The Stink Without a Secret 506

After six solid months of co-ordinated allegation from the mainstream media allied to the leadership of state security institutions, not one single scrap of solid evidence for Trump/Russia election hacking has emerged.

I do not support Donald Trump. I do support truth. There is much about Trump that I dislike intensely. Neither do I support the neo-liberal political establishment in the USA. The latter’s control of the mainstream media, and cunning manipulation of identity politics, seeks to portray the neo-liberal establishment as the heroes of decent values against Trump. Sadly, the idea that the neo-liberal establishment embodies decent values is completely untrue.

Truth disappeared so long ago in this witch-hunt that it is no longer even possible to define what the accusation is. Belief in “Russian hacking” of the US election has been elevated to a generic accusation of undefined wrongdoing, a vague malaise we are told is floating poisonously in the ether, but we are not allowed to analyse. What did the Russians actually do?

The original, base accusation is that it was the Russians who hacked the DNC and Podesta emails and passed them to Wikileaks. (I can assure you that is untrue).

The authenticity of those emails is not in question. What they revealed of cheating by the Democratic establishment in biasing the primaries against Bernie Sanders, led to the forced resignation of Debbie Wasserman Shultz as chair of the Democratic National Committee. They also led to the resignation from CNN of Donna Brazile, who had passed debate questions in advance to Clinton. Those are facts. They actually happened. Let us hold on to those facts, as we surf through lies. There was other nasty Clinton Foundation and cash for access stuff in the emails, but we do not even need to go there for the purpose of this argument.

The original “Russian hacking” allegation was that it was the Russians who nefariously obtained these damning emails and passed them to Wikileaks. The “evidence” for this was twofold. A report from private cyber security firm Crowdstrike claimed that metadata showed that the hackers had left behind clues, including the name of the founder of the Soviet security services. The second piece of evidence was that a blogger named Guccifer2 and a websitecalled DNC Leaks appeared to have access to some of the material around the same time that Wikileaks did, and that Guccifer2 could be Russian.

That is it. To this day, that is the sum total of actual “evidence” of Russian hacking. I won’t say hang on to it as a fact, because it contains no relevant fact. But at least it is some form of definable allegation of something happening, rather than “Russian hacking” being a simple article of faith like the Holy Trinity.

But there are a number of problems that prevent this being fact at all. Nobody has ever been able to refute the evidence of Bill Binney, former Technical Director of the NSA who designed its current surveillance systems. Bill has stated that the capability of the NSA is such, that if the DNC computers had been hacked, the NSA would be able to trace the actual packets of that information as those emails travelled over the internet, and give a precise time, to the second, for the hack. The NSA simply do not have the event – because there wasn’t one. I know Bill personally and am quite certain of his integrity.

As we have been repeatedly told, “17 intelligence agencies” sign up to the “Russian hacking”, yet all these king’s horses and all these king’s men have been unable to produce any evidence whatsoever of the purported “hack”. Largely because they are not in fact trying. Here is another actual fact I wish you to hang on to: The Democrats have refused the intelligence agencies access to their servers to discover what actually happened. I am going to say that again.

The Democrats have refused the intelligence agencies access to their servers to discover what actually happened.

The heads of the intelligence community have said that they regard the report from Crowdstrike – the Clinton aligned private cyber security firm – as adequate. Despite the fact that the Crowdstrike report plainly proves nothing whatsoever and is based entirely on an initial presumption there must have been a hack, as opposed to an internal download.

Not actually examining the obvious evidence has been a key tool in keeping the “Russian hacking” meme going. On 24 May the Guardian reported triumphantly, following the Washington Post, that

“Fox News falsely alleged federal authorities had found thousands of emails between Rich and Wikileaks, when in fact law enforcement officials disputed that Rich’s laptop had even been in possession of, or examined by, the FBI.”

It evidently did not occur to the Guardian as troubling, that those pretending to be investigating the murder of Seth Rich have not looked at his laptop.

There is a very plain pattern here of agencies promoting the notion of a fake “Russian crime”, while failing to take the most basic and obvious initial steps if they were really investigating its existence. I might add to that, there has been no contact with me at all by those supposedly investigating. I could tell them these were leaks not hacks. Wikileaks. The clue is in the name.

