Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 42 of 42

Thread: Good article on Crowdstrike

  1. #31 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    30,392
    Thanks
    8,416
    Thanked 19,432 Times in 12,910 Posts
    Groans
    5
    Groaned 1,003 Times in 959 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FastLane View Post
    BINGO!
    The DNC is sufficiently corrupt they’d engage foreign help in getting fake campaign dirt from Russians; they’re sufficiently corrupt they would screw members of their own party but they wouldn’t hide their own dirt from the cops.

    Nah, the DNC wouldn’t stoop to that, would they?
    Coup has started. First of many steps. Impeachment will follow ultimately~WB attorney Mark Zaid, January 2017

  2. #32 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    25,672
    Thanks
    8,344
    Thanked 14,925 Times in 10,344 Posts
    Groans
    178
    Groaned 1,245 Times in 1,180 Posts

    Default

    CrowdStrike Revises Russian Hack Into Ukrainian Artillery
    https://legalinsurrection.com/2017/0...ian-artillery/
    Cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike recently revised a report from December that insisted that the group “Fancy Bear,” which has ties to Russian intelligence, used malware to hack into Ukrainian artillery. In the same report, the firm said “Fancy Bear” used the same malware to “hack” into the American election.

    Well, British think tank International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) found that CrowdStrike “erroneously used IISS data as proof of the intrusion.” This also calls into question its findings of meddling in our election.
    ~~~

    CrowdStrikeOut: Mueller’s Own Report Undercuts Its Core Russia-Meddling Claims
    https://www.realclearinvestigations....ng_claims.html
    While the 448-page Mueller report found no conspiracy between Donald Trump's campaign and Russia, it offered voluminous details to support the sweeping conclusion that the Kremlin worked to secure Trump's victory.
    The report claims that the interference operation occurred "principally" on two fronts:
    1. Russian military intelligence officers hacked and leaked embarrassing Democratic Party documents,
    2.and a government-linked troll farm orchestrated a sophisticated and far-reaching social media campaign that denigrated Hillary Clinton and promoted Trump.

    But a close examination of the report shows that none of those headline assertions are supported by the report’s evidence or other publicly available sources. They are further undercut by investigative shortcomings and the conflicts of interest of key players involved:

  3. #33 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    25,672
    Thanks
    8,344
    Thanked 14,925 Times in 10,344 Posts
    Groans
    178
    Groaned 1,245 Times in 1,180 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StoneByStone View Post
    I'm guessing it's all bullshit, so no. Do you also believe in Pizzagate?
    I'm sure your 100% bullshit

  4. #34 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    30,392
    Thanks
    8,416
    Thanked 19,432 Times in 12,910 Posts
    Groans
    5
    Groaned 1,003 Times in 959 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dukkha View Post
    link doesnt work
    Weird, worked for me just now:
    __________

    Neither Hillary Clinton nor any of her surrogates ever once challenged the authenticity of any of the emails WikiLeaks published. Instead, from the very beginning, her sole strategy was relentlessly hammering home the narrative that there was a Russian plot allegedly responsible for making them public.

    Paying any attention to all the proof of her corruption and incompetence would be unpatriotic, Clinton warned, because the real threat was its publication in the first place. That was all part of a nefarious plot hatched by that arch-fiend Putin to throw the election to Trump. The real story here, we were told, is that the Kremlin attacked, not just her campaign, but literally all of America on Trump’s behalf. A New York Times headline published a few days after the DNC emails started dropping said it all: “Democrats Allege D.N.C. Hack Is Part of Russian Effort to Elect Donald Trump.”

    The Times supported Clinton’s allegations by citing some unnamed “researchers” who’d claimed that “the D.N.C.’s server had been breached by Russian intelligence agencies.” Besides not naming CrowdStrike, the Times failed to mention that the “researchers” it used to substantiate the Democrats’ accusations were on the DNC’s payroll.

    It sure was lucky that CrowdStrike’s conclusions turned out to be so useful for Hillary Clinton. The DNC’s tech firm couldn’t have come up with something better suited to transform WikiLeaks’ disturbing revelations about her into suspicions about her opponent if they’d concocted it out of thin air just for that purpose.

    Interestingly, CrowdStrike had first publicly announced the alleged Russian breach of the DNC’s servers exactly two days after WikiLeaks’ founder Julian Assange had warned that the DNC emails were coming by declaring he had “upcoming leaks in relation to Hillary Clinton . . . We have emails pending publication.”

