Sirija

[Eraserhead]

Lagali za MH17 lagali za napad u Engleskoj, lagali za prethodne napade hemijskim oruzjem u Siriji ali posto znaju da ce budale i dalje da se loze onda sto ne bi lagali opet. Propagandna masinerija koja pociva na teorijama zavera nastavlja da melje.

 

Russian TV Interview With Syrian Boy Was Secretly Conducted at Army Facility

 

Quote

 

AN INTERVIEW WITH an 11-year-old Syrian boy broadcast last week on Russia’s main state-owned news channel, Russia-24, appears to have been filmed not in the boy’s hometown, where a suspected chemical attack took place, but at a Syrian army facility where Russian military advisers were present.

The report, claiming to prove that video of the attack’s aftermath was fake, is considered so important by Russian officials that Vassily Nebenzia, Russia’s ambassador to the United Nations, plans to screen it for the Security Council.

 

As state news channels included the interview in bulletin after bulletin, and it was featured in a report on the country’s main Sunday night news show, the boy, identified as Hassan Diab, was described as a crucial witness because he was first seen being doused with water in video recorded by an opposition activist in the rebel-stronghold of Douma just after the suspected chlorine gas attack there on the night of April 7.

 

After Islamist rebels were driven out of Douma the following day, and Russian military police took control of the town, the Russia-24 correspondent Evgeny Poddubnyy found the boy and produced a report claiming that the child had been coerced into acting in the video by volunteer rescue workers who hoped to provoke Western military intervention.

Poddubnyy’s report was promoted by Russian diplomats, remixed for international broadcast on the Kremlin-financed Russia Today channels, and injected into social networks via In the Now, a government-owned account stripped of all Russian branding.

 

The accusation that the boy had been used to create “fake news” of a chemical attack was quickly picked up and repeated uncritically by some Western news outlets, like Metro UK, a free newspaper distributed to British commuters.

 

Those news outlets seemed entirely unaware of the fact that Syrian officials have claimed since the first weeks of the uprising against President Bashar al-Assad, in 2011, that all evidence of violent repression by the state must be fake.

 

At a news conference in Damascus on March 24, 2011, an adviser to the Syrian president, Bouthaina Shaaban, lectured Lina Sinjab of the BBC for referring to video evidence posted on YouTube in a report about the use of force against peaceful protesters in the southern city of Dara’a. There was no need for foreign broadcasters to look to YouTube, Shaaban told Sinjab, since they could rely on the government’s own journalists at state-run television who “have their credibility.” Since “the events are happening in Syria,” she added, “only Syrian television tells the truth, no one else.”

 

Five days after it took military control of Douma, Russia’s ministry of defense screened video for reporters in which two medics from the town’s hospital claimed that victims of the bombardment treated in their clinic on the night of the attack showed no signs of chemical exposure. Instead, the medics said, the survivors were treated for breathing problems and doused with water by opposition activists who wanted to create the impression that there had been a chemical attack. Colleagues of the medics who had escaped to an opposition-controlled area of Syria told The Guardian that the medical workers who remained in Douma had been threatened with punishment by Syrian government forces if they did not give interviews saying that the footage was fake and there had been no chemical attack.

 

When asked on Monday if the boy and his father, who also appeared in the report, might have been pressed to lie about the attack once Douma came under the control of Russia and Syria — the government accused of the chemical attack — Poddubnyy told The Intercept via Twitter that he could “guarantee that the interview was recorded without pressure on the child’s father and the boy himself.” The reporter also insisted that he had not been introduced to the boy by Russian military “peacekeepers” but by sources at the hospital in Douma where the video of attack survivors being treated was recorded.

 

Pressed to explain the presence of three uniformed men who could be seen in the background at the start of his report, the correspondent admitted that they were from the Russian Reconciliation Center for Syria — a unit of military advisers currently charged with registering Douma’s civilian population — but insisted they were merely on their way to a “local cafe.”

 

Poddubnyy also revealed that his interview with the boy and his father had not been recorded in Douma, but in Damascus, the Syrian capital, near the Dama Rose hotel. When asked directly if the piece had been filmed on the grounds of the Syrian Army Officers Club, which is next door to that hotel, Poddubnyy said that it had not.