So those “17 agencies” are not really investigating but are prepared to endorse weird Crowdstrike claims, like the idea that Russia’s security services are so amateur as to leave fingerprints with the name of their founder. If the Russians fed the material to Wikileaks, why would they also set up a vainglorious persona like Guccifer2 who leaves obvious Russia pointing clues all over the place?

Of course we need to add from the Wikileaks “Vault 7” leak release, information that the CIA specifically deploys technology that leaves behind fake fingerprints of a Russian computer hacking operation.

Crowdstrike have a general anti-Russian attitude. They published a report seeking to allege that the same Russian entities which “had hacked” the DNC were involved in targeting for Russian artillery in the Ukraine. This has been utterly discredited.

Some of the more crazed “Russiagate” allegations have been quietly dropped. The mainstream media are hoping we will all forget their breathless endorsement of the reports of the charlatan Christopher Steele, a former middle ranking MI6 man with very limited contacts that he milked to sell lurid gossip to wealthy and gullible corporations. I confess I rather admire his chutzpah.

Given there is no hacking in the Russian hacking story, the charges have moved wider into a vague miasma of McCarthyite anti-Russian hysteria. Does anyone connected to Trump know any Russians? Do they have business links with Russian finance?

Of course they do. Trump is part of the worldwide oligarch class whose financial interests are woven into a vast worldwide network that enslaves pretty well the rest of us. As are the Clintons and the owners of the mainstream media who are stoking up the anti-Russian hysteria. It is all good for their armaments industry interests, in both Washington and Moscow.

Trump’s judgement is appalling. His sackings or inappropriate directions to people over this subject may damage him.

The old Watergate related wisdom is that it is not the crime that gets you, it is the cover-up. But there is a fundamental difference here. At the centre of Watergate there was an actual burglary. At the centre of Russian hacking there is a void, a hollow, and emptiness, an abyss, a yawning chasm. There is nothing there.

Those who believe that opposition to Trump justifies whipping up anti-Russian hysteria on a massive scale, on the basis of lies, are wrong. I remain positive that the movement Bernie Sanders started will bring a new dawn to America in the next few years. That depends on political campaigning by people on the ground and on social media. Leveraging falsehoods and cold war hysteria through mainstream media in an effort to somehow get Clinton back to power is not a viable alternative. It is a fantasy and even were it practical, I would not want it to succeed.

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>

506 thoughts on “The Stink Without a Secret

1 2 3 5
  • J

    One question I haven’t heard asked if that even if it were true, which it isn’t, what is the argument against an informed electorate?

        • Ishmael

          I know Russia never remotely did communism “proper” But all the same, I’m glad we have (more actual) self proclaimed influential communists in the UK.

          Look USA, actual communist “marxists” in the UK. (hate that ist btw, think those on the left are stupid for calling themselves it, undemines Marx’s work and the movement it was)…

  • Njegos

    I would add that the NYT has actually retracted the “17 agencies” myth.

    Russophobia is in vogue of course which is why James Clapper can say things like “Russians are genetically programmed to meddle” without raising any eyebrows.

    We also have John Brennan warning people that they could be traitors without realising it.

    Meanwhile, various senior CNN employees have admitted while being secretly filmed that the Russia story is being driven by ratings, not evidence.

    Others appear to be driven by terminal deMenschia.

    Great entertainment.

    • Ian

      Yes, the full picture of Clinton’s lie about the ’17 intelligence agencies’ is slowly coming to light. Turns it wasn’t even the three or four they are now claiming, but one notorious Russophobe and his hand-picked associates in a few agencies.

      So, nothing in the claim is supported by any evidence. The ‘paper of record’ is looking idiotic now. No basic fact-checking, no investigative journalism, just a rubber stamp for whatever is stovepiped to them by media manipulators. The farce of it all is how easy it is for a handful of zealots and liars to feed information to MSM outlets and make it the standard narrative. Which tells you a lot about the integrity and basic journalistic skills and ethics of these outlets.

  • Republicofscotland

    Was Clinton and her retinue, trying to cover up her own misgivings (server in the bathroom etc) by accusing Trump of Russian collaboration and the Russians of hacking?

    Is this whole fiasco an attempt to impeach Trump? And has the narrative worked out for those in power wishing to further demonise Russia.

    It seems in this day and age, no evidence is required, only the notion that someone or some nstion has committed, a crime, fraud, or even an atrocity. The media then gets behind it, and it grows wings, and in this manner wars and invasions arise. The Kellogg-Briand Pact was circumnavigated decades ago, without a public outcry.