    But CrowdStrike’s conclusions wouldn’t have been very useful at all had they been the only ones fingering the Russians. To get any mileage out of their allegations, Clinton obviously needed confirmation by some authority not on the DNC’s payroll.

    And, lo and behold, the very next day she was blessed by yet another remarkable coincidence. Some anonymous FBI officials just happened to leak information to the New York Times for a follow-up story with the incredibly useful headline: “Spy Agency Consensus Grows That Russia Hacked D.N.C.”

    According to the Times, a “federal investigation, involving the F.B.I. and [other] intelligence agencies” had concluded that “the Russian government was behind the theft” of the emails WikiLeaks had just published. So certain was Russia’s guilt that senior intelligence agency officials had even informed President Obama.
    Coup has started. First of many steps. Impeachment will follow ultimately~WB attorney Mark Zaid, January 2017

  5. #35 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    25,672
    Thanks
    8,344
    Thanked 14,925 Times in 10,344 Posts
    Groans
    178
    Groaned 1,245 Times in 1,180 Posts

    Default

    n fact, even their existence is just a hypothesis that, because a certain collection of tools and techniques were used in a number of different hacks, the culprits were the same. And since it’s been known that actors other than APT 28 have had access to some of the malware Alperovitch says he found on the DNC server since 2015, even if APT 28 does exist, assuming they’re the ones who infected the DNC servers is baseless conjecture. Indeed, any claim of universal exclusivity was already a remarkably thin and decidedly unscientific reed on which to rest such serious accusations in the fast-changing world of cyberespionage, where hiding what you know and pretending to be someone you aren’t are standard operating procedure.

  6. #36 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    25,672
    Thanks
    8,344
    Thanked 14,925 Times in 10,344 Posts
    Groans
    178
    Groaned 1,245 Times in 1,180 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Omar View Post
    Weird, worked for me just now:
    __________

    Neither Hillary Clinton nor any of her surrogates ever once challenged the authenticity of any of the emails WikiLeaks published. Instead, from the very beginning, her sole strategy was relentlessly hammering home the narrative that there was a Russian plot allegedly responsible for making them public.

    Paying any attention to all the proof of her corruption and incompetence would be unpatriotic, Clinton warned, because the real threat was its publication in the first place. That was all part of a nefarious plot hatched by that arch-fiend Putin to throw the election to Trump. The real story here, we were told, is that the Kremlin attacked, not just her campaign, but literally all of America on Trump’s behalf. A New York Times headline published a few days after the DNC emails started dropping said it all: “Democrats Allege D.N.C. Hack Is Part of Russian Effort to Elect Donald Trump.”

    The Times supported Clinton’s allegations by citing some unnamed “researchers” who’d claimed that “the D.N.C.’s server had been breached by Russian intelligence agencies.” Besides not naming CrowdStrike, the Times failed to mention that the “researchers” it used to substantiate the Democrats’ accusations were on the DNC’s payroll.

    It sure was lucky that CrowdStrike’s conclusions turned out to be so useful for Hillary Clinton. The DNC’s tech firm couldn’t have come up with something better suited to transform WikiLeaks’ disturbing revelations about her into suspicions about her opponent if they’d concocted it out of thin air just for that purpose.

    Interestingly, CrowdStrike had first publicly announced the alleged Russian breach of the DNC’s servers exactly two days after WikiLeaks’ founder Julian Assange had warned that the DNC emails were coming by declaring he had “upcoming leaks in relation to Hillary Clinton . . . We have emails pending publication.”

    But CrowdStrike’s conclusions wouldn’t have been very useful at all had they been the only ones fingering the Russians. To get any mileage out of their allegations, Clinton obviously needed confirmation by some authority not on the DNC’s payroll.

    And, lo and behold, the very next day she was blessed by yet another remarkable coincidence. Some anonymous FBI officials just happened to leak information to the New York Times for a follow-up story with the incredibly useful headline: “Spy Agency Consensus Grows That Russia Hacked D.N.C.”

    According to the Times, a “federal investigation, involving the F.B.I. and [other] intelligence agencies” had concluded that “the Russian government was behind the theft” of the emails WikiLeaks had just published. So certain was Russia’s guilt that senior intelligence agency officials had even informed President Obama.
    i got it off a post. thanks.
    ~~~

    There is a lot on the timing which I did not know about, and of course the Master Liar of All Time -
    Comeys superlatives in testimony. But the timing throws the claims off by the DNC.

    One thing I've learned about Deep State Creeps ( Brennan /Comey/ et all)is they have absolutely no problem lying and distorting to serve their political agenda

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to dukkha For This Post:

    Darth Omar (02-15-2020)

  8. #37 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    30,392
    Thanks
    8,416
    Thanked 19,432 Times in 12,910 Posts
    Groans
    5
    Groaned 1,003 Times in 959 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dukkha View Post
    i got it off a post. thanks.
    ~~~

    There is a lot on the timing which I did not know about, and of course the Master Liar of All Time -
    Comeys superlatives in testimony. But the timing throws the claims off by the DNC.

    One thing I've learned about Deep State Creeps ( Brennan /Comey/ et all)is they have absolutely no problem lying and distorting to serve their political agenda
    Timelines are the bane of fake narratives lol.

    And all these happy little ‘coincidences’ that pop-up to prop up Clinton’s Russian narrative. Hillary must know where the bodies are buried to have that kind of control.

    And it’s all linked to tiny corrupt little Ukraine. But presidents mustn’t ask about it.
    Coup has started. First of many steps. Impeachment will follow ultimately~WB attorney Mark Zaid, January 2017

  9. #38 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    25,672
    Thanks
    8,344
    Thanked 14,925 Times in 10,344 Posts
    Groans
    178
    Groaned 1,245 Times in 1,180 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Omar View Post
    Timelines are the bane of fake narratives lol.

    And all these happy little ‘coincidences’ that pop-up to prop up Clinton’s Russian narrative. Hillary must know where the bodies are buried to have that kind of control.

    And it’s all linked to tiny corrupt little Ukraine. But presidents mustn’t ask about it.
    tell you what.
    take the Deep State Creeps feeding their disinformation, amplified by a compliant media, and shouted by Dems as "distraction" , and you have hoodwinked 99% of the population,including almost all of Congress
    ( not Jordan, Nunes -but almost)

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to dukkha For This Post:

    Darth Omar (02-15-2020)

  11. #39 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    30,392
    Thanks
    8,416
    Thanked 19,432 Times in 12,910 Posts
    Groans
    5
    Groaned 1,003 Times in 959 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dukkha View Post
    tell you what.
    take the Deep State Creeps feeding their disinformation, amplified by a compliant media, and shouted by Dems as "distraction" , and you have hoodwinked 99% of the population,including almost all of Congress
    ( not Jordan, Nunes -but almost)
    It’s entirely plausible it involves members of both parties.

    I don’t pretend know the whole story only to say the ‘official story’ is almost certainly NOT it. It doesn’t pass the sniff test.
    Coup has started. First of many steps. Impeachment will follow ultimately~WB attorney Mark Zaid, January 2017

  12. #40 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    86,110
    Thanks
    4,899
    Thanked 23,560 Times in 18,861 Posts
    Groans
    2,053
    Groaned 2,140 Times in 2,037 Posts

    Default

    we need fact checkers checking the facts on fact checkers,,,,,
    Isaiah 6:5
    “Woe to me!” I cried. “I am ruined! For I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips, and my eyes have seen the King, the Lord Almighty.”

  13. #41 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    25,672
    Thanks
    8,344
    Thanked 14,925 Times in 10,344 Posts
    Groans
    178
    Groaned 1,245 Times in 1,180 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Omar View Post
    It’s entirely plausible it involves members of both parties.

    I don’t pretend know the whole story only to say the ‘official story’ is almost certainly NOT it. It doesn’t pass the sniff test.
    I'm starting to think they are gonna get away with it. Tom Fenton ( Judicial Watch)has been saying he can't even get relevant FOIA request from DoJ.

    Apparently a lot of Obama DoJ appointees have dug in by declaring themselves careerists

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to dukkha For This Post:

    Darth Omar (02-15-2020)

  15. #42 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    13,532
    Thanks
    439
    Thanked 2,348 Times in 1,919 Posts
    Groans
    85
    Groaned 922 Times in 843 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dukkha View Post
    I'm sure your 100% bullshit
    My 100% bullshit what?

Similar Threads

  1. Good NR Article on the Alt-Right
    By Bull Durham in forum General Politics Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-28-2017, 11:16 PM
  2. Good economic article
    By Cancel 2016.2 in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-01-2011, 09:44 AM
  3. A Good Article
    By Fear&Loathing in forum General Politics Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-09-2008, 03:22 PM
  4. Good article
    By Canceled.LTroll.29 in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-21-2008, 03:21 PM
  5. A Good Ron Paul article...
    By Cypress in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 99
    Last Post: 11-27-2007, 09:41 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •