A Blatant Neo-Con Lie 86

It is a plain lie that Russia was responsible for the leak of the Democratic National Committee emails to WikiLeaks. It is quite extraordinary that the Obama administration formally adopted the accusation yesterday.

The US motivation is apparently to attempt to discredit in advance the further Hillary material that WikiLeaks plans to release in the coming month. The official statement that the leak was “consistent with the methods and motivation of Russian directed efforts” is carefully written by the NSA and, when you analyse it, extremely weak. What it says is “there is no evidence whatsoever but this is the sort of thing we think the Russians do”. As it happens, I have direct knowledge that there could not have been any evidence as it was not the Russians.

That the Obama administration has made a formal accusation of Russia based on no evidence is, on one level, astonishing. But it is motivated by desperation. WikiLeaks have already announced that they have a huge cache of other material relating to Hillary’s shenanigans. The White House is simply seeking to discredit it in advance by a completely false association with Russian intelligence.

It fascinates me that the media reports the story widely with no reference anywhere to what the DNC leak actually revealed – that the body organising the Democratic election had a consistent and active bias, doing everything possible to tilt the plating field and ensure that Hillary “won” against Bernie Sanders.

The US government cares so little about its relationship with Russia that it is prepared to launch completely false allegations at the Kremlin in order to influence a domestic election. The implications of that are chilling.

Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

86 thoughts on “A Blatant Neo-Con Lie

1 2
  • lysias

    Why does it matter whether or not it was the Russians who did the hacking? Isn’t the content of the hacked messages infinitely more important?

  • Sharp Ears

    I have been watching Boris giving ‘evidence’ to the Foreign Affairs Committee. Never has so little information been given by a Foreign Secretary in 90mins as he waffled away, umming and ahing throughout. He is a joke and a dangerous one at that. The only piece of information given was that a big meet to discuss Syria is taking place on Sunday but he couldn’t say who the participants will be.

    Look at his hard and narrow set eyes. The jocularity and jesting of this ex Bullingdon Boy is contrived.

    Tim Barrow and Simon McDonald follow him before the Committee. They are respectively Director General Political, Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Permanent Under Secretary, Foreign and Commonwealth Office


    See http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/?s=simon+mcdonald for Craig’s previous references to Simon McDonald.

    McDonald ‘joined the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) in 1982 and served in Jeddah, Riyadh, Bonn and Washington, D.C. as well as in London. He was Principal Private Secretary to the Foreign Secretary 2001–03; Ambassador to Israel 2003–06; Director for Iraq at the FCO 2006–07; Foreign Policy Adviser to the Prime Minister and Head of the Overseas and Defence Secretariat at the Cabinet Office 2007–10; and was appointed Ambassador to Germany in October 2010.

    In September 2015, McDonald became Permanent Under-Secretary in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Head of the Diplomatic Service, replacing Sir Simon Fraser. As of 2015, McDonald was paid a salary of between £180,000 and £184,999 by the Foreign Office, making him one of the 328 most highly paid people in the British public sector at that time.’

    • Paul Barbara

      Check this out from the Levant Intelligence Report:
      ‘2012 Defense Intelligence Agency document: West will facilitate rise of Islamic State “in order to isolate the Syrian regime”.’
      And these:
      ‘Ex-French Foreign Minister Roland Dumas is on video/TV saying that when he was in London in 2009, TWO YEARS before the so-called ‘Arab Spring’, he was approached by high British officials whom he knew, who told him Britain was going to overthrow Assad with the use of mercenaries.’
      ‘In 2001, days after the attack on the US, 4* General (Retd.) Wesley Clark, ex-Supreme Allied Commander, Europe, visited the Pentagon to find out what the US was going to do about it. He was told by a 3* serving General on the Joint Chiefs of Staff that the US was going to attack Iraq, Clark asked if the US had linked Saddam to 9/11, and was told no, but the US was going to attack Iraq.
      Clark went home, but after the US started bombing Afghanistan, he returned to the Pentagon and asked the same 3* General if the US was still going to attack Iraq, The 3* General told Clark it was worse than that: The uuUS was going to overthrow seven governments in five years, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran (the time-scale has obviously slipped).’ And of course, the ‘Yinon Plan’.

      I have made many MP’s aware of this information, and also ‘Stop the War’ (Ha,Ha! They claim to want to stop wars, but Lindsey German walked away when I personally tried to question her about why the info wasn’t up on the StW site – she muttered that it was as she scuttled off, but I have looked high and low on their site, and I can’t find it.
      These are not theories, one is an official US Defense Intelligence Agency document; one is a well-known plan from an Israeli in 1982; and the other two are TV/video interviews with an ex-Supreme Allied Commander, Europe and another from an ex-French Foreign Minister – yet no one wants to know – they would sooner toss around the feasibility of a confrontation with Russia, which is in Syria with the blessing of the legitimate Syrian government.
      Apart from the lies and illegality associated with the attacks on Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, have people forgotten the similar murderous thugs the US unleashed on the Sovereign Country of Nicaragua (the ‘Contra’ mercenaries), or the illegal invasions of Panama and Grenada? You could go back to the birth of the American Republic, and you would find ‘False Flag’ wars and interventions, or just plain old expansionism.

  • shortchanged

    Has it not occured to the neocon Washington crowd, the nsa, cia, etc that if it so easy to hack into any government or semi government entity, their much hyped multi billion dollar security systems are absolute crap, to use a much favoured US technical term and, rather than trying to catch and jail these hackers, perhaps it would be more prudent to employ them.
    Also it seems that to contiually complain that they have been hacked is an admission of failure and best to just shut up about it. But I suppose that would not conform to their demonizing of Russian and Mr Putin.

1 2

Comments are closed.