"'I don't understand why the CIA would say the information came from Russian hackers when they must know that isn't true,' he said. 'Regardless of whether the Russians hacked into the DNC, the documents Wikileaks published did not come from that.'" (EXCLUSIVE: Ex-British ambassador who is now a WikiLeaks operative claims Russia did NOT provide Clinton emails," Daily Mail)
As of Thursday, none of the major media have covered or investigated Murray's claims which should be expected since it essentially proves that the MSM fairytale-version of events is pure bunkum. By the way, there's an excellent article at Consortium News by 6 Intelligence agency veterans titled "US Intel Vets Dispute Russia Hacking Claims" that challenges the absurd "Russia hacking claim" and attributes the cyber incident to leaking. Here's a short blurb from the piece that helps to clarify a few important points:
"All signs point to leaking, not hacking. If hacking were involved, the National Security Agency would know it -- and know both sender and recipient.
"In short, since leaking requires physically removing data -- on a thumb drive, for example ...
"NSA is able to identify both the sender and recipient when hacking is involved...The bottom line is that the NSA would know where and how any 'hacked' emails from the DNC, HRC or any other servers were routed through the network...
"The various ways in which usually anonymous spokespeople for U.S. intelligence agencies are equivocating -- saying things like 'our best guess' or 'our opinion' or 'our estimate' etc., -- shows that the emails alleged to have been 'hacked' cannot be traced across the network. Given NSA's extensive trace capability, we conclude that DNC and HRC servers alleged to have been hacked were, in fact, not hacked.
"The evidence that should be there is absent; otherwise, it would surely be brought forward, since this could be done without any danger to sources and methods. Thus, we conclude that the emails were leaked by an insider -- as was the case with Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning. Such an insider could be anyone in a government department or agency with access to NSA databases, or perhaps someone within the DNC." ("US Intel Vets Dispute Russia Hacking Claims," Consortium News)
Bottom line: Leaked not hacked. Thus, the MSM "Putin did it" version = Bullshit.
Here's more on Murray's eyewitness account of his contact with the whistleblower. This is from an exchange that took place on Tuesday in an interview between Murray and author David Swanson.
David Swanson -- When you say you've met the leaker; was that of the DNC emails or the Podesta emails?
Craig Murray -- I cannot give too much detail on that...but I have met one of the people involved. ...The person is American and not connected to Russia at all...(Julien Assange has confirmed that the leaker was not Russian)
David Swanson -- Your claim is not that the Russians would never hack into a computer, right? Your claim is that you know who did this and it isn't Russia?
Craig Murray -- Right, I was involved in handling top secret material myself for over 20 years, and all the spy services spy on each other all the time. So the Russians could have done this, but they didn't. I happen to know that they didn't. In both the Podesta and the DNC emails came from sources that are not Russian, but were American inside sources. And that could be inside the organization itself or it could be American agencies that are monitoring people's communications...Inside the DNC or inside the NSA." ("Talk Nation Radio: Craig Murray: Russia Didn't Do It")
So, the "hacking story" has nothing to do with hacking and nothing to do with Russia. It's just another attempt by establishment elites to distort the facts in order to subvert the democratic process and overturn the election results. Isn't that what this is really all about, regime change in the USA?
You bet it is.
This charade has Hillary's bloody fingerprints all over it.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
5
3
2
