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.

 

SethRich.info New website + will Mueller declare states secrets?

page: 2
42
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 29 2017 @ 05:33 AM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

So the Russian Embassy, RT, and WikiLeaks all want you to believe it was Hillary Clinton, not the SVR. That proves it couldn't possibly have been the Russians murdering him to create a conspiracy theory firestorm.



+4 more 
posted on May, 29 2017 @ 05:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: D8Tee

So the Russian Embassy, RT, and WikiLeaks all want you to believe it was Hillary Clinton, not the SVR. That proves it couldn't possibly have been the Russians murdering him to create a conspiracy theory firestorm.


The Russians were accused and denied it. RT have rightly held the line that there is no evidence of a Russian hack, and Wikileaks have a reputation for the truth, and as the actual publisher of the information are telling you it was a DNC leak.

On the other hand, 3 intelligence services, known for lying, took the disgraced and discredited Crowdstrike's word that it was the Russians, didn't bother actually analysing the server, and lumped in some anti-Hillary news stories on RT to conclude a conspiracy.

Neither one proves anything, but the former is far more credible.

The coverage in the media is completely one sided. They have just accepted the Govt's word that it was the Russians with no proof and continue to push a narrative. They are not supposed to just accept the Govt's word for things. They have made no effort at all to follow up on the more likely answers.

It suggests a conspiracy alright, but not with Russia.
edit on 29/5/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2017 @ 05:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: D8Tee

So the Russian Embassy, RT, and WikiLeaks all want you to believe it was Hillary Clinton, not the SVR. That proves it couldn't possibly have been the Russians murdering him to create a conspiracy theory firestorm.


Hey, not bad angling!

It's just that for your conspiracy theory to work, Assange would have to be a Russian plant forever now, I mean going back forever when its not like in those days they had some great system / cause to even lure defectors over to.

All in a long con setup for this last year.

When its not like Russians could have predicted all out war with Hillary Clinton.

And then there's the odd angle where a Soros group has sponsored Wikileaks.

Your conspiracy theory followed to its logical climax is like uber the top, where Russia & Soros & Trump & Obama & Hillary & so on are all in league, have been for at least a decade, in one o the most ultimate long cons ever; the implications endless.

Are you suuuuuure you want to commit to that theory?!?!?!?




posted on May, 29 2017 @ 05:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: D8Tee

So the Russian Embassy, RT, and WikiLeaks all want you to believe it was Hillary Clinton, not the SVR. That proves it couldn't possibly have been the Russians murdering him to create a conspiracy theory firestorm.


Hey, not bad angling!

It's just that for your conspiracy theory to work, Assange would have to be a Russian plant forever now, I mean going back forever when its not like in those days they had some great system / cause to even lure defectors over to.

All in a long con setup for this last year.

When its not like Russians could have predicted all out war with Hillary Clinton.

And then there's the odd angle where a Soros group has sponsored Wikileaks.

Your conspiracy theory followed to its logical climax is like uber the top, where Russia & Soros & Trump & Obama & Hillary & so on are all in league, have been for at least a decade, in one o the most ultimate long cons ever; the implications endless.

Are you suuuuuure you want to commit to that theory?!?!?!?



but...but ...but ... 17 intelligence services said so!



posted on May, 29 2017 @ 06:00 AM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss


It's just that for your conspiracy theory to work, Assange would have to be a Russian plant forever now, I mean going back forever when its not like in those days they had some great system / cause to even lure defectors over to.


Why? Even an idealist committed to the truth can be suborned and used for propaganda purposes'


All in a long con setup for this last year.


Again, why? Establishing the credibility of an information medium is very useful if you want to use it later for propaganda. It so happens it was handy to use against Clinton. More recently, it was useful against Emmanuel Macron. Eventually, it will be useful against Trump if he doesn't play by Moscow's rules.


When its not like Russians could have predicted all out war with Hillary Clinton.


If you think the Kremlin couldn't see what every American political observer has seen since 2008, you must think they are awfully stupid.


And then there's the odd angle where a Soros group has sponsored Wikileaks.


Nothing odd about that; George Soros funds many NGOs dedicated to fighting corruption, and championing freedom of speech. It may be hard for you to understand, but freedom of speech means that you allow others to have their say without censoring or shouting them down. When everyone is allowed their say, propagandists will take advantage of the channels that are opened in this way. It is the the "yin" to the "yang" of free speech.

