• Теги
    • избранные теги
    • Люди721
      • Показать ещё
      Страны / Регионы537
      • Показать ещё
      Компании470
      • Показать ещё
      Разное419
      • Показать ещё
      Международные организации93
      • Показать ещё
      Издания137
      • Показать ещё
      Формат17
      Показатели7
      Сферы3
Джеймс Клеппер
19 января, 00:03

Будет Трамп-пам-пам. Что сделает новый президент, вступив в должность

Политолог Михаил Нейжмаков рассказал о трудностях, с которыми предстоит столкнуться новому президенту Америки, его возможных отношениях с Россией и несбыточных предвыборных обещаниях.

16 января, 16:29

Trump: Was the CIA chief 'the leaker of fake news?'

Donald Trump on Sunday night questioned whether outgoing CIA Director John Brennan was behind the leak of an unverified report that accused the president-elect of salacious conduct. “.@FoxNews 'Outgoing CIA Chief, John Brennan, blasts Pres-Elect Trump on Russia threat. Does not fully understand.' Oh really, couldn't do much worse - just look at Syria (red line), Crimea, Ukraine and the build-up of Russian nukes. Not good! Was this the leaker of Fake News?” Trump tweeted. The president-elect was responding to Brennan, who harshly criticized the president-elect earlier in the day on "Fox News Sunday," saying, among other things, that Trump’s comparison of the intelligence community to Nazi Germany was “outrageous.”The Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, took an unusual step last week to publicly say he didn’t believe the intelligence community was responsible for leaking the document and hadn’t made a judgment on whether the information was verified. The tweet was Trump’s latest dust-up with the intelligence community. He earlier slammed the intelligence community after news reports came out that trump and President Barack Obama were briefed on the contents of a dossier containing unverified compromising information on the president-elect. “Intelligence agencies should never have allowed this fake news to 'leak' into the public. One last shot at me. Are we living in Nazi Germany?" Trump tweeted last week. In an interview that aired Sunday on 60 Minutes, Obama said the president-elect must improve relations with the intelligence community. “You're not going to be able to make good decisions without building some relationship of trust between yourself and that community,” Obama said.

14 января, 21:07

The Insanity of a New Cold War: A Top Russian Scholar Sounds the Alarm

In this week's episode of KCRW's "Scheer Intelligence," host Robert Scheer is joined by Russian-born professor Sergei Plekhanov. Plekhanov teaches at York University in Toronto and has a wealth of knowledge about Russian culture and politics, which, he argues, are overlooked by Western media. The conversation begins with a brief discussion of the history between the United States and Russia, particularly during the Cold War. Scheer then asks Plekhanov about U.S. attitudes toward Russia today. Listen to the interview below: In the eyes of some in the United States, "Russia has undermined the international order," Plekhanov says. "So," he continued, "Russia needs to be punished, Russia needs to be contained. That's the view." Scheer brings up the recent political mayhem over allegations of Russian hacking, particularly the role of FBI Director James Comey and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. Clapper makes it seem like we are entering another chapter of the Cold War, Scheer says, but "Putin is not, any longer, a Communist." Plekhanov delves into how Russia is "transitioning," and argues that Putin "is concerned about the survivability of Russia." Western beliefs about Russia aren't accurate, he continues. "Russians are informed," he explains, refuting Western beliefs that Russians only get their daily news from KGB-run sources. "Can you have both security and democracy?" Plekhanov muses. "Understandably enough, the Russians are more concerned about security." Scheer and Plekhanov discuss how Russia is advancing its infrastructure and economy, and how this will continue during the Trump administration. Plekhanov says: "Somebody like Trump, who thinks like a businessman--I really think that there are more opportunities than dangers with regards to Russia. So we're stuck in this obsolete policy of containment. ... But in the meantime, we might actually benefit tremendously from being part of this larger network of economic ties and economic development that is growing in Eurasia. "I'm sure some people will say, 'Well, Sergei is just a propagandist for Putin,' " he concludes. "By the way, I've never voted for Putin as a Russian, and I'm not a Putin supporter. I'm an academic who's trying to make sense of what's happening in the world. And I'm appalled at the quality of reporting on Russia that dominates the media here in the West." Adapted from Truthdig.com -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

