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.

 

Seth Rich, Craig Murray and the Sinister Stewards of the National Security State

page: 1
79
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+53 more 
posted on May, 22 2017 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Why is it a “conspiracy theory” to think that a disgruntled Democratic National Committee staffer gave WikiLeaks the DNC emails, but not a conspiracy theory to think the emails were provided by Russia?

Why?

Which is the more likely scenario: That a frustrated employee leaked damaging emails to embarrass his bosses or a that foreign government hacked DNC computers for some still-unknown reason?

That’s a no-brainer, isn’t it?

Former-DNC employee, Seth Rich, not only had access to the emails, but also a motive. He was pissed about the way the Clinton crowd was “sandbagging” Bernie Sanders. In contrast, there’s neither evidence nor motive connecting Russia to the emails. On top of that, WikiLeaks founder, Julien Assange (a man of impeccable integrity) has repeatedly denied that Russia gave him the emails which suggests the government investigation is completely misdirected.


www.unz.com...
edit on Sun May 28 2017 by DontTreadOnMe because: trimmed overly long quote IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS



+26 more 
posted on May, 22 2017 @ 11:48 AM
link   
Excellent article showing the double standards of the media accepting the Russian narrative but refusing to listen to anything regarding Rich being the leaker. I find the part about Craig Murray to be of particular interests.


Have you ever heard of Craig Murray?

Murray should be the government’s star witness in the DNC hacking scandal, instead, no one even knows who he is. But if we trust what Murray has to say, then we can see that the Russia hacking story is baloney. The emails were “leaked” by insiders not “hacked” by a foreign government. Here’s the scoop from Robert Parry at Consortium News:

“Former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray, has suggested that the DNC leak came from a “disgruntled” Democrat upset with the DNC’s sandbagging of the Sanders campaign and that the Podesta leak came from the U.S. intelligence community….He (Murray) appears to have undertaken a mission for WikiLeaks to contact one of the sources (or a representative) during a Sept. 25 visit to Washington where he says he met with a person in a wooded area of American University. ….


www.unz.com...

Why hasn't Murray been asked to testify? For smoe reason everyone seemed to be enthralled with a former MI6 agents opposition research about Trump liking to be peed on, but Murray's meeting and claims are not worth looking into?

The article also does a great job of showing all of the problems with the Intelligence Community Assessment thaat was supposed to be the intelligence agencies proof that Russia did the hack.
edit on Sun May 28 2017 by DontTreadOnMe because: trimmed overly long quote IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS


+14 more 
posted on May, 22 2017 @ 11:51 AM
link   
Lastly maybe the most important part of the article. Is this man a Trump supporter? Nope, he hates him and thinks that he may be the worst president ever. But as any true american and liberal should do, he questions cheering on this war by the deep state to remove him.


Does this analysis make me a Donald Trump supporter?

Never. The idea is ridiculous. Trump might be the worst US president of all time, in fact, he probably is. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t other nefarious forces at work behind the smokescreen of democratic government. There are. In fact, this whole flap suggests that there’s an alternate power-structure that operates completely off the public’s radar and has the elected-government in its death-grip. This largely invisible group of elites controls the likes of Brennan, Clapper and Comey. And, apparently, they have enough influence to challenge and maybe even remove an elected president from office. (We’ll see.)

And what’s more surprising, is that the Democrats have aligned themselves with these deep state puppetmasters. They’ve cast their lot with the sinister stewards of the national security state and hopped on the impeachment bandwagon. But is that a wise choice for the Dems?


www.unz.com...

This article is a great read for anyone interested on how bizarre the treatment of these hacks is by the media, political groups, and the intelligence agencies.
edit on Sun May 28 2017 by DontTreadOnMe because: trimmed overly long quote IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 11:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

I'm trying to understand your suggested motive. Seth Rich was killed by the Hillary or someone on her team because the Emails would make her look bad with her shenanigans against Bernie?


+33 more 
posted on May, 22 2017 @ 11:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: Grambler

I'm trying to understand your suggested motive. Seth Rich was killed by the Hillary or someone on her team because the Emails would make her look bad with her shenanigans against Bernie?


The article specifically states that it is not addressing who killed Rich.

It merely states that it is far more plausible that an insider such as Rich that was upset about the treatment of Bernie leaked these emails than that they were hacked by Russians.

Is it possible that the DNC murdered Rich for revealing these documents? I suppose. But that is not a necessary scenario to prove the hypocrisy and insanity of ignoring the fact that he may have been the leaker and accepting it was the Russians with no proof.