  • Ishmael

    I’m also positive about the movement Bernie Sanders is involved in. I think he’d credit occupy (and others) helping to start it though.

    As to the rest it’s all a bit heavy for me. I support truth and justice (the initial reason for me coming on this blog) And those who help to that end…

    (then cower under the table at the crazy clusterfuck that seems mainstream american politics and hope I don’t get shot)

    • Beth

      The movement Bernie Sanders started was great but he was cheated and then for some inexplicable reason he endorsed ‘we came, we saw, he died…chuckle cackle’ war criminal , charity thief Clinton. So he is not the same Bernie. Tulsi Gabbard should be the new hope for the future.
      BTW this is a great blogpost – really glad to see it at last. You tuber, author, columnist and writer, HA Goodman has been covering all this and more for months.

    • Shatnersrug

      Now that macron has decided that he wants to curtail democracy by reducing French parliament by a third can we have Bevan back?

      • J

        To be honest, I agreed with most of the counter punch article, just didn’t want gush, plus not a popular view. It’s certainly plausible to me. ‘EU scepticism’ as such is entirely valid. Never really thought about it but Eurosceptic sounds rather disreputable from the outset. Anyway, on the other hand I also appreciate what Varoufakis is trying to do and it seems the most interesting and optimistic thing to have emerge out of the left in my limited perspective.

        I agree regarding Bevan. I didn’t even know he’d been banned till election night. Hope he would be of a mind to.

        • Muscleguy

          Varoufakis seems to me to have been traumatised by his EU experiences. Greece was in the shit and needed bailing out, it went cap in hand to creditor nations asking for a handout and it came with unpalatable strings. They always fucking do. They are counterproductive for the desperate nation in many ways, they always fucking are. That is not the bloody point, the point is punishment and making sure those lending are first in the queue for monies. The local people can eat grass for all the money men care. ‘Twas ever thus, will always be thus. It is Realpolitik, there are no free lunches. The Marshall Plan money came with strings and tied the funded countries even more firmly into the new NATO entity. The US was tired of war and did not want another one but if one was coming it wanted the allies retooled and rearmed, stat.

          That was why they did not object when the UK took its Marshall Plan money* and pissed it up the wall in arms and maintaining a large military to hang onto the Empire for just a bit longer. It funded the Malaya Emergency, it funded the atrocities of the Mau-Mau rebellion/liberation movement in Kenya (the Kenyan govt gives Mau-Mau veterans a war pension if you are ever wondering how they saw it).

          *there is a myth about that Britain got no or derisory amounts of MP money, while those dastardly Germans spent it all on machine tools and rebuilt their industries. Britain could have done that, could have avoided the expensive dinosaurs Thatcher had to put out of their miseries. Though to truly compete with the Germans we would have needed German industrial relations too and that was never going to happen.

  • CanSpeccy

    [Bill Binney former Technical Director of the NSA who designed its current surveillance systems… has stated that the capability of the NSA is such, that if the DNC computers had been hacked, the NSA would be able to trace the actual packets of that information as those emails travelled over the internet, and give a precise time, to the second, for the hack.

    Binney’s claim with reference to Russian hacking is what WTC7’s 2.4 seconds of free-fall is to 9/11, the only fact one needs to disperse the fog of lies. It is a fact well worth restating and widely propagating.

  • TomO

    I think it is a mistake on your part to get through this piece without mentioning that the DNC / Podesta emails that were compromised were hosted at Google’s email service Gmail – and that top ranking neo-liberal and Google boss Eric Schmidt is also a top ranking Democrat…

  • Ishmael

    For all those who spit out “marxist’ and “communist” like a swear words, Listen to this:

    The Communist Manifesto – FULL Audio Book – by Karl Marx & Friedrich Engels

    Criticise all you wish about it (not what Russia did), You can’t say it’s still not incredibly relevant. “free trade” = exploitation.

  • Silvio

    Karma for the USA as the dispenser of colour revolutions and regime change around the globe gets to see the techniques in use up close and personal.

    “Color Revolution” Comes Home? Are Americans Also the Victims of “Regime Change”?

    The Donald Trump presidency, which we regularly criticize, brings a lot of these tools to the forefront because Trump beat the system and defeated the elites of both parties. As a result, Democratic Party propaganda is being used to undermine Trump not only based on his policies but also through manufactured crises such as RussiaGate. The corporate media consistently hammers home RussiaGate, despite the lack of evidence to support it. Unlike the Watergate or Iran-Contra scandals, there is no evidence that Trump colluded with Russia to get elected. And, the security state – the FBI and the agencies that conduct regime change operations around the world – is working to undermine Trump in a still unfolding domestic coup.

    Civil society also has a strong role. John Stauber writes that:
    “The professional Progressive Movement that we see reflected in the pages of The Nation magazine, in the online marketing and campaigning of MoveOn and in the speeches of Van Jones, is primarily a political public relations creation of America’s richest corporate elite, the so-called 1%, who happen to bleed Blue because they have some degree of social and environmental consciousness, and don’t bleed Red. But they are just as committed as the right to the overall corporate status quo, the maintenance of the American Empire, and the monopoly of the rich over the political process that serves their economic interests.”

  • mike

    Fantastic piece, Craig, as were ‘If the Banks Had Bust’ and ‘Beware Bewildered Blairites’.

    You’ve absolutely nailed all three.

  • Becky Cohen

    Find it quite amusing that the term ‘hysteria’ that was popular with 19th century men doctors who believed that the key to mental illness in women originated somewhere in the womb is used here in an article about the hang-ups of two men – Trump and Putin – who are mostly known for being so hung-up and insecure about their masculinity:)

    • Geoffrey

      Putin was not mentioned or referred to . Nor were Trump’s “hangups”.
      I am aware that Trump implied that he had a large penis but did not know that Putin has also referred to the size of his penis…I assume that it is something you are particularly interested in.

      • John Spencer-Davis

        Strange thing to say. Becky Cohen’s interest seems to be in the remarkably ugly and prurient attitude of Victorian male-dominated medicine towards women, which is an utter horror story that very few people are aware of in any detail. Becky Cohen is quite restrained in her comments about masculinity and does not mention penis size. Maybe it’s something you’re more interested in than she is. J

        • Ray Raven

          Geoffrey’s statement that “Putin was not mentioned or referred to” is not a strange thing to say. It is a truthful, accurate and correct statement; thus your rebuttal is wholly without merit.
          Furthermore, Becky’s phrase “hung-up and insecure about their masculinity” is a very specific euphemism (“a mild or indirect word or expression substituted for one considered to be too harsh or blunt when referring to something unpleasant or embarrassing”) for referring to the male penile member.
          So, contrary to your assertions, Geoffrey’s statements are not strange or peculiar, but wholly logical and pertinent.
          “19th Century male-dominated medicine towards women” notwithstanding.
          By the way, Becky made no mention of the “Victorian” era, her terminology referred to the “19th Century” (verbatim). The “Victorian” era covered only part of the 19th Century, namely “the Victorian era was the period of Queen Victoria’s reign, from 20 June 1837 until her death on 22 January 1901” (extract from Wiki – I assume the dates are correct).
          Details are important, correct and accurate details even more so.

          • John Spencer-Davis

            My comment makes clear that the “strange thing to say” to which I am referring is the following: “…I assume that it is something you are particularly interested in.” Becky Cohen can speak for herself, but that is certainly not the meaning I perceive from her comment. So your rebuttal is wholly without merit. The huge popularizing of female hysteria as a catch-all diagnosis for women presenting themselves with medical problems to male doctors happened, roughly speaking, between about 1850 and 1880, squarely in the Victorian era. That happens also to be in the 19th century, so Becky Cohen and I are both correct. J

    • Carl Olsen

      Yes, IMO Craig needs to update/correct his otherwise excellent article.

  • frankywiggles

    The Democrats’ reckoning with last November’s defeat has been toe-curling in the extreme. Absent from the narrative they’ve since constructed is any acknowledgement that they had every conceivable advantage going into that election.

    Hillary Clinton had amassed a vast campaign fund of $1.7 billion, thanks to a multitude of private, paid-for promises to corporate America. She had the uniform support of respectable media and political opinion, which demonized her clownish, ill-informed opponent 24/7 for months on end.

    The posthumous received wisdom that it was the hacking and release of Hillary’s emails that cost her is just wilful self-deception. Lest it be forgetten, the day wikileaks released them the entire media leapt to her rescue by miraculously *discovering* an old tape of Trump talking about assaulting women. The actual content of the emails barely received a hearing and the only major repercussion of their release was that the media went into overdrive with the allegation that “Putin wants Trump to win”.