14 января, 14:01

Donald Trump Poised To Become Misstater In Chief

WASHINGTON ― Donald Trump told America this week that he had no loans from Russia. That Russian intelligence could not possibly have compromising material about him. That no one on his staff had any contacts with the Russians during the presidential campaign. And after 18 months of listening to him, Americans might be excused if they choose not to believe even a word of it, as the candidate who issued falsehoods at a historic rate will next week find himself the least believed president since Richard Nixon, right from the moment he takes the oath of office. “You don’t want to be accused of lying,” said Matt Mackowiak, a Texas-based GOP communications consultant. “But that doesn’t seem to bother Trump.” Ari Fleischer, former press secretary to President George W. Bush, said voters obviously tolerated Trump’s loose relationship with facts when they went to the polls in November. “Trump comes from a business world where what’s important is: Can you turn a pile of dirt into a tower of steel?” As to whether and how Trump can win back credibility, the question itself might be irrelevant. “Politically it may not matter because if people in general like what he’s getting accomplished and notice improvements in their lives, I don’t think people are going to be too worried about the precision of his language,” said Rick Tyler, a former aide to Trump’s last remaining Republican primary rival, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas. “As long as things are going great, you know: Tell me lies! Tell me lies!” And that, says frequent Trump critic Jay Rosen, is precisely the next president’s plan. “Trump is preparing a presidency that optimizes for a low-trust environment,” said Rosen, a journalism professor at New York University. “The whole premise of ‘winning back credibility’ is off. He’s prepared to govern without credibility. He seeks to profit from maximizing distrust.”  You don’t want to be accused of lying. But that doesn’t seem to bother Trump. Matt Mackowiak, Texas-based GOP consultant Trump through the years has been notoriously willing to say things that are untrue. During a 2007 deposition in a defamation lawsuit he filed because he was angry that the writer had questioned his claimed net worth, Trump repeatedly made statements that proved to be false. He claimed ownership of properties, for example, in which he was either merely licensing the use of his name or was in line to receive a share of future profits. When confronted by lawyers, Trump then argued that, in fact, not having an ownership interest was smarter because it limited his losses. A decade and a half earlier, Trump had taken untruth to a new level, calling a gossip columnist to claim a nonexistent sexual relationship with Italian supermodel Carla Bruni while claiming to be his own nonexistent press aide. The proclivity for falsehoods accompanied Trump into his presidential campaign, as Trump regularly misrepresented facts about ― among many, many other things ― the crime rate, the unemployment rate, the size and strength of the U.S. military, the nature and significance of the balance of trade, Muslims cheering from rooftops on 9/11, self-funding his campaign and the current state of illegal immigration. In a Republican primary debate in the autumn of 2015, Trump claimed he had no idea where a characterization describing rival Marco Rubio as Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg’s personal senator could have come from ― even though the source was his own campaign website. (When confronted on this a few minutes later, Trump responded with 158 words on unrelated topics that failed to address the question.) Then there was the debate in which Trump claimed a strong relationship with Russian leader Vladimir Putin because he’d been on the same CBS News broadcast with him: “I got to know him very well because we were both on ‘60 Minutes.’ We were stablemates.” Trump later denied knowing him at all. “I don’t know Putin,” he said during the final general election debate 11 months later. Over the span of just days last year, Trump claimed the NFL had sent him a letter complaining of the fall debate schedule (it had not), that the billionaire Koch brothers had wanted to meet with him (they had not) and that he had seen video of pallets of cash sent by the United States being unloaded in Iran (no such video existed). In the case of the invented Iranian cash video, Trump added embellishments describing where and how it had been shot. Trump on a number of occasions during the campaign even said that the father of Cruz had been involved in the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy, basing his theory on an article in the National Enquirer supermarket tabloid. Cruz, on the day he lost the Indiana primary that effectively ended his candidacy after months of praising the reality TV star, finally unloaded on Trump. “I’m going to do something I haven’t done before – those of you who follow me around on the campaign trail. I’m going to tell you what I really think of Donald Trump,” he said to reporters. “This man is a pathological liar. He doesn’t know the difference between truth and lies. I say pathological because I actually think Donald, if you hooked him up to a lie detector test, he could say one thing in the morning, one thing at noon and one thing in the evening, all contradictory. And he’d pass the lie detector test each time. Whatever lie he’s telling, at that minute he believes it.”  As long as things are going great, you know: Tell me lies! Tell me lies! Rick Tyler, former aide to GOP presidential candidate Ted Cruz ttTrump and his top staff’s casualness with facts has continued after the election and right up through his Wednesday news conference. Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway, for example, claimed that Trump had never personally been briefed by U.S. intelligence officials about a privately gathered dossier of his contacts with Russia, including salacious material about Trump’s purported activities with prostitutes in that country. But late Wednesday, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper essentially confirmed that information about the dossier had been included in his overall briefing last week regarding Russia’s efforts to get Trump elected. Even in the news conference itself, Trump continued his reliance on falsehoods. He claimed, for instance, that 96 million Americans are looking for full-time work but cannot find it ― or nearly one-third of the nation’s entire population. (The real number is less than 6 million.) In the end, his misstatements, even if proved intentional, may not matter. The election is over, and the next one is four years away. What’s more, Republican consultants agreed, enough voters in enough key states decided that Trump’s promise to improve their lives was more important than his personal qualities, including his willingness to dispense untruths. “The tolerance for ambiguity is a function of whether people are satisfied or dissatisfied with the leadership,” said Tyler, the former Cruz aide. And if voters do not see improvement in their lives and wind up dissatisfied? That’s where American’s lack of trust in their new president could prove devastating. A president like Barack Obama, whose personal integrity and honesty were among his strongest features, was able to weather bad times because voters were willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, Fleischer said. Trump will not have that to fall back upon should the economy worsen instead of, as he has promised, take off. “If he says things that are not accurate and things haven’t turned around,” Fleischer said, “then the double whammy can set in.” “He’s got a six-month period,” Mackowiak predicted. “He’s either going to be a real success, or he’s going to have real problems.”   -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