However, that appears to have been a lie. An exhaustive, crowd-sourced search for images of the exterior of the building seen at the start of Poddubnyy’s report reveals that it almost certainly was recorded at the military facility, which is just a short distance from Syria’s ministry of defense.

 

At the start of the Russian television report, the boy and his father are seen walking outside a well-appointed building with a distinctive tiled floor and arched entryway before the uniformed men walk past.

 

After several people familiar with the city independently suggested on Twitter that the location looked like the Syrian Arab Army’s Officers Club, that appeared to be confirmed by a photograph of that building’s exterior found on the Syrian defense ministry’s website.

 

The same distinctive arch, tiled floor, and stone door frame can also be seen in a reverse angle taken from inside the building, discovered by a Syrian blogger on the website of a Damascus architecture firm hired to refurbish the club.

 

Another image, found on Facebook by an open-source researcher, even shows a poster of President Bashar al-Assad above the club’s doorway that is partially visible in the original Russian TV report.

 

Poddubnyy — whose channel complained bitterly on Monday that his work had been ignored by Western networks like CNN, Fox News, France 24, and the BBC — did not immediately respond when confronted with the visual evidence that he had, indeed, conducted his interview with the boy and his father at a Syrian military facility used by Russian officers.

 

While some Syrian activists welcomed evidence that the boy and his father might have been interviewed under duress, undermining the Russian case that the attack had been a hoax, others, who have grown exhausted and bitter after seven years of war, were distressed by the attempt to fact-check the story.

 

“There is no realistic way to find out if the boy was coerced or not, and it doesn’t even matter,” the Aleppo blogger who writes as Edward Dark said in an internet message.

 

“Syrian lives are propaganda pieces in a cynical global power struggle, each side wants to win public opinion over to his side, and doesn’t give a flying fuck about Syrians beyond their use as emotional manipulation tools,” he added. “And yes, journalists are at the forefront of this. We’re sick of this, we just want to end the war and be left alone.”

 

In an online debate over the footage of the boy and his father agreeing to the Russian and Syrian government claims that there was no chemical attack, Lina Sinjab, the BBC correspondent observed: “What can people say in government-controlled areas with Russian media except the government line?”

 

Rami Jarrah, a Syrian media activist who helped document the first days of the uprising, and then the descent into war, argued that anyone familiar with Assad’s Syria knows “that these people do not have the choice to say anything other than what the regime’s narrative spells.”

 

 

[Weenie Pooh]

22 minutes ago, 3opge said:

 The timeline strongly implies that Russia’s aim was to disrupt the election from the start.

 

As opposed to what? Ko je ikad tvrdio da su hakeri slučajno zalutali na DNC servere, pročitali hiljade mejlove iz dosade, i onda se dosetili da bi mogli da ih objave?

 

“In the run-up to the 2016 election, Russia mounted a brazen attack on American Democracy.”

 

Treba li ponavljati kakav je ovo vrhunac cinizma? Kažite da je prekršen zakon, da su narušene institucije sistema, da je ugrožena privatnost i bezbednost plemenitih ljudi koji iz ubeđenja rade za DNC... ali ne kenjajte kako je nedemokratično izneti istinite podatke u javnost.

 

Bizarno mi je da neko uzima sebi za pravo da tvrdi daje kamen-temeljac američke demokratije sakrivanje informacija od javnosti. Što javnost bolje zna koga bira, to su izbori manje demokratskog karaktera.

[3opge]

jao, jesi sad ispinovao. btw, nisi li ti tvrdio da nije bilo nikakvog ruskog budzenja izbora?

 

 

[Weenie Pooh]

Na osnovu čega bih tako nešto mogao da kažem?  Tvrdio sam i tvrdim da za tako nešto apsolutno nema dokaza, a teško će ih i biti. (Da je ostao digitalni paper trail, NSA bi ga imala u roku od odmah. Ako nije ostao, piši propalo.) Takođe tvrdio i tvrdim da je cela priča sviranje kurcu jer joj je cilj vrlo očigledno stabilizacija poljuljanog autoriteta (D) establišmenta; to što stabilizuju svoje pozicije gurajući ratnohuškačke gadosti u javnost, to ih ne interesuje.

 

A što pitaš, da ne smatraš tužbu za nekakav dokaz možda?

