

Zie ook: ‘‘Russische bemoeienis’ met de Nederlandse verkiezingen….. Waaruit blijkt nu die manipulatie, gezien de verkiezingsuitslag?

        en: ‘CIA malware voor manipulaties en spionage >> vervolg Wikileaks Vault 7

        en: ‘Campagne Clinton, smeriger dan gedacht…………‘ (met daarin daarin opgenomen de volgende artikelen: ‘Donna Brazile Bombshell: ‘Proof’ Hillary ‘Rigged’ Primary Against Bernie‘ en ‘Democrats in Denial After Donna Brazile Says Primary Was Rigged for Hillary‘)

        en: ‘WikiLeaks: Seth Rich Leaked Clinton Emails, Not Russia

        en: ‘Hillary Clinton en haar oorlog tegen de waarheid…….. Ofwel een potje Rusland en Assange schoppen!

        en: ‘Murray, ex-ambassadeur van GB: de Russen hebben de VS verkiezingen niet gemanipuleerd

       en: ‘‘Russische manipulaties uitgevoerd’ door later vermoord staflid Clintons campagneteam Seth Rich……… AIVD en MIVD moeten hiervan weten!!

       en: ‘Obama gaf toe dat de DNC e-mails expres door de DNC werden gelekt naar Wikileaks….!!!!

       en: VS ‘democratie’ aan het werk, een onthutsende en uitermate humoristische video!

       en: ‘Democraten VS kochten informatie over Trump >> Forgetting the ‘Dirty Dossier’ on Trump

       en: ‘Hillary Clinton moet op de hoogte zijn geweest van aankoop Steele dossier over Trump……..

       en: ‘Flashback: Clinton Allies Met With Ukrainian Govt Officials to Dig up Dirt on Trump During 2016 Election

       en: ‘FBI Director Comey Leaked Trump Memos Containing Classified Information

       en: ‘Publicly Available Evidence Doesn’t Support Russian Gov Hacking of 2016 Election

       en: ‘Russia Is Trolling the Shit out of Hillary Clinton and the Mainstream Media

       en: ‘CIA chef Pompeo waarschuwt voor complot van WikiLeaks om de VS op alle mogelijke manieren neer te halen……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

       en: ‘Russische ‘hacks’ door deskundigen nogmaals als fake news doorgeprikt >> Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence

       en: ‘Rusland krijgt alweer de schuld van hacken, nu van oplichters Symantec en Facebook……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

       en: ‘Russiagate, of: hoe de media u belazeren met verhalen over Russische bemoeienis met de VS presidentsverkiezingen……..

       en: ‘Rusland zou onafhankelijkheid Californië willen uitlokken met reclame voor borsjt…….

       en: ‘Rusland zou onafhankelijkheid Californië willen uitlokken met reclame voor borsjt…….

       en: ‘Clinton te kakken gezet: Donna Brazile (Democratische Partij VS) draagt haar boek op aan Seth Rich, het vermoorde lid van DNC die belastende documenten lekte

       en: ‘Kajsa Ollongren (D66 vicepremier): Nederland staat in het vizier van Russische inlichtingendiensten……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

       en: ‘WannaCry niet door Noord-Korea ‘gelanceerd!’

       en:  ‘False flag terror’ bestaat wel degelijk: bekentenissen en feiten over heel smerige zaken……….

Voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, klik op één van de labels, die u onder dit bericht terug kan vinden.

Mijn excuus voor de belabberde vormgeving.

BBC richt pijlen op China, als volgend ‘groot gevaar……….’

Afgelopen zaterdagmiddag in het BBC World Service nieuws van 14.00 u. het bericht dat China haar defensie uitgaven met 7% opschroeft. Voorts werd gemeld dat de VS 4 keer meer uitgeeft aan defensie dan Rusland. Dat is een grove leugen, volgens de nieuwste Sipri cijfers, geeft de VS 4 keer meer uit aan defensie, dan Rusland en China bij elkaar opgeteld*.

Het angstzaaien voor China begon ermee, dat de ‘deskundige correspondent’ stelde, dat de Chinese militaire uitgaven waarschijnlijk een stuk hoger zijn, dan de iets meer dan 13% (van het nationaal bbp) die Sipri aangeeft. Nee, dat is niet te bewijzen, men loopt daarvoor even naar buiten en steekt een natte vinger in de lucht. Terwijl al jaren blijkt, dat de cijfers van Sipri uiterst betrouwbaar zijn………..

