It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

FBI, DHS release report on Russia hacking

page: 3
19
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 06:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: roadgravel
Refreshing to know we spend so much money on DHS but they won't say their work is even valid. I suppose they know it isn't. Good job.


yeah, why bother spending the time and money to do an investigation and write a report if they aren`t going to stand behind their work. we could get a homeless person off the streets to do an investigation and write a report that they won`t stand behind and it would cost the taxpayers a whole lot less to go that route.




posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 06:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Tardacus

Makes a person have faith in those overseeing the security of the country, doesn't it.

Reminds me of those Hollywood sets, the ones that look like buildings but are nothing more than a fancy front with 2x4s propping it up from the back.



posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 06:26 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Where the heck on here did I see a report claiming that some states were complaining that dhs was hacking their voting crap?

I'll find it...


eta;
I have to come back tomorrow, time for sleep.
HGN
edit on (12/29/1616 by loveguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 08:21 PM
link   
When it all comes down to it. Left or Right, Republican or Democrat.... it shows you what they really think of the unwashed masses.

To them we are just kids in the backseat of the car, along for the ride and no say about where we're going.... and daddy is starting to look like he is ready to turn around and start smacking some kids if they dont start listening.



posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 08:59 PM
link   
I find it interesting that all the code names they have in their report are all names that a western hacker would call themselves. These names are all Western nicknames to me.

Yes, it's easy to say, "well they did that on purpose."

I doubt it. Because I doubt the entire story.

AAC



posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 09:00 PM
link   
What if the hacking is like many of the "hate crimes" we've read about lately? Did the DNC hack itself?



posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 09:03 PM
link   
a reply to: MiddleInitial

Given the atrocious state of US Cybersecurity over the past 8 years, I doubt anyone employed by the DNC knows how to hack anything.

Probably can't even call up a simple dxdiag.



posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 09:34 PM
link   
Personally i think Russia are involved but not in the pressumed hacking of the elections. I think this is related to how Russia have been capable of stopping US covert initiatives on all fronts in Syria, Iraq, Jordan and Yemen. And also on Russian soil.

The Russian FSB have operators within IS/ISIL and syrian anti-Assad rebels and pro-Asad rebels. Just like the US and the British have. GRU teams have been in charge together With FSB to build a covert plan to Counter US/UK covert initiatives.

Obama have no other reason to sanction FSB and GRU. Because they are not really the mastermind behind the Russian progres in Syria. That would be the Russian internal comand and controll (C1,C2 and C3). Command and Controll are not the FSB or the GRU unites. GRU and FSB are jsut Tools.

Only the Russian internal command and controll would have the authority to hack the US government on behalf of the Russian government/Putin.

Its odd that the US would not sanction Putin?



edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 10:22 PM
link   
a reply to: tridalop


Yes, immigrants crossing the border to pick oranges for $3 an hr and a cyber attack by Russia directed at the United States are comparable.



posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 10:52 PM
link   
Just which 35 diplomats will be very telling...

Is anyone aware of the names yet??

Most will, without a doubt, be minor functionaries with no real purpose under heaven save for being sacrificial lambs.



posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 10:57 PM
link   
Again, I have to ask ... Has anyone connected to Podesta, the DNC, the Clinton Foundation or the Clinton Campaign bothered at any stage to deny anything in any of these emails?

Have they ever claimed they were at all fraudulent and made up or are they only whining they were hacked and leaked to the public?

If the latter, it means all of this is crying over having their dirty laundry exposed, meaning nothing in those emails is at all fake. They are tacitly owning every dirty trick and corrupt moment. The press in this case is aiding and abetting because they have massive egg on their face too. Those emails made them look every bit as bad as we've always suspected they were.

In this matter, you can't trust either the government or the press.



posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 11:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: PlasticWizard
a reply to: Ohanka

They messed up with the disclaimer... This screams propaganda 100%. Which is legal now.


Seeing as propaganda is now legal, why would they need to have a disclaimer unless they were trying to point out that this was their opinion on the matter, which means they can't prove it as fact?

Please people, think before you type or speak.



posted on Dec, 30 2016 @ 12:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: PlasticWizard
a reply to: tridalop

Hence the disclaimer, it leaves them open to say "oh that was just a preliminary report.. Blah blah blah" when proof emerges that says that they didn't "hack the election" .



Once again, if this was propaganda then it's one hell of a way to bring attention to it by saying that the report holds no lawful weight or guarantee of correctness.

Let's think about it. The law states the federal government can produce propaganda against the citizenry. Okay, inside of producing such propaganda would it make sense to call attention to it as propaganda? If this report was propaganda would they have put in a disclaimer that was in no way legally necessary? Highly doubtful.

I think the report likely is correct that the Russians played a part in hacking systems, or at least people connected to them. Whatever, that's the DNC's fault and not Russia...especially when seeing the fact Clinton wanted direct and asymettrical war with Russia. The DNC lost the elections and should stop being pansies about the whole thing.

I imagine in an earlier time these types of grievances would not have been aired in such a manner. You hack us, we do something destructive to you, and so on and so forth.



posted on Dec, 30 2016 @ 01:04 AM
link   
Putin have said that they will Close the International School....The Anglo-American School of Moscow.



The Anglo-American School faculty consists of 150 qualified and experienced educators and 13 administrators, principally from the US, UK, and Canada.  



posted on Dec, 30 2016 @ 01:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: PlasticWizard
Weird it has a disclaimer.



grin... the line in disclaimer basicly translates as "the report is all BS"



posted on Dec, 30 2016 @ 01:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: seagull
Just which 35 diplomats will be very telling...

Is anyone aware of the names yet??

Most will, without a doubt, be minor functionaries with no real purpose under heaven save for being sacrificial lambs.


Leonid Reportisfalski
Alexander Fakenewsov
Boris .....



posted on Dec, 30 2016 @ 01:52 AM
link   
grin... C.a.N.aa.N having a field day...
laughing their ** out about how easy it is to deceive the millions..

edition.cnn.com...

"Dmitri Peskov, a spokesman for Russian President Vladimir Putin, told reporters there is "no alternative to reciprocal measures," adding that Putin is "in no rush to make a decision."

...ofcourse not : he knows very well the one-sided Circus his brothers at the other side of the pond started



posted on Dec, 30 2016 @ 02:30 AM
link   
It sounds like Podesta fell for a email phishsing attack.....not very cutting edge.


edit on 30-12-2016 by pavil because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2016 @ 02:49 AM
link   
a reply to: IsntLifeFunny

Nice try professor.. Propaganda may be legal but a disclaimer will keep you out of a lawsuit. Perhaps that disclaimer was put in there to protect the media outlets that are spreading the propaganda. Gotta protect the lackies. Or maybe the government thinks we're too stupid to read the fine print.



posted on Dec, 30 2016 @ 03:08 AM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

I don't recall any, right off hand.

Doesn't, of course mean they didn't, but I don't recall one.




top topics



 
19
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join