    Despite endless repetition of that claim in the final weeks of the campaign, and all of her other advantages, Hillary *still* managed to achieve the impossible – losing in all the key swing states where she’d focused her campaign spending. Her hugely improbable defeat should have been cause for humble introspection, not only for her but for Barack and all the other corporate Dem leaders, and all their media and social-media camp followers.

    Sadly, that hasn’t been the case. Instead, the same corrupt figures are still firmly in control of the party, while their ‘strategy’ for winning back Congress in 2018 seems to be to simply double down on a slogan already proven to have little electoral resonance:

    “Putin wanted Trump to win !!!”

    • James Dickenson

      This individual believes that it was voter fraud.

      “And it’s deadly. Doubtless, Crosscheck delivered Michigan to Trump who supposedly “won” the state by 10,700 votes. The Secretary of State’s office proudly told me that they were “very aggressive” in removing listed voters before the 2016 election. Kobach, who created the lists for his fellow GOP officials, tagged a whopping 417,147 in Michigan as potential double voters.”

      • frankywiggles

        Greg Palast does really great work. He’s been documenting the systematic disenfranchisement of minority voters for over a decade now. It begs the question: why are his compelling findings re November 16 being ignored by the Dems and MSM, in order to go down the rabbit hole of this unsubstantiated, warmongering Russia narrative?

        • Kaplan

          because they engage in just as much voter/voting shenanigans as the republicans?

  • A Truly Concerned Troll

    This anti-Russia frenzy goes way beyond Trump. JJ Patrick on Twitter seems to suggesting that Russia had a hand in engineering Brexit and even seems to be hinting at dark money infiltrating Scottish politics. They (Russians) have a secret pact with Turkey too apparently (a NATO member state which happened to shoot down a Russian jet recently, almost triggering WW3).

    It’s all getting a bit hysterical.

    After Snowden’s revelations about US intelligence’s industrial scale hacking of basically everyone in the world, you’d think the liberal elite and others would have fatter fish to fry.

    • J

      Are you saying there’s a connection between US intelligence’s industrial scale hacking and the US accusing every one else of industrial scale hacking? You’d think it would be harder than simply pointing the other way and then accusing the other guy of exactly what you were just up to.

      Actually, I’ve done that a bit… 🙁

      • A Truly Concerned Troll

        I’m saying that conspiracy theories about Russian hacking are difficult to take seriously when the US over the last 10 years of the digital age has been bugging and hacking all of us.

        Snowden revealed the scale and depth of it — it isn’t a conspiracy theory — and we now know that they can hack smart phones and other devices at will, listen in and even watch (via in-built cameras), and monitor your whereabouts using gps.

        Even if the Russian allegations were proven, and, as Craig Murray makes clear, we’re a million miles from that, they wouldn’t amount to much compared to what we know about US activities in these murky areas.

        I can’t imagine what the unknown knowns might look like in regards to US hacking etc. The known knowns are grim enough tho.

    • Ishmael

      The red scare, old tactic to kill several birds with one stone.

      Two main ones being any notion or socialism/communism as desirable (as if Russia was ever a good example, like Catalonia was) and an enemy with which to give the nation a cohesive sense.

      Do they still call Russia communist? it’s absurd to think there is a paper thickness between their actual ideology as embodied by realty. And they are not liberals.

  • Sean Nilibud

    “I remain positive that the movement Bernie Sanders started will bring a new dawn to America in the next few years. ”

    The trouble is Bernie Sanders also runs round bellowing “Russia hacked the election”

    He is either a liar or an idiot, or most probably both.

    Bernie is a sell out, a company man, a Democrat stooge. The idea that he could start a movement is horrifying.

    Maybe a movement of guileless, virtue signalling morons who indulge in identity politics yet don’t bat an eyelid to any number of illegal wars.

    As I say, terrifying. Plus he’s as old as dirt, so thankfully we won’t be seeing that old disgrace for much longer.

    • Hieroglyph

      Ha Ha, well put. I’ve never understood the Feel The Bern nonsense (and I note his wife is now in trouble with The Feds). Bernie is small-target insider whose reputation for being a maverick is decidedly misleading. Miles better than Clinton though he is, I’m still quite he would have lost against Trump. I’m also fairly certain that under Bernie we’d now have TPP in place – whatever he said on stump.

      The fact that he’s been waffling about Russia marks him out as either a stooge or an idiot. Maybe he’s looking to the next election, and getting onside with the money, but I fear his enthusiastic supporters will find themselves disappointed – again. No, the Dem to look for is the one brave enough to call out the Russia nonsense – and the Clinton’s. Bernie won’t.

      • J

        “…the Dem to look for is the one brave enough to call out the Russia nonsense…”

        Probably. Maybe the one who can articulate for them that there really is no ark for their grand children to escape to once their power games have squandered everything on the short term. All the energy spent on a ridiculous trust in naked ambition has been wealth squandered as far as anyone can tell. Imagine if Russia, America and China were collaborating on the really big problems, the big questions. or imagine what couldn’t be achieved with over a trillion and a half each year..

      • Ishmael

        I think he does pretty dam well considering, Not perfect at all. But in America? The issues he’s fronted are recognised by me and many as being truly what could progress america in a holistic way. Native rights, worker rights, environmental issues. He’s been out there with the people. A credit to himself (in a deeper way that’s actually about helping others, not just saying it like most others).

        It’s clear he could have won. And should continue imo.

    • SteveK9

      I think he is talking about a left-wing (at least for America) movement. Bernie is not going to run again.

  • John Goss

    “It evidently did not occur to the Guardian as troubling, that those pretending to be investigating the murder of Seth Rich have not looked at his laptop.”

    An excellent argument if it did not involve the clandestine groups set up to keep all Americans safe. The spooks who actually knew who killed Seth Rich would have no need to look at his laptop. That’s true. But being spooks they might say they had not looked at it or not had it in their possession when they had. Alternatively being spooks they might not have looked at his laptop because they were unable to make entry past the encryption and simply speculated on an email exchange. Or any number of possible scenarios. Somebody murdered Seth Rich and it was not a botched robbery.

    Yes there were leaked emails. Many speculate that Seth Rich was the one who leaked them. But Wikileaks would never divulge that information even if it were true. As to Russia Trump connections Project Veritas has proved from an admission by CNN producer John Bonifield that the stories are fake.

    It’s a good post. I hope Bernie Sanders gets the presidency forbidden him by his own party leadership. I hope the US media grows up and stops producing reams of meaningless anti-Russian, anti-Trump propaganda.

    • Hieroglyph

      Van Jones actually called Veritas CNN stuff a ‘hoax’. I’m not personally a big fan of the secret tape technique, it seems a little Stasi to me, and essentially unfair. However, Van Jones was caught saying Russia gate was a nothing burger, and I’m not really sure what ‘selective editing’ was done to make him look bad.

      I didn’t especiallly care for ‘p*ssy gate’ either; following a guy round for a day and waiting for him to say something stupid seems like shooting fish in a barrel, not journalism. Esp. with Trump. Imagine what happens if you follow Hilary around for a few days! I’d watch that TV show. Drink a double for every death threat.

      • John Goss

        Your points are valid Hieroglyph. However admitting that there is no story in the Trump-Russia ‘scandal’ is not a mistake or slip of the tongue, it is an admission, and something most sensible people knew anyway. I don’t like the follow-people around until they make a mistake approach either. But if you take a bung as a football manager, which you should not do, then you must be prepared to suffer the consequences if you get caught out.

  • Tony Kevin

    Thank you Craig Murray. So clear. And convinces me. I will copy to my small networks. Tony Kevin

  • Ishmael

    I do think the main issue here (what they are afraid of) is socialism in america.

    eg, The World Today – Homage to Catalonia

    If Scotland was after anything thing like this I think they’d be thinking totally different, because going ‘Alone’ (in *cough* EU) is not a reasonable proposal. Doing it with larger groups on side certainly seems more viable to me. IMO if Scotland was to go for own currency, out of the EU system, You really gonna do that? I’d consider backing that ideologically, but still not given what’s happening in the UK now.

    We have a chance to do something that may impact Europe in a good way, different way, without being in the EU. As a result of leaving in fact. It’s still be quite hopeless if there weren’t similar movements, everywhere.

  • Hieroglyph

    One allegation is that the Dems refused to allow the FBI access to their servers. How to put this delicately? The Dems may have had excellent reasons for this refusal …

  • David Haines

    This whole “drama” appears to be baseless and intended only to discredit Trump (who is doing a pretty good job without help) and inflame anti-Russian feelings that must be leaving the military industrial complex (+ Rupert Murdoch) rubbing their hands with glee.