Een andere deskundige stelde na het nieuws, dat China nu weliswaar 7% meer gaat uitgeven aan militaire middelen, maar dat dit jarenlang 10% op jaarbasis was (en of de luisteraar naar het programma na dit cijfer, maar even snel wit om de neus wilde worden van angst….)… Terwijl de VS de afgelopen 20 jaar China aan vele kanten heeft omsloten met militaire bases, om over het eerder genoemde defensie budget van de VS maar te zwijgen…….. Met andere woorden: gezien de agressie van de VS, zoals we die vanaf WOII hebben gezien, of zelfs alleen die agressie in de eerste 17 jaar van deze eeuw**, is het op z’n zachtst gezegd niet zo vreemd, dat een land als China meer gaat uitgeven aan defensie……..

En ja hoor, daar ging men los over ‘de Chinese agressie’ in de Zuid-Chinese Zee……… Alsof China landen is binnen gevallen en daar oorlogsmisdaden als massamoorden heeft begaan……. Nogmaals: terwijl er meer dan honderd VS bases rond China liggen…….

Trouwens wat betreft het VS budget aan militaire uitgaven, is het maar zeer de vraag of alles wordt meegeteld, bij mijn weten, zijn veel operationele kosten van dat leger geheim. Daarnaast kan je stellen, dat de CIA niet alleen een geheime dienst is, maar ook een dienst die diverse geheime operaties uitvoert in het buitenland, dit met speciale legercommando’s.

Nee, echt ‘een groot gevaar’ China…….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Bij nazoeken van cijfers kwam ik ook een tabel tegen van het goochelcijferinstituut CBS over defensie uitgaven. De cijfers die het CBS oplepelt zijn meestal van erg regering bevoordelend gehalte en onbetrouwbaar. Eén opmerkelijk getal, waar het CBS stelt dat iedere Nederlander jaarlijks € 450,– kwijt is aan defensie en dat dit in Duitsland op € 370,– per jaar ligt. Over GB gaf het CBS geen bedrag, vreemd daar GB wel ruim boven de norm uitgeeft aan ‘defensie’ (lees, net als bij VS: oorlogsvoering)……..

Aangezien het CBS onze regering graag uit de wind houdt met fantasiecijfers, valt dan ook te vrezen, dat Nederlanders amper minder uitgeven aan defensie dan de Britten….. Let wel: in Groot-Brittannië rekent men deels ook de uitgaven voor oorlogvoering mee in het budget, niet zo vreemd dus, dat de uitgaven daar een stuk hoger liggen dan hier……

Volgens het CBS hebben de invallen in Irak en Afghanistan vooral sterk op het VS defensie-budget gedrukt. Men lult maar niet over Nederland, waar we de eerste jaren 1 miljoen euro per dag kwijt waren aan de totaal onzinnige oorlog tegen Afghanistan, een bedrag dat later opliep naar meer dan 1,5 miljoen euro per dag!!

* Volgens de laatste cijfers van Sipri geven de EU landen Groot-Brittannië, Frankrijk, Duitsland en Italië al meer dan 2 keer zoveel uit aan defensie, dan Rusland….. Let wel 4 NAVO landen. U begrijpt dat met alle EU-NAVO leden bij elkaar opgeteld, plus die buiten Europa, ofwel de westerse militaire uitgaven voor defensie te samen, het absolute ‘wereldrecord’ is (‘wat een eer….’)……. Overigens staat Saoedi-Arabië op de 3de plek wat betreft militaire uitgaven.

** In de eerste 17 jaar vermoordde de VS al zo’n 2 miljoen mensen (waarvan 1,5 miljoen in Irak). Vanaf WOII tot het jaar 2000 ligt dat cijfer rond de 20 miljoen………

Zie ook: ‘Vliegdekschip GB loopt van stapel, kosten meer dan 3 miljard pond, terwijl dik 20 miljoen Britten in armoede leven…….

        en: ‘Groot-Brittannië stuurt nieuwe vliegdekschepen naar Zuid-Chinese Zee…. China listen, here’s a free tip!

Klik voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, op één van de labels, die u onder dit bericht terug kan vinden.

Russische diplomaten: 9 verdachte sterfgevallen de afgelopen paar jaar………

Onlangs berichtte ik al over de dood van 4 Russische diplomaten, die in korte tijd na elkaar omkwamen*. ‘Geheel toevallig’ ambtenaren die nodig waren om de spanningen tussen de VS / Rusland en tussen Turkije / Rusland te doen verminderen.

Gisteren ontving ik van Anti-Media een artikel waar men tot een paar jaar eerder teruggaat en waaruit blijkt dat in die tijd tot nu al 9 hoge Russische ambtenaren/diplomaten op toch wel vreemde manier zijn omgekomen. ‘Zeg maar’ iets te toevallig allemaal……

Oordeel zelf:

9
Russian Officials Have Recently Died Suspiciously and Nobody Knows
Why

February
27, 2017 at 10:20 am

Written
by 
Anti-Media
News Desk

9 Russian Officials Have Recently Died Suspiciously and Nobody Knows Why

(ZHE Op-Ed) Six
Russian diplomats have died in the last 60 days. 
As
Axios notes,
 all
but one died on foreign soil. Some were shot, while other causes of
death are unknown. Note that a few deaths have been labeled “heart
attacks” or “brief illnesses.”