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 12:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

The Russians with no proof would mean Trump is innocent of all possible charges of obstruction of justice because there's no evidence the Russians did anything?

I think there's a Tom Clancy novel in the making!



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 12:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

I read this yesterday on Counterpunch. It's got some questionable assumptions as well as likely factual inaccuracies. I'll start at the beginning:


Which is the more likely scenario: That a frustrated employee leaked damaging emails to embarrass his bosses or a that foreign government hacked DNC computers for some still-unknown reason?


That's problematic because the thrust of the reason for believing that Seth Rich was the source of the DNC emails is that he was murdered. It also ignores the fact that state sponsored hacking is quite common and that there is evidence of similar attacks in other countries.

In June of 2015, it was the German parliament. More recently, it's been alleged in the French elections. So the real question should be this:

Which is the more likely scenario: That a frustrated employee leaked damaging emails to embarass his bosses and was assassinated for leaking emails that only substantiated what was already known (DWS was in the bag for Clinton) or that a foreign state with a history of meddling in elections and more importantly, one suspected in a series of similar state-sponsored attacks against the political establishment in multiple Western countries, hacked DNC computers?

The author is quite coy when he suggests that the reason for such a hack is somehow hard to discern when there are obvious motivations for doing so.

I don't want to post a giant text wall and I'm answering emails at the same time, so I'll start here and then follow up in additional posts.
edit on 2017-5-22 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)


+14 more 
posted on May, 22 2017 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Damn Gambler you are not joking about the veracity of this article!!

Thank god people are waking up to the propaganda that is being spewed around by the deep state, even those who have been brainwashed by their media outlets will have a hard time looking over this and not questioning their stance!

The Russian narrative continues to disintegrate into the worthless pile of s*** it is!



+17 more 
posted on May, 22 2017 @ 12:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Grambler


Which is the more likely scenario: That a frustrated employee leaked damaging emails to embarass his bosses and was assasinated for leaking emails that only proved what was already known (DWS was in the bag for Clinton) or that a foreign state with a history of meddling in elections and more importantly, one suspected in a series of similar state-sponsored attacks against the political establishment in multiple Western countries, hacked DNC computers?



But you throw in the part about him being assassinated which is not necessary for him to be the leaker. And just because everyone suspected the DNC was in the bag for Hillary, as a DNC member and Bernie supporter, he would have been quite disheartened to see proof that Bernie was being cheated by the DNC.

And if Russia has such experience in hacks such as these, why would they leave such an obvious trail? In addition, why would the ICA released by the inteligence agencies have some many problems in it?

I will link what the article says.


Let’s take a minute and review the main points in the article:

1–Was the Intelligence Community Assessment the summary work of all 17 US Intelligence Agencies?

No, it was not. “In his May 8 testimony to a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing, Clapper confirmed …(that) the ICA reflected the views of only three intelligence agencies — CIA, NSA and FBI – not all 17.”

2–Did any of the analysts challenge the findings in the ICA?

No, the document failed to acknowledge any dissenting views, which suggests that the analysts were screened in order to create consensus.

.........

Keep in mind, this is a list of the people who actually “reviewed the evidence”, and even they are not convinced. It just goes to show that the media blitz is not based on any compelling proof, but on the determination of behind-the-scenes elites who want to destroy their political rivals. Isn’t that what’s really going on?


www.unz.com...
edit on Sun May 28 2017 by DontTreadOnMe because: trimmed overly long quote IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 12:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Hmmmm interesting.

I remember the Gavin MacFadyen articles and like many ATSers here found the timing of his demise to be rather "coincidental" to say the least.

We really need whoever made to Podesta leak to just put their name on the line and come forward because they will probably end up dead either way. In fact, since we don't know who it was, they may already be dead.

This is a really tricky situation. I think it's unlikely the Spy hasn't been found out yet, though I guess it's possible, just unlikely.

Thanks for sharing the article. A lot of stuff is being written about this topic right now which I find very fishy. I'm just kinda confused on how everything synchronized so well.


+15 more 
posted on May, 22 2017 @ 12:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: Grambler

I'm trying to understand your suggested motive. Seth Rich was killed by the Hillary or someone on her team because the Emails would make her look bad with her shenanigans against Bernie?


You are missing the point - as are many people who look at this. I think many intentionally - in an attempt to make anyone looking into the Seth Rich story as a crazy conspiracy theorist.

Here is the point

It does not matter who killed Seth Rich or why. All that matters is if he is the source of the DNC wikileaks because it completely destroys the whole Russia narrative as a lie.



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 12:30 PM
link   
a reply to: elementalgrove

The "deep state" or "shadow govt" also controls other nations around the world too, from Russia to China or European states etc. What loyalties or allegiances or agendas it may have are often hard to discern because we simply don't have enough information to make good assessments.

We can only make vague generalizations about the global shadow government, like "they like to repress and withhold advanced technology". Or "they collude on keeping secrets about outer space". Even then this is very difficult to assert definitively.

We simply don't know the facts - but it is clear that the facts are being withheld from us. We should theoretically know a lot more about everything.
edit on 5/22/2017 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 12:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler


Former-DNC employee, Seth Rich, not only had access to the emails, but also a motive. He was pissed about the way the Clinton crowd was “sandbagging” Bernie Sanders. In contrast, there’s neither evidence nor motive connecting Russia to the emails.


Has it ever been established that Seth Rich had access to the emails? Seth Rich was working as a data analyst on a voter expansion project. The project was centered on helping voters find the nearest open polling places. Seth Rich majored in History and Political Science in College.

I have looked and I have yet to find any evidence that Seth Rich had administrator access to the DNC email servers — or any DNC servers for that matter, let alone servers on the same network as the email server. In fact, we know what firm the DNC had outsourced server administration. I don't remember the name off the top of my head but I remember when it was published, the company changed their home page to a landing page which was only their logo.

Here the author states it matter as a matter of fact without offering any evidence.

This is a very big deal. The author plays fast and loose with motivation and completely takes for granted opportunity. That's unforgivably sloppy. It seems unlikely to me that Seth Rich would have had the required access as a part of his job.

To the second part of the excerpt, there are in fact multiple lines of evidence pointing to a state actor, most likely to be Russia. Since the author doesn't actually explain the basis for his opinion, it's hard to know how he arrived at it. Finally, he harps on motive again. That's the author's questionable opinion. Tens of millions of people see the Russian motive for doing so being every bit as plain as the author's view of what he presumes to be Rich's possible motive.



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 12:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: proximo

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: Grambler

I'm trying to understand your suggested motive. Seth Rich was killed by the Hillary or someone on her team because the Emails would make her look bad with her shenanigans against Bernie?


You are missing the point - as are many people who look at this. I think many intentionally - in an attempt to make anyone looking into the Seth Rich story as a crazy conspiracy theorist.

Here is the point

It does not matter who killed Seth Rich or why. All that matters is if he is the source of the DNC wikileaks because it completely destroys the whole Russia narrative as a lie.


99% correct yes.
It seems very unlikely that Rich was a Russian agent or sellout.
It doesn't make much sense either.

So yes - the Russia angle is pretty much destroyed.
And the credibility of the MSM should be destroyed too, along with it.

But the MSM is a phoenix, they will rise again from the ashes fo their lies like a new credible news source.
They do it everyday and people STILL believe in this crap.


+6 more 
posted on May, 22 2017 @ 12:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: proximo

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: Grambler

I'm trying to understand your suggested motive. Seth Rich was killed by the Hillary or someone on her team because the Emails would make her look bad with her shenanigans against Bernie?


You are missing the point - as are many people who look at this. I think many intentionally - in an attempt to make anyone looking into the Seth Rich story as a crazy conspiracy theorist.

Here is the point

It does not matter who killed Seth Rich or why. All that matters is if he is the source of the DNC wikileaks because it completely destroys the whole Russia narrative as a lie.


Bingo!

Again, I have not seen any proof that Rich was in fact the leaker, nor have I seen any proof that the Russians hacked the DNC.

Yet one of these stories is accepted as absolute fact and to question it makes you an unAmerican conspiracy theorists, despite the fact the other is actually more likely.

You would think that all of those calling for Trumps head would at least be interested in hearing from Craig Murray or investigating Rich as the possible leaker.


+7 more 
posted on May, 22 2017 @ 12:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Grambler

I read this yesterday on Counterpunch. It's got some questionable assumptions as well as likely factual inaccuracies. I'll start at the beginning:

That's problematic because the thrust of the reason for believing that Seth Rich was the source of the DNC emails is that he was murdered. It also ignores the fact that state sponsored hacking is quite common and that there is evidence of similar attacks in other countries.


No that is not the thrust of the reason. The thrust is Assange all but outed him as a wikileaks source by bringing up his name impromptu in this interview



Then later pledging a 20,000 dollar reward for info on his murder. Also Murray saying the source was American, and Assange denying the source was Russian several times. Then just this weekend KimDotCom saying he was involved with Rich and Wikileaks, and he knows Seth was the source.