  • giyane

    Under Trump, we appear to be making progress against Israel’s Islamic State. OK seven Turkish helicopters were seen scooping up top NATO staff who had been helping Daesh, but they waited too long in Aleppo and the Russians found them before NATO could get them out.

    It seems this Trump Russia thing is the only available smokescreen for the fully exposed alliance between USUKIS and Russia/China against the Muslim world and the purpose of the smokescreen is not to disguise the fact of the alliance to USUKIS citizens but rather directed to those Muslims whose naievety compels them to the idea that political Islam might contain traces of Islam in it.

    Nothing in modern politics is remotely what is printed on the tin’s label.
    ‘ 100% pink-coloured offal and fat ‘ might lose NATO’s Erdogan and other darling useful idiot dictators a few Muslim votes.

  • Ian Brookes


    This week the media admitted that the Intelligence Report was not the output of 17 agencies, like a National Intelligence Estimate, but the result of four agencies (all driven by political appointees). This weakens their argument even more.

  • Gulliver

    The stupid thing is, there are plenty of legitimate issues one can use to attack Trump, and equally importantly the GOP who are using Trump as a cover to further their asset stripping of the US middle and working class.

    The on going debacle over Trumpcare which will leave millions without medical insurance and millions more having to pay increased premiums just to give a 1% tax cut to millionaires who probably won’t even notice it. And stripping away of environmental protection should be ammunition enough to bury both Trump and his GOP handlers.

  • Peter Beswick

    It may be fake intelligence but that hasn’t stopped Britain from going to war before.

    “On Tuesday Michael Fallon, the British defence secretary, said the UK would consider retaliating with military means against a cyber attack by another state, reflecting rising concern about the militarization of cyber space the havoc such attacks can cause.”

  • Ishmael

    I know it’s not news, but american govenment is out of control.

    It’s always framed as protecting from others risk isn’t it? As if Russia threatens the US, or north korea, or wikileaks “putting lives in danger”.

    You could not make it up.

  • Anthony Murphy

    Note that Russiagate serves to deflect the reality of the Democratic Party’s total failure. No one is interested in this stupid sideshow except the media..

  • Ishmael

    Be useful to have more/better flags.

    International organisations, new and old forms.

    I always liked the anarchist flag not just in it’s meaning. it’s very different to a nation state flag or team flag about some fixed ‘state’. The red and black denotes process, a manifesto.

    I wonder if other organisations couldn’t befit from the notion. It maybe a bad example but think about the form wikileaks is pursuing, like a new area of international journalism. While I think wikileaks is great there is no recognised banner under which it fits and others can situate themselves under easy without directly supporting wikileaks atm.

    New struggles may be the same as old in many ways but they are also not the same. like advertising most flags are about preventing any meaning or deeper symbology than the surface, which is of perfect for nation states where the flag is that “blank slate”. I find the current symbols grotesque in looks and meaning.

    Better flags.

    • Ishmael

      which is * perfect for nation states

      …Honestly, as a “painter”, there is something wrong with people who can gaze at the same harsh basic image over and over and over again, and not be sick to death of seeing it.

      Your going against some kind of natural instinct there.

  • Jo

    The really irritating thing is that all corners of the BBC news network are happy to report every new allegation and repeat it at least four times per hour while presenting as fact despite no evidence. Comey, for example, recently appeared before Committee and aired a number of mere opinions yet the BBC ran these as if they were facts. Most disconcerting.

    Perhaps the worst aspect of all this is that the US media was basically pissed that Hillary lost and that’s the only reason this backlash has occurred. The Washington Post is even on the receiving end of lots of so-called classified information from the intelligence agencies, ironically, while insisting Trump is a security risk! You really couldn’t make it up.

    • MJ

      That’s the new reality. Evidence is such an old-fashioned concept. Only police detectives, courts and conspiracy theorists are interested in it these days.

  • Ba'al Zevul

    Whatever the truth of the allegations, it’s pretty certain that in Trump’s contacts with Putin or his proxies, the orange one failed to realise that Putin could run intellectual rings round him, and the US would be the worse for any ‘deal’ struck in that company. And see:

    But the question remains, where did Wikileaks get the files from, then? N. Korea? Israel? Time for someone to come clean, I think, especially if they for some unknown reason feel that Trump should be unobstructed in his route to the asylum (probably)

1 2 3 5

Comments are closed.