1.
You probably remember Russia’s Ambassador to Turkey, Andrei
Karlov
 —
he was assassinated by a police officer at a photo exhibit in Ankara
on December 19.

2.
On the same day, another diplomat, Peter Polshikov, 
was
shot dead in his Moscow apartment. The gun was found under the
bathroom sink but the circumstances of the death were under
investigation. Polshikov served as a senior figure in the Latin
American department of the Foreign Ministry.

3.
Russia’s Ambassador to the United Nations, Vitaly Churkin,
 died
in New York this past week. Churkin was rushed to the hospital from
his office at Russia’s UN mission. Initial reports said he suffered
a heart attack, and the medical examiner is investigating the death,
according to CBS.

4.
Russia’s Ambassador to India, Alexander Kadakin,
 died
after a ‘brief illness’ January 27, which The Hindu said he had
been suffering from for a few weeks.

5.
Russian Consul in Athens, Greece, Andrei Malanin,
 was
found dead in his apartment January 9. A Greek police official said
there was ‘no evidence of a break-in.’ But Malanin lived on a
heavily guarded street. The cause of death needed further
investigation, per an AFP report. Malanin served during a time of
easing relations between Greece and Russia when Greece was
increasingly critiqued by the EU and NATO.

6.
Ex-KGB chief Oleg Erovinkin,
 who
was suspected of helping draft the Trump dossier, was found dead in
the back of his car December 26, according to The Telegraph.
Erovinkin also was an aide to former deputy prime minister Igor
Sechin, who now heads up state-owned Rosneft.”

If
we go back further than 60 days…

7.
On the morning of U.S. Election Day, Russian diplomat Sergei
Krivov
 was
found unconscious at the Russian Consulate in New York and died on
the scene. Initial reports said Krivov fell from the roof and had
blunt force injuries, but Russian officials said he died from a heart
attack. BuzzFeed reports Krivov may have been a Consular Duty
Commander, which would have put him in charge of preventing sabotage
or espionage.

8.
In November 2015, a senior adviser to Putin, Mikhail Lesin, 
who
was also the founder of the media company RT, was found dead in a
Washington hotel room according to the NYT. The Russian media said it
was a ‘heart attack,’ but the medical examiner said it was ‘blunt
force injuries.’

9.
If you go back a few months prior in September 2016, Russian
President Vladimir Putin’s driver 
was
killed too in a freak car accident while driving the Russian
President’s official black BMW  to add to the insanity.”


If
you include these three additional deaths that’s a total of nine
Russian officials that have died over the past two years
that 
WeAreChange.com’s
Aaron Kesel
 knows
of – he notes there could be more.

As
Kesel explains,
 it’s
worth noting that governments, specifically the CIA, have for long
periods of time had chemical concoctions that can induce a full
systematic shutdown of a person’s nervous system and in some cases
cause someone’s’ heart to explode.


Former
CIA employee Mary Embree discusses the infamous heart attack gun and
how she was tasked with finding a chemical concoction that would
cause a heart attack. The weapon was first made public during the
Church Committee hearings in 1975 by former CIA director William
Colby. It was said to be very lethal and untraceable, by using this
weapon a murder is made to look natural while the poison dissolves in
hours.

It
seems highly unlikely and improbable to write off that six Russian
officials would die in under 60 days in such an influx in various
different mysterious ways without a catalyst. And let’s not forget
RT founder and former Putin aide Mikhail Lesin was 
found dead
in 2015 from a blunt weapon that was originally blamed on a 
heart
attack
 so
assassination can’t be taken off the table and ruled out in any of
these cases. Turkey and Russia already accused NATO of a false flag
attack killing Karlov the Russian-Turkish Ambassador. NATO also had a
dead diplomat Yves Chandelon mysteriously 
died of
a gunshot wound to the head in his car a week before the death of
Karlov. Chandelon was the chief auditor in charge of counterterrorism
funding.

Turkey
and Russia have the will not to be deceived by this false flag
attack,”
 they said.


Don’t
forget that on Christmas day, a Russian military jet went down over
the Black Sea, 
killing 60
members of the Red Army choir and 33 others that just adds to the
massive coincidence list.

On
a final note, former acting director of the U.S. Central Intelligence
Agency (CIA), Michael Morell openly conspired to “covertly” kill
Russians and Iranians in Syria in an August 2016 interview with
Charlie Rose. While Morell was talking about killing Russian and
Iranian soldiers it is definitely a strange piece to add to this
puzzle.

