• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

CIA says "High Confidence" that Putin involved with Hacking

Elixir said:
whichphilosophy said:
political intercourse
Click to expand...

That's where one country's leader lets another country's leader fuck them in the ass, right? You won't have a long wait for that...
Click to expand...

In politics its called having each other's backs. Hope they can cooperate in removing ISIS and other of the same ilk.
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
whichphilosophy said:
What Russian US thaw? Putin is anticipating this will take place when Trump takes office unless he is assassinated or something.
Europe and the US need to work with Russia to combat terrorism.
Click to expand...
I must have missed the Freeze in US russia relations caused by Obama. Putin pretty much just dicked Obama around. Probably should have let Syrian rebels sell WMDs from Syria to the fucking Chechenians.

This isn't about a thaw, it is about a predecided quid pro quo of Putin and Trump's team.
Click to expand...

There are no known Weapons of Mass Destruction, just the politics of mass distraction. What was pre-decided?
 
Horatio Parker said:
One piece I read over the weekend said Obama and Putin got along pretty well until the Arab spring. Putin refused to believe we didn't orchestrate it.

They did the new START treaty together.
Click to expand...

No, you are wrong, You confuse Putin with Medvedev.
Putin have never got along with Obama. Obama became president when Medvedev was a president in Russia and Putin was a Prime Minister. When Obama replaced Bush he and Hillary tried to reset crappy relations after that Georgian War which is widely believed (in Russia) was started by american neocons. Reset did not go anywhere, even though US/Obama liked Medvedev. And then when it became clear that Putin is running for President again "reset" was forgotten and US started working on a maidan in Russia, supporting opposition and prompting protests in other words trying to influence elections (remind you of anything?). That's where Putin and Obama/Clinton finally broke up. Putin won the elections and kicked out all US funded anything in Russia, even the ones which had seemingly nothing to do with democracy and stuff.
In short, US really hated Putin staying in power for a third term and have been undermining everything Putin does just because he is Putin.

My theory is, Putin was ready to skip at least one more presidential term. but then Georgian war happened and NATO kept pushing and pushing and he realized that West really hates Russia and he should run again. I can't blame him for that.
Medvedev was a pretty likable and liberal guy and yet US/NATO treated Russia the same - as enemy.
 
Last edited:
Jimmy Higgins said:
In order to reach the level of "High confidence" there needs to be well documented evidence. This evidence will be reviewed by others. We'll see. As an FYI, you may be wise to start coming up with reasons why Putin interfering with the American election (and the word is now House seat elections were also targeted) isn't a big deal.
Click to expand...

It's quite amusing (though somehow I think you'll not find it funny) how the US spokespeople and intelligence creeps choose their words so carefully to fool Americans.
Take John Kirby for example. At the 2.45 he makes the claim that Russia "interfered with the US election". Yet the only evidence of this is that RT news criticised Hillary Clinton ( or something equally benign).

I'd say that is the entire extent of any evidence they have on anything. But by framing things the right way and by choosing their words carefully, they enable people who want to be deceived that that have evidence of hacking.

[YOUTUBE]https://youtu.be/SUDXV66-n64[/YOUTUBE]
 
barbos said:
In short, US really hated Putin staying in power for a third term and have been undermining everything Putin does just because he is Putin.
.
Click to expand...
They do it because Putin is not a puppet. They want a puppet who will roll over and obey. Putin looks out for Russia's interests first, and they can't deal with that. Putin wants to speak to them as an equal, but the neocons don't know how to do that. They regard America as different, as exceptional, as above the rules that others have to keep.

All over the globe we find countries bowing to America, compromising themselves, begging almost for help, losing self respect, losing their way
 
barbos said:
Horatio Parker said:
One piece I read over the weekend said Obama and Putin got along pretty well until the Arab spring. Putin refused to believe we didn't orchestrate it.

They did the new START treaty together.
Click to expand...

No, you are wrong, You confuse Putin with Medvedev.
Click to expand...

My mistake. I guess I substituted "Putin" for "Russia".
 
Will Wiley said:
Jimmy Higgins said:
In order to reach the level of "High confidence" there needs to be well documented evidence. This evidence will be reviewed by others. We'll see. As an FYI, you may be wise to start coming up with reasons why Putin interfering with the American election (and the word is now House seat elections were also targeted) isn't a big deal.
Click to expand...

It's quite amusing (though somehow I think you'll not find it funny) how the US spokespeople and intelligence creeps choose their words so carefully to fool Americans.
Take John Kirby for example. At the 2.45 he makes the claim that Russia "interfered with the US election". Yet the only evidence of this is that RT news criticised Hillary Clinton ( or something equally benign).

I'd say that is the entire extent of any evidence they have on anything. But by framing things the right way and by choosing their words carefully, they enable people who want to be deceived that that have evidence of hacking.