[3opge]

na primer (WIRED takodje):

 

ON THURSDAY, A report from the Daily Beast alleged that the Guccifer 2.0 hacking persona—famous for leaking data stolen from the Democratic National Committee in 2016—has been linked to a GRU Russian intelligence agent. What appears to have given Guccifer away: The hacker once failed activate a VPN before logging into a social media account. This slip eventually allowed US investigators to link the persona to a Moscow IP address. In fact, they traced it directly to GRU headquarters.

 

[Weenie Pooh]

Primetićeš da su ti "US istražitelji" anonimni izvori Daily Beasta. Takvih je bilo bezbroj u prethodnih godinu i kusur dana, sve insajder iz Službe do insajdera iz Službe koji eto tako bezveze javlja medijima a ne Muelleru da je supertajnim tehnikama ispratio Twitter login do IP adrese Putinovog privatnog klozeta.

 

Mediji dobijaju klikove, Službe oblikuju mišljenje javnosti bez potrebe da išta konkretno dokažu, svi srećni, svi zadovoljni.

[3opge]

aha, dobro. znaci cia napakovala. supertajnim tehnikama.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[ManicMiner]

8 hours ago, 3opge said:

na primer (WIRED takodje):

 

ON THURSDAY, A report from the Daily Beast alleged that the Guccifer 2.0 hacking persona—famous for leaking data stolen from the Democratic National Committee in 2016—has been linked to a GRU Russian intelligence agent. What appears to have given Guccifer away: The hacker once failed activate a VPN before logging into a social media account. This slip eventually allowed US investigators to link the persona to a Moscow IP address. In fact, they traced it directly to GRU headquarters.

 

 

Meni ovo interesantno, obzirom da sam u struci

 

Dakle, 'supervesti' haker ruske tajne sluzbe, hakuje koristeci dobropoznate IP adrese koje pripadaju sedistu te iste sluzbe, pri tome pacerski zaboravljajuci da ukljuci VPN pre nego se loguje na hakovani account?

 

Ma vazi

 

Disclaimer : ne tvrdim da ruska drzava ne stoji iza provale u mail prepisku Klintonovke, mozda stoji a mozda i ne stoji, ali ono sto znam je da se ovakvi propusti ne desavaju profesionalcima. Nikada.

 

 

[JozoMujica]

7 minutes ago, ManicMiner said:

 

ali ono sto znam je da se ovakvi propusti ne desavaju profesionalcima. Nikada.

 

Nevezano za ovaj slučaj, ali se svakakvi propusti dešavaju svima. Često.

[Anduril]

Pa sad, i ti famozni profesionalci mogu da pogrese i popiju - sve vec vidjeno.

Inace, naravno da u demokratiji javnost treba da bude informisana o stvarima koje politicari kriju, ali, jos vaznije je balansirano informisanje, tj. da se ne koriste dupli standardi.

U atmosferi propagande, ostrascenosti,  korisnih idiota,  teorija zavere, demonizovanja medija i kasnije ulicnog nasilja elektorati su u proslosti donosili neke od najgorih odluka za planetu, i to je jedna od najvecih boljki demokratije.

Edited April 25, 2018 by Anduril

[ManicMiner]

47 minutes ago, JozoMujica said:

Nevezano za ovaj slučaj, ali se svakakvi propusti dešavaju svima. Često.

 

Slazem se, ali postoji toliko veoma jednostavnih nacina da se ovakav, izuzetno banalan, propust ne desi, tako da sam veoma skeptican glede nazovi dokaza.

 

Moje misljenje je da je istrazni tim dosao do saznanja koristeci se konvencionalnim metodama, a dato objasnjenje , po sistemu 'nek vidi pucanstvo kako se hakuje u matriksu i dr. robotu' predstavlja zamajavanje zainteresovane populacije.

 

[placenik]

1 hour ago, ManicMiner said:

 

Slazem se, ali postoji toliko veoma jednostavnih nacina da se ovakav, izuzetno banalan, propust ne desi, tako da sam veoma skeptican glede nazovi dokaza.

 

 

Nema teorije da GRU nema automatsko skrivanje IP-ja, to je bas very basic.

[Lord Protector]

 

Quote

 

JUST WHEN YOU THOUGHT “RUSSIAGATE” COULDN’T GET ANY SILLIER …

APRIL 21, 2018 THOMAS L. KNAPP

 

April 20 is cannabis culture’s high holiday, and  the Democratic National Committee celebrated it with fervor this year: Blaze up, get silly, file a bizarre lawsuit accusing the Russian government, Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, and transparency activist group WikiLeaks of conspiring to steal an election.

The suit  confirms that after more than a year, special counsel Robert Mueller still hasn’t amassed the evidence required for a successful criminal prosecution, requiring proof “beyond a reasonable doubt.” A civil suit lowers that bar to “a preponderance of the evidence.”

But even that’s a long shot. The only credible evidence produced so far implicates only the Trump campaign, not the other two defendants, and only to the same extent that it likewise implicates the Clinton campaign.

That is, both campaigns admittedly tried to tap “Kremlin-connected” sources (defined as “anyone who’s ever been in Moscow”) for dirt on their opponents. Donald Trump Jr. met with a Russian lawyer in hopes of getting the goods on Hillary Clinton. The Clinton campaign commissioned a British former spy to work his Russian regime sources for salacious tidbits on Trump the Elder.

Central to the suit’s claims is alleged “Russian hacking” of the DNC’s servers, followed by an embarrassing release of emails showing, among other things, attempts by DNC to rig the 2016 primaries in favor of Clinton and against her main opponent, Bernie Sanders. Problems with the case:

First, the DNC refused to turn those servers over to the FBI for forensic analysis, instead hiring a friendly cybersecurity firm to announce the results it wanted announced.

Secondly, metadata in the “hacked” files released by “Guccifer 2.0” indicates transfer speeds consistent with an internal source at DNC copying the files directly to a USB drive rather than an external hacker accessing the servers.

Thirdly, while the subsequent announcement by the US intelligence community of its conclusions claims methods and IP addresses “consistent with” Russian state hackers, those methods and IP addresses are also “consistent with” every other type of hacker on Earth.

Fourthly and probably decisively, the DNC makes the mistake of dragging WikiLeaks into the matter. The next time WikiLeaks gets caught making a false statement will be the first time. On the other hand, the leaked emails themselves demonstrate that the DNC lies constantly and without hesitation. When it comes to credibility, WikiLeaks is the gold standard and the DNC is something one tries to wipe off the bottom of one’s shoe before entering a respectable household. WikiLeaks says no, its source was neither the Russian government nor any other state party.

This lawsuit is simply the latest version of what the DNC has been doing since 2016: Trying to fob blame for its loss of an election it should have won in a walk off onto someone, anyone, but itself and its insanely poor choice of presidential nominee.

It’s very a risky move. In civil suits “discovery” runs in both directions. We’re about to learn a lot more about how the Democratic Party really works behind the scenes.

 

 

 

[Miralem]

11 hours ago, 3opge said:

jao, jesi sad ispinovao. btw, nisi li ti tvrdio da nije bilo nikakvog ruskog budzenja izbora?

 

 

ti si, kako da ti kazem, prolupao. pokusaj da manje pratis vesti.

[Weenie Pooh]

1 hour ago, ManicMiner said:

 

Slazem se, ali postoji toliko veoma jednostavnih nacina da se ovakav, izuzetno banalan, propust ne desi, tako da sam veoma skeptican glede nazovi dokaza.

 

Moje misljenje je da je istrazni tim dosao do saznanja koristeci se konvencionalnim metodama, a dato objasnjenje , po sistemu 'nek vidi pucanstvo kako se hakuje u matriksu i dr. robotu' predstavlja zamajavanje zainteresovane populacije.

 

 

Ali vidiš na linku da nije nikakav istražni tim, nego Wired citira Daily Beast koji citira anonimni izvor koji im je rekao "ustanovili smo da se taj loguje na Tviter direktno iz sedišta GRU, majke mi rođene". Svaka informacija koju plasiraju ti dobro obavešteni izvori koji žele da ostanu neimenovani je čista izmišljotina dok se ne dokaže suprotno... a ne dokaže se gotovo nikad.

 

23 minutes ago, placenik said:

Nema teorije da GRU nema automatsko skrivanje IP-ja, to je bas very basic.

 

Ma pusti, tvrdili su ti "izvori" i luđe stvari, npr. ono da im Rusi hakuju elektroprivredu...