Are
we witnessing a battle between the deep state and Russia in a spy
versus spy plotline or is this all just a freak coincidence?

Opinion
by 
Tyler
Durden
 /
Republished with permission / 
Zero
Hedge
 / Report
a typo

=====================

* Zie: ‘Media stilte over dood 4 Russische diplomaten………

Zie ook:

FBI beweert dat Lesin, de oprichter van RT, zichzelf heeft doodgeslagen……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

De Russiagate samenzweringstheorie dient de machthebbers………‘ (zie ook de links in dat bericht)

Klik voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, op één van de labels, die u onder dit bericht terug kan vinden.

Trumps vrede met Rusland weer van de kaart met aanstelling McMaster?

Donald ‘het beest’ Trump liet tijdens de verkiezingen weten, dat hij de relaties met Rusland wilde verbeteren en ook na zijn verkiezing noemde hij dit nog een paar keer. Intussen blijkt dat Trump zich heeft neergelegd bij de bestaande status quo: de Koude Oorlog 2.0.

Met het aanstellen van generaal McMaster* als nationale veiligheidsadviseur, heeft Trump bevestigd, dat hij zich heeft gevoegd bij de anti-Russische oorlogshitserij in het Pentagon en bij de geheime diensten, zoals de CIA en de NSA……….

McMaster is een oorlogshitser van de eerste orde en liegt dat het gedrukt staat, o.a. over Georgië, De Krim en Oekraïne (zoals u in het artikel hieronder kan lezen).

Hier dat artikel van Anti-Media, gisteren ontvangen (lees en zie ook de artikelen/video onder de links in dat artikel):

Hopes of Peace with Russia Could Be Crushed by Trump’s New National Security Advisor

February 22, 2017 at 10:44 am

Written by Anti-Media News Desk

(RPI)** President Trump has selected Gen. H.R. McMaster to be his National Security Advisor, replacing the short-lived Gen. Michael Flynn. Those breathing a sigh of relief that the rumored favorite John Bolton didn’t get the nod may want to hold that thought — and their breath. McMaster is not the man to guide President Trump toward better relations with Russia and less US interference in the internal affairs of others.

In fact, he believes the opposite.

In a speech*** delivered at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) just last May, Gen. McMaster blamed the lack of sufficient US military presence overseas for what he calls a more aggressive Russian geostrategic posturing.

Said the General:

“Even though it may have been apparent, at least since 2008, that Russia was changing its geostrategic behavior and engaging in…probing, probing at the far reaches of American power, our strategic response was to accelerate our withdrawal of…army forces from Europe. And what we’re seeing now is we’ve awakened to obviously this threat from Russia who is waging limited war for limited objectives. Annexing Crimea. Invading Ukraine. At zero cost. And consolidating gains over that territory, and portraying the reaction by us and partners as escalatory. … What is required is forward deterrence. To be able to ratchet up the cost at the frontier.”

The General also made the completely fallacious assertion that Russia invaded Georgia in 2008. Even the highly critical if not overtly anti-Russia European Union concluded that Georgia was to blame for launching an ill-advised attack on Russian peacekeeping forces that were part of an international mission in South Ossetia.

Does this sound like someone who is going to work to help President Trump improve relations with Russia?

No wonder neocons Max Boot and Sen. John McCain are absolutely thrilled with Trump’s choice of McMaster to be National Security Advisor.

Sen. McCain, who just returned from attacking President Trump at the Munich Security Conference for not being harder on Russia, said today that McMaster:

“…knows how to succeed. I give President Trump great credit for this decision, as well as his national security cabinet choices. I could not imagine a better, more capable national security team than the one we have right now.”

Max Boot had a similar reaction:

“H.R. McMaster is one of the most impressive army officers of his generation—a rare combination of soldier and scholar.”

McMaster’s claim to fame was the 1997 Dereliction of Duty, which is billed as a brave attack on the mistake of the Vietnam war, but was in fact largely focused on the failure to devote enough resources to actually winning the war — a typical neocon critique of failed military interventions.

Is McMaster a worse choice than John Bolton? Perhaps. Whereas Bolton would have been under the microscope, McMaster may just be able, due to his military history, be able to avoid close scrutiny.

Whatever the case, McMaster is all about conflict with Russia. Will his boss keep him in check?

Whatever the case, McMaster is all about conflict with Russia. Will his boss keep him in check?

By Daniel McAdams / Republished with permission / RPI / Report a typo

======================================

*   McMaster bedankte Trump uitvoerig voor zijn benoeming, terwijl hij vierde keus was…….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!



**  RPI: Ron Paul Institute

*** Een toespraak op een conferentie die werd betaald door Rolls Royce Noord-Amerika………. (Rolls Royce bouwt o.a. vliegtuigmotoren…..)