Yes the murder allowed this story to come out, but it really does not matter much to the importance of the story if it was a random robbery as the cops state, or Hillary pulled the trigger herself. All that matters is if Seth Rich the source of the leaks as oppossed to Russian hackers.



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 12:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler


But you throw in the part about him being assassinated which is not necessary for him to be the leaker. And just because everyone suspected the DNC was in the bag for Hillary, as a DNC member and Bernie supporter, he would have been quite disheartened to see proof that Bernie was being cheated by the DNC.


Could you point to one compelling piece of evidence that Seth Rich was the source? As far as I can tell, the CT is 90% speculation based on the fact that he was murdered, the murder is unsolved and Julian Assange offered a $20k reward for information.

If he hadn't been murdered, why would anyone be talking about Seth Rich at all?

I'm sure a lot of Bernie supporters within the DNC weren't happy about DWS. Why aren't they all put forth as possible sources? Because none of them are dead, not because there's any more or less evidence of any of them being the source.



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 12:39 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

What people see as plain is irrelevant - we are all delusional to a degree.

Ok - for the sake of argument, let's say Rich did make the leaks.
And let's also say your question is good, they Rich didn't have direct access to the email server.

Than couldn't he have worked in unison with several other members of the DNC to have obtained those emails and he acted as the liaison for this group of disgruntled employees and wikileaks?

Or alternatively, could he have snuck into an Admin's room and downloaded the information in order to leak it (therefore breaking the rules in doing so) ? In this scenario he could have had help or acted alone.


+14 more 
posted on May, 22 2017 @ 12:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

What sort of a robber forgets to do the robbery bit of the robbery? Someone who had no intention to rob him, that's who.

The allegations direct from Hillarys lips during the debates, as well as from the DNC establishment that Russia hacked their emails needs to be a top priority for Mueller in his investigation of Russia / Trump election interference.

If Mueller is an honest man who is determined to get to the truth, no matter how dangerous it becomes for his life or that of his family, then he will investigate the allegation, and if he finds no Russian interference then he needs to publicly release all the evidence that Hillary has - and she has evidence because she wouldn't be stupid enough to lie to the planet, no she told her truth so she obviously has the proof to back it up, just like Trump has the proof to back up his wiretap claim.

and in Mueller investigating this crazy Russian conspiracy theory I hope his hand is forced to review allegations made by non-DNC entities that Seth Rich was the leaker and he was murdered for it, not robbed as the incoherent cover story contends.


+2 more 
posted on May, 22 2017 @ 12:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Grambler


Former-DNC employee, Seth Rich, not only had access to the emails, but also a motive. He was pissed about the way the Clinton crowd was “sandbagging” Bernie Sanders. In contrast, there’s neither evidence nor motive connecting Russia to the emails.


Has it ever been established that Seth Rich had access to the emails? Seth Rich was working as a data analyst on a voter expansion project. The project was centered on helping voters find the nearest open polling places. Seth Rich majored in History and Political Science in College.

I have looked and I have yet to find any evidence that Seth Rich had administrator access to the DNC email servers — or any DNC servers for that matter, let alone servers on the same network as the email server. In fact, we know what firm the DNC had outsourced server administration. I don't remember the name off the top of my head but I remember when it was published, the company changed their home page to a landing page which was only their logo.

Here the author states it matter as a matter of fact without offering any evidence.

This is a very big deal. The author plays fast and loose with motivation and completely takes for granted opportunity. That's unforgivably sloppy. It seems unlikely to me that Seth Rich would have had the required access as a part of his job.

To the second part of the excerpt, there are in fact multiple lines of evidence pointing to a state actor, most likely to be Russia. Since the author doesn't actually explain the basis for his opinion, it's hard to know how he arrived at it. Finally, he harps on motive again. That's the author's questionable opinion. Tens of millions of people see the Russian motive for doing so being every bit as plain as the author's view of what he presumes to be Rich's possible motive.


I have yet to see proof that Rich did have or could not have had access to those emails. If he definitely could have got acces to them though, I would have expected the DNC spokesman for the family to have mentioned that. Instead they have said nothing about his ability to access those emails, only that there was no proof he shared them.

It is healthy of you to question this, but somehow you have no problem with the DNC not allowing the FBI to look at their server and instead take crowd strike and the intelligence communities word for the fact it was Russia while providing no evidence. Why the double standard on this?

And you still haven't referenced all of the problems with the ICA that was supposed to be the smoking gun proof the the Russians did it.




top topics



 
79
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join