14 января, 00:29

Former Intel Chief: Community Caught Between 'Scylla and Charybdis' on Trump Dossier

A conversation on intelligence and well-meant incompetence

14 января, 00:29

Former Intel Chief: Community Caught Between 'Scylla and Charybdis' on Trump Dossier

A conversation on intelligence and well-meant incompetence

13 января, 21:34

Clinton allies exact revenge on Trump

Campaign aides flood the airwaves to pummel the president-elect.

13 января, 15:12

Trump revives attack on intel community in early morning Twitter burst

President-elect Donald Trump renewed his criticism of the intelligence community Friday morning, blaming it once again for leaking an unverified report containing compromising and salacious allegations about him to the media and citing the Russian government as proof that the dossier's allegations are false. That report, which had circulated for months among government officials and media institutions, was published Tuesday evening in full by BuzzFeed, which cautioned that the information it contained was unverified and included multiple errors. BuzzFeed’s decision to publish that report, the product of a private security company paid to develop opposition research on Trump, came on the same day that CNN reported that a summary of it had been included in briefings delivered to both the president-elect and President Barack Obama. “It now turns out that the phony allegations against me were put together by my political opponents and a failed spy afraid of being sued. Totally made up facts by sleazebag political operatives, both Democrats and Republicans - FAKE NEWS!” Trump said in a flurry of posts to Twitter Friday morning. “Russia says nothing exists. Probably released by ‘Intelligence’ even knowing there is no proof, and never will be. My people will have a full report on hacking within 90 days!” The "failed spy" Trump refers to is the supposed author of the report, a former British M16 agent identified by the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post and other media organizations as Christopher Steele. He is the director of a London-based intelligence company named Orbis Business Intelligence. The president-elect continued to blame the intelligence community for leaking the report despite assurances from Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who took the unusual step on Wednesday of releasing a statement reading out a phone call he placed to Trump. In that readout, Clapper said he told Trump that he didn't believe the intelligence community was behind the leak, has not made a judgment about the voracity of the report published by BuzzFeed and that such leaks are “extremely corrosive and damaging to our national security.” A Russian government spokesman said Wednesday that the report amounted to “pulp fiction,” and that the Kremlin did not possess compromising information about Trump or his 2016 opponent, Hillary Clinton. The president-elect has repeatedly cited this assertion as proof that the claims are false. Trump has promised to initiate a cybersecurity review immediately upon taking office with a report to be delivered to him within 90 days. Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, a longtime supporter of Trump's who works as a security consultant for foreign governments, said Thursday that he will head up that team.