[YOUTUBE]https://youtu.be/SUDXV66-n64[/YOUTUBE]
Click to expand...

What he is saying the crime is classified and the evidence is classified. So it implies that someone could be on trial but the charges are secret and what is supposed to have happened is secret. Even if the sources are secret the evidence provided by them should be presentable where the accused can then answer. So the CIA and those involved are playing this rather like a air guitar.

Further ww could say that the accusations are groundless and the sources are secret, where the defence also says it cannot reveal its sources as these are confidential. Then it means not only the CIA but those opposing these
 
I think Trump should hire Aaron Sorkin to write these daily briefings, and faster speakers. It would save huge amount of time each day, as well as make it hell of a lot more interesting.
 
Jayjay said:
I think Trump should hire Aaron Sorkin to write these daily briefings, and faster speakers. It would save huge amount of time each day, as well as make it hell of a lot more interesting.
Click to expand...

Oh great. You know damn well what would come from saving Trump time; another crap-ton of idiotic tweets.
 
Elixir said:
Jayjay said:
I think Trump should hire Aaron Sorkin to write these daily briefings, and faster speakers. It would save huge amount of time each day, as well as make it hell of a lot more interesting.
Click to expand...

Oh great. You know damn well what would come from saving Trump time; another crap-ton of idiotic tweets.
Click to expand...
I meant the state department briefs. It's not like the president has to touch those with a ten foot pole anyway. In fact they seem more like a hazing ritual for the white house interns to throw them answer dumbass questions from RT trolls, without being able to actually say anything.
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
In order to reach the level of "High confidence" there needs to be well documented evidence. This evidence will be reviewed by others. We'll see. As an FYI, you may be wise to start coming up with reasons why Putin interfering with the American election (and the word is now House seat elections were also targeted) isn't a big deal.
Click to expand...
We have seen the evidence. You can review it for yourself. The evidence is that RTnews criticised Hillary Clinton. That's it.

This is evidence that Putin interfered in the election. There is no other evidence. That's why we see the NSA only having moderate confidence, and the CIA having to say they have "high confidence". It's the NSA who would have the actual evidence of interference not the CIA, yet the NSA weakly limped in with "moderate confidence".
Wake up
 
Will Wiley said:
Jimmy Higgins said:
In order to reach the level of "High confidence" there needs to be well documented evidence. This evidence will be reviewed by others. We'll see. As an FYI, you may be wise to start coming up with reasons why Putin interfering with the American election (and the word is now House seat elections were also targeted) isn't a big deal.
Click to expand...
We have seen the evidence. You can review it for yourself. The evidence is that RTnews criticised Hillary Clinton. That's it.

This is evidence that Putin interfered in the election. There is no other evidence. That's why we see the NSA only having moderate confidence, and the CIA having to say they have "high confidence". It's the NSA who would have the actual evidence of interference not the CIA, yet the NSA weakly limped in with "moderate confidence".
Wake up
Click to expand...
Yes, NSA relies on actual data, whereas CIA relies on their own "analysis" of sometimes publicly available data which apparently includes RT in this case. That's why there is a difference in confidence.
 
They say APT28 and APT29 were unaware of each other and yet they say Putin is behind it. Does that mean Putin forgot he already had it hacked and hacked again?

Also this private company which did all the work appears merely "moderately" confident that was russian government job. So I don't understand where "high" comes from in "High Confidence".
 
barbos said:
They say APT28 and APT29 were unaware of each other and yet they say Putin is behind it. Does that mean Putin forgot he already had it hacked and hacked again?

Also this private company which did all the work appears merely "moderately" confident that was russian government job. So I don't understand where "high" comes from in "High Confidence".
Click to expand...
There was a bit more investigating after the private firm did their investigation.
 
barbos said:
They say APT28 and APT29 were unaware of each other and yet they say Putin is behind it. Does that mean Putin forgot he already had it hacked and hacked again?

Also this private company which did all the work appears merely "moderately" confident that was russian government job. So I don't understand where "high" comes from in "High Confidence".
Click to expand...

It's a terminology used in place of no evidence. Bear in mind the Russians and Americans are always attacking each other mail resources
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
barbos said:
They say APT28 and APT29 were unaware of each other and yet they say Putin is behind it. Does that mean Putin forgot he already had it hacked and hacked again?

Also this private company which did all the work appears merely "moderately" confident that was russian government job. So I don't understand where "high" comes from in "High Confidence".
Click to expand...
There was a bit more investigating after the private firm did their investigation.
Click to expand...
What investigating? FBI did not even look at these DNC servers. And I don't see 17 agencies explicitly refuting their conclusion that APT28 and APT29 were unaware of each other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom