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.

 

Former NSA Experts: It Wasn't Russia. It Wasn't Even A Hack. It Was A Leak.

page: 7
67
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 01:09 AM
link   
a reply to: deadlysyn

First off, I never spew nonsense so there's that and second, of course I believe the news I quote and the information I provide. Why on earth would I present a point of view I didn't believe in?
Are you crazy? Do you do that?
Everything else you said .
Shakes head.
Why do I bother you?
You start with bad information you make wrong conclusions that's all I can say.




posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 01:13 AM
link   
a reply to: mkultra11

Stop! . I know that from other sources. They were so easily identified it was as if they were taunting us so please.
Remember the terms cozy bear and fancy bear? If not look them up.

And my opinion based on research study and a keen understanding doesn't need to be useful to you, it's mine and its useful to me.
Why do you even say # like that? What's wrong with you?
edit on 8112017 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 01:22 AM
link   
That's two members in a row who attacked me because they don't agree with my opinion.
One says I spew nonsense the other that my opinion is useless.
You know what that really says?
It says you have no counter reply to my arguments. Either of you.
You can't counter the facts I provide, you can't argue against the truth so you bite instead.



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 02:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
That's two members in a row who attacked me because they don't agree with my opinion.
One says I spew nonsense the other that my opinion is useless.
You know what that really says?
It says you have no counter reply to my arguments. Either of you.
You can't counter the facts I provide, you can't argue against the truth so you bite instead.



Dude, I get that too. No matter how on-topic, polite, factual and calm you conduct yourself...there's always the inevitable ad-homs and off topic comments to try and derail an otherwise productive discussion.

Hey, that's life.


Sometimes I feel like people know they can't win an argument, so they intentionally try to drive a thread into the ground by making it utterly full of ad-homs and off topic-type posts.

I can't help but wonder why only a small number of pro-Trump-type people keep pushing this? How can the entire US intel community just be so utterly incompetent not to notice the same things with the data transfers ect?

I mean, seriously. What's more likely?

1. That the entire US intel community and DNI office was somehow "duped"

Or...

2. "some guy and friends" figured out a bunch of things that all make sense to non-technical people....but got missed by our best people?

That's the problem with a lot of these recent political conspiracies. The most plausible explanation generally tends to be the correct one. Sure, extraordinary things happen on rare occasions, but what's the likelyhood that all of this was somehow not noticed by all of our computer geeks (some of which are ex hackers themselves)?

"It was covered up!"

Right...yeah, not buying that. How many thousands of analysts would have to be silenced? If it was simple for this forensicator guy to figure it out, why haven't 100's or even 1,000s of other people come to the very same conclusion, including some respectable people in the computer forensics field?

If we start seeing top computer scientists, leading people in their field come to the same conclusions after looking at all available evidence...

That, a different story this would make...



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 02:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kettu
2. "some guy and friends" figured out a bunch of things that all make sense to non-technical people....but got missed by our best people?

The worst part is that they didn't figure out a bunch of stuff. All they looked at were a few timestamps and calculated "download times" without taking into account that the timestamps might not have been created when the files were originally downloaded (in the event that it was a hack). The files were then handled before being placed in a zip file.

They totally ignore files with timestamps that show slow transfer rates, which don't prove that a USB was not used to originally obtain the files but it does put in question the claim that the fast timestamps are proof of the files being copied at USB2.0 speeds, which by the way was 16 year technology, at the time of the "leak/hack".

ETA: USB3.0 has a transfer rate almost 20 times that shown by the timestamps and it was 8 year old tech at that time.


edit on 11-8-2017 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 02:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: Gryphon66

A nice dodge, but the DNC argued in court that they had the right to rig the primary. Game. Set. Match. As it were.


Prove it.



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 02:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: Gryphon66

It's quite simple. Releasing classified information to non-cleared sources is leaking.


Ah. So what Trump has done in tweets several times. Gotcha.



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 04:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: Gryphon66

It's quite simple. Releasing classified information to non-cleared sources is leaking.


Ah. So what Trump has done in tweets several times. Gotcha.


he is his own deepthroat



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 05:14 AM
link   
Is anybody else able to corroborate the work Forensicator did?

Has he released the encryption key to unlock the Guccifer files so that others, including the FBI, can validate his work?