If George Soros is such an evil man, why does he fund WikiLeaks and the ACLU, and how does that fit your conspiracy narrative?



posted on May, 29 2017 @ 06:01 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth


The Russians were accused and denied it.


Case closed, then. Would Russia lie?



posted on May, 29 2017 @ 06:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
Nothing odd about that; George Soros funds many NGOs dedicated to fighting corruption, and championing freedom of speech. It may be hard for you to understand, but freedom of speech means that you allow others to have their say without censoring or shouting them down. When everyone is allowed their say, propagandists will take advantage of the channels that are opened in this way. It is the the "yin" to the "yang" of free speech.


The biggest pro censorship monger (surely) in this sites history, alleging that one of the most driven mad by any perceived notion of censorship (about as is possible), is instead the pro-censorship monger, is something priceless.

That you'd support the international supervillain George Soros is par for the course, however.

Prompting you to acknowledge that Soros funded Wikileaks (at some point anyways), which is hell on your own Wikileaks works for Russia narrative, is the cherry on top.


edit on 29-5-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2017 @ 06:29 AM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss


The biggest pro censorship monger (surely) in this sites history, alleging that one of the most driven mad by any perceived notion of censorship, as is possible, is something priceless.


Please don't be so modest. You are the biggest pro censorship monger in this site's history.


That you'd support the international supervillain George Soros is par for the course, however.


I support the ACLU, which champions freedom of speech, and WikiLeaks, which has the potential to give whistleblowers a platform. Ironically, ACLU has been known to defend Nazi's freedoms as well as liberals, and WikiLeaks can be used to disseminate black propaganda as well as the truth. I can only assume you are opposed to both of them if you think Soros is evil.


Prompting you to acknowledge that Soros funded Wikileaks (at some point anyways), which is hell on your own Wikileaks works for Russia narrative, is the cherry on top.


What part of "Russia is using WikiLeaks" are you having trouble with? When Gutenberg invented the printing press, he had no way of knowing that it would be used by both Protestants and Catholics to print their propaganda. Julian Assange may have started out to provide a microphone to those fighting corruption, but it has been suborned for other puposes. He now lives in fear, and can be even more easily exploited.
edit on 29-5-2017 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2017 @ 06:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
You are the biggest pro censorship monger in this site's history.


HAHA!!!!

Get Real.


I support the ACLU, which champions freedom of speech, and WikiLeaks, which has the potential to give whistleblowers a platform. Ironically, ACLU has been known to defend Nazi's freedoms as well as liberals, and WikiLeaks can be used to disseminate black propaganda as well as the truth.


I support the idea of the ACLU, and quite a bit of their efforts. But its well established they're a liberal agenda obsessed front, and are part of the massive campaign to push SJW insanity (as are you), which is the most Nazi'esque movement in history (worldwide), that makes the authoritarianism of the Neocon's like like a Baywatch lifeguard (okay, that final bit is a bit satire).


I can only assume you are opposed to both of them if you think Soros is evil.


Soros is easily one of the most evil men in all of human history, easily quantifiable in terms of width & breadth. He's the global Anarchist In Chief (that is, anarchy of the total chaos variety).


Assange who has already been under the gun, as you admit, um yeah becoming a Russian agent while under the microscope would be such a smart play for him. Riiight.
edit on 29-5-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2017 @ 06:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth


The Russians were accused and denied it.


Case closed, then. Would Russia lie?


Yes, case closed as we KNOW Crowdstrike are lied and completely discredited.
Now that is out of the way we can focus on who leaked the emails from the DNC.



posted on May, 29 2017 @ 06:56 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth


Yes, case closed as we KNOW Crowdstrike are lied and completely discredited.


So... you are going to discard all the evidence it was the Russians because either the source is anonymous or discredited, and the rest of the evidence, though overwhelming, is merely "circumstantial." Instead, you favor a complicated theory for which there are no reliable sources and for which the "evidence" is entirely circumstantial?



posted on May, 29 2017 @ 06:59 AM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss


I support the idea of the ACLU, and quite a bit of their efforts. But its well established they're a liberal agenda obsessed front, and are part of the massive campaign to push SJW insanity (as are you), which is the most Nazi'esque movement in history (worldwide), that makes the authoritarianism of the Neocon's like like a Baywatch lifeguard (okay, that final bit is a bit satire).


Sadly, you will never see the irony in what you say and do.


Soros is easily one of the most evil men in all of human history, easily quantifiable in terms of width & breadth. He's the global Anarchist In Chief (that is, anarchy of the total chaos variety).


So which is he? A Nazi or an anarchist? Which are you?


Assange who has already been under the gun, as you admit, um yeah becoming a Russian agent while under the microscope would be such a smart play for him. Riiight.


He's living as a fugitive from the law in a banana republic embassy. What are his choices?



posted on May, 29 2017 @ 07:06 AM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

The work that George Webb has been doing has brought awareness to a growing number of people around the globe.

He has revealed so much information about the Clinton Cabal, simply by following through with the research, documenting it for all to see and then open sourcing every lead he can. To see him all over the Seth Rich case brings me hope!

That website you shared is a great place to point people, note the petition demanding the White House appoints a special prosecutor in this case... can you say Trey Gowdy!



posted on May, 29 2017 @ 07:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Kettu




Well, you conservatives don't exactly have the best track record at delivering with your conspiracies.
Except that the two guys in the vid were/are Bernie supporters . I am trying to think of that "T" word that must have inspired your post .Actually I think it must inspire all most of your posts . maybe I will check your history and see if I am even close on that .



posted on May, 29 2017 @ 07:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth


Yes, case closed as we KNOW Crowdstrike are lied and completely discredited.


So... you are going to discard all the evidence it was the Russians because either the source is anonymous or discredited, and the rest of the evidence, though overwhelming, is merely "circumstantial." Instead, you favor a complicated theory for which there are no reliable sources and for which the "evidence" is entirely circumstantial?


I haven't discarded any evidence. There is no evidence.



posted on May, 29 2017 @ 07:53 AM
link   
"If Trump wins, we all hang from nooses."
- Hillary Clinton

If she did nothing wrong why make the comment?



posted on May, 29 2017 @ 07:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth


Yes, case closed as we KNOW Crowdstrike are lied and completely discredited.


So... you are going to discard all the evidence it was the Russians because either the source is anonymous or discredited, and the rest of the evidence, though overwhelming, is merely "circumstantial." Instead, you favor a complicated theory for which there are no reliable sources and for which the "evidence" is entirely circumstantial?


I haven't discarded any evidence. There is no evidence.


If there was it would have been leaked already.



posted on May, 29 2017 @ 08:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth


Yes, case closed as we KNOW Crowdstrike are lied and completely discredited.


So... you are going to discard all the evidence it was the Russians because either the source is anonymous or discredited, and the rest of the evidence, though overwhelming, is merely "circumstantial." Instead, you favor a complicated theory for which there are no reliable sources and for which the "evidence" is entirely circumstantial?


I haven't discarded any evidence. There is no evidence.


If there was it would have been leaked already.


Indeed. All we have is the word of the DNC outsourced IT organisation - the same people as you well know who got busted pushing their "fancy bear" nonsense in another case.



posted on May, 29 2017 @ 08:02 AM
link   
The whole Seth Rich thing should give even the staunchest of liberals pause. I am baffled that so many would willingly discard the possible links. Is it just that the mere possibility would crush their spirit and faith in mankind? Or is it that their cause outweighs their means? A man was murdered. There was a motive. Are we willing to accept the motive that suggests the perpetrators were ultimately fruitless after removing the biggest obstacle to their goal?

ETA- Even more shocked that his parents would be against entertaining all possible scenarios, just seems odd for people who lost a loved one tragically
edit on 29-5-2017 by onthedownlow because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2017 @ 08:19 AM
link   
In the OP vid George says that Muller is making Seth Rich case "states secret" ..That is what they used to gag Sibyl Edmonds the whistle blower who had worked for the FBI around the time of 911 . Muller was a Bush appointment 2 months prior to 911 . Could Sibyl Edmonds gaging using "states privilege" been a way to lock out the loose ends to the operation and is it being used now to tie up the loose ends to keep the Russian narrative going ?

Sibyl got crafty in exposing the group of people behind the "states secret" operation and its contained in the vid . Are these same actors still in play ? It would explain a lot . " Special Report- State Secrets: Sibel Edmonds Uncovers ‘The Untouchables’"

edit on 29-5-2017 by the2ofusr1 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
42
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join