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 06:41 AM
link   
a reply to: DanteGaland

You clearly lack knowledge in how Internet speeds work.. The speed of the users Internet is completely irrelevant in the case of a hack.. if it was HACKED it was accessed REMOTELY so the files would be UPLOADED to the hacker. Having files upload fast enough to download at the other end at 22 mb/s isnt going to happen unless multiple people are uploading the file. And in the case of a hack it's being uploaded directly to where its being saved so there isn't multiple hosts uploading it..
Downloading a file at 22 mb/s isn't unheard of, very uncommon and generally will only happen if it's from a hardwire to the source. But my point stands if it was hacked it was uploaded to the source and therefore it would not have downloaded at those speeds.

Also.. just because you have a speed of say, 50 megabytes a second doesn't mean if you download something you will download it at that speed. If you can't grasp the simple reason why that would neverr happen I have no hope for you. Every single device connected uses part of that 50 MB. At most, depending on the amount of devices, you may have 30 MB not being used. Now if you try to download a file, all 30 MB of that doesn't magically receive the data at that speed. If the computer the data is coming from has a max upload rate of only 25MB/s you'll only receive that file at maybe 5MB/s, probably less. Hacking something isn't the same as moving files to a USB. The speed isn't anywhere close to the same.
edit on 11-8-2017 by andrew778 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 06:44 AM
link   
a reply to: AutonomousMeatPuppet

I can corroborate that a hack uploads information to the person hacking it and upload speeds generating a download on the other end of 22 mbytes/s isn't going to happen. Doesn't matter how good said hackers Internet and computer are. The sources Internet is all that matters.
edit on 11-8-2017 by andrew778 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 07:02 AM
link   
a reply to: andrew778

Where everybody is really missing the mark is in just accepting that the cited speed is correct.


The sources Internet is all that matters.

Despite the above, do you think the DNC is running on dial-up?



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 07:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: growler

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: Gryphon66

It's quite simple. Releasing classified information to non-cleared sources is leaking.


Ah. So what Trump has done in tweets several times. Gotcha.


he is his own deepthroat


I think I saw a movie like that once ...



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 07:32 AM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

Not at all. Whatever upload speed they have is split between every device on that network. Even if they have 75 MB/s upload speed that's only going to upload from a single computer at less than 10 due to the volume of devices on the network. People get "faster" Internet to be able to run more and more devices simultaneously. People think it means they can download at 100MB/s because that's their Internet speed. It won't happen



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 07:38 AM
link   
So team damage control is here to detract from all information with (*checks) non information, opinion and sentimental judgements of others.

Nice.

I guess it was improbable for Iraq to carry out 9/11 and build WMDs after years of inspections, as an axis of evil, ooh. The argument was supported by the "rumors" of our intel community and media.....

But according to some, they wouldnt lie to us like that so as to favor a few corrupt power players.

So I guess we REALLY DID save the world by cluster effing Iraq.

Freedom bombs.

edit on 8 11 2017 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 07:48 AM
link   
a reply to: andrew778

Still doesn't address how accurate the "speed" forensicator came up with is or if the method he used is even valid.

You are only focusing on the internet speed. In part it is my fault for posting that question.



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 07:51 AM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

That's the basis of the "argument" presented in the OP. (That and silly "appeals to the authority" of former IC guys that now work for Fox and the rest of the right-wing media).

You're spot on in your responses. Do you notice your very valid questions have received no real answers?

That's because there aren't any.



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 07:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I believe that is in reference to the DNC Florida court case.


Shortly into the hearing, DNC attorneys claim Article V, Section 4 of the DNC Charter—stipulating that the DNC chair and their staff must ensure neutrality in the Democratic presidential primaries—is “a discretionary rule that it didn’t need to adopt to begin with.” Based on this assumption, DNC attorneys assert that the court cannot interpret, claim, or rule on anything associated with whether the DNC remains neutral in their presidential primaries.


observer.com...



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 08:00 AM
link   


I guess the "validity" of the source negates the verifiable evidence offered without even having to check it.

The source isnt being accused of false or incorrect information. They are just too "foxy"

Lovely

edit on 8 11 2017 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2017 @ 08:00 AM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

You're completely right, there's absolutely no way to prove that it's accurate but the method isnt really relevant. Pulling original meta data even after deletion can be done by those who are very good with code and computers. It can be done so accuracy and if any of it is true is what matters. I was addressing DanteGaland who used that as his logic for saying it's false when in reality his reasoning is completely flawed.

I'm not saying this article is true by any means. Just showing that some people are ignorant as hell when it comes to how download/Internet speeds work.
edit on 11-8-2017 by andrew778 because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-8-2017 by andrew778 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
67
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join