13 января, 14:09

British Spy Behind Report On Donald Trump Aided FBI With Soccer Scandal Probe

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_1'),onPlayerReadyVidible); The former MI6 British spy named as the author of an unverified report on Donald Trump’s alleged relationship with Russia earned his reputation as an investigator aiding the FBI in its bombshell probe of world soccer. Christopher Steele, 52, and his family were in hiding Thursday night, after media reports exposed him as being behind the report containing potentially compromising but unsubstantiated information about the president-elect. Intelligence leaders said they informed Trump about the dossier last Friday as they briefed him about Russian hacking during the presidential campaign. Steele runs the London-based private investigation firm, Orbis Business Intelligence, which he co-founded after leaving the British Secret Service. The FBI may have taken his allegations about Russia and Trump more seriously because agents had worked with him during an investigation into world soccer’s governing body FIFA, Reuters news agency and The New York Times report. England’s Football Association hired Steele in 2009 to investigate Russia, which was then a rival to England to the host the 2018 World Cup, Reuters said Thursday. Steele eventually turned information he gathered on Russia to the FBI’s New York-based Eurasian Task Force in a 2010 meeting in London. Steele’s FIFA work lent credibility to his Russia expertise and contacts, U.S. officials told the news agency. The FBI’s probe ultimately resulted in dozens of U.S. indictments in 2015 against soccer administration leaders and sports marketing executives on charges ranging from bribery to tax evasion and money laundering. Coincidentally, the key informer in the FBI’s case was former FIFA executive Chuck Blazer, a friend of Trump’s who was a frequent guest at the real estate businessman’s beauty pageants. Blazer lived in Trump Tower and ran CONCACAF, the regional confederation overseeing soccer in North America, Central America and the Caribbean, from offices in the building. (Court filings released Wednesday reveal reveal Blazer admitted in 2013 to accepting bribes related to South Africa’s 2010 World Cup bid.) One of Steele’s reports involves alleged pressure from Russia on Trump to build projects connected to the 2018 World Cup, which the British agent’s report said the real estate businessman had rebuffed. Steele’s firm was hired during the presidential campaign by anti-Trump Republicans — and later Democrats — to probe the businessman’s relationship with Russia, Reuters reported. The British agent, who had worked as a spy in Russia for years, reportedly used contacts to create a series of reports on claims about the country’s alleged relationship with Trump. The unverified reports also allege that members of Trump’s campaign team maintained ties with Russians during his race for the presidency. Trump denounced media coverage of the existence of the report this week as “fake news,” a “political witch-hunt” and “crap.” A spokesman for Russian President Vladimir Putin called the reports “absolute fantasy.” CNN was the first to report that Trump was briefed on the existence of Steele’s reports by U.S. intelligence chiefs. The network said Trump should be aware of the report, even though its claims were unverified, because it had been circulating for months among politicians and members of the media. Trump has said that intelligence agencies determined there was no truth to Steele’s finding. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper issued a statement Wednesday saying that he had called Trump to clarify that intelligence agencies had made no judgment about the reliability of the allegations. He also insisted that the leak about the report did not come from any intelligence agency. During his press conference Wednesday, Trump refused to call on a reporter from CNN, calling the broadcaster “fake news.” Buzzfeed is the only media to date that has printed the full dossier that Steele reportedly wrote. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

13 января, 11:24

СМИ заявили об участии бывшего посла Британии в РФ в передаче досье на Трампа

Бывший посол Великобритании в РФ Эндрю Вуд сыграл "исключительно значительную роль" в передаче американской разведке данных о якобы имеющемся у Москвы "компромате" на избранного президента США Дональда Трампа, пишет The Independent.  Издание сообщает, что сенатор США Джок Маккейн встретился с Вудом в Канаде в прошлом ноябре после победы Трампа. Там, как отмечается, Маккейн обратился к Вуду за советом по поводу досье о якобы существующих связях Трампа с Кремлём, а затем встретился с директором ФБР Джеймсом Коми и передал ему данные.  Сам бывший посол подтвердил изданию, что встречался с Маккейном, и заявил, что обсуждал возможные связи избранного президента с Россией и то, как Трамп мог оказаться в ситуации, в которой его могли "попытаться шантажировать". Вуд был послом в России с 1995 по 2000 год.  Ранее СМИ написали, что автором доклада в СМИ о связях Дональда Трампа с Россией был бывший сотрудник разведки Великобритании Кристофер Стил. Напомним, ранее портал BuzzFeed опубликовал информацию, согласно которой Трамп в ходе визита в Москву в 2013 году заказывал проституток в президентский номер отеля Ritz Carlton. CNN заявил, что при этом в номере Трампа установили камеры и микрофоны, чтобы собрать компромат. Сам избранный президент публикации назвал фальшивыми. При этом директор Национальной разведки США Джеймс Клеппер сообщил, что доклад о якобы имеющемся компромате на избранного президента США Дональда Трампа, опубликованный СМИ, не составлялся официальными спецслужбами.

13 января, 05:00

President Elect Ambushed By The Shadow Government

Three blind mice. The FBI's James Comey, now under investigating the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who in his own words said "My fingerprints were on that national intelligence estimate." When referring to the bogus intelligence that got the United States into the Iraq War in 2002. And recently lied to Congress about every American's right to privacy from the Orwellian surveillance state. And the CIA's John Brennan, as Roger Stone put it a Saudi mole, a man who voted for the Communist party in 1976, and a Wahhabi convert. all of them loyal to the globalist Obama Administration and on their way out with nothing to lose. Three Amigos utilizing information warfare to foment order out of chaos. Question is, who is running the show here? The Compromised Intelligence Agency's Fronting for the interests of a shadow government or the duly elected President Elect Donald Trump, who as the head of the Executive Branch of our government should not be subjected to the blackmail tactics of an out of control globalist controlled media ambush. © The Alex Jones Show Copyright 1995- 2016 All Rights Reserved. Credit to videezy for backgrounds. Help us spread the word about the liberty movement, we're reaching millions help us reach millions more. Share the free live video feed link with your friends & family: http://www.infowars.com/show Follow Alex on TWITTER - https://twitter.com/RealAlexJones Like Alex on FACEBOOK - https://www.facebook.com/AlexanderEmerickJones Infowars on G+ - https://plus.google.com/+infowars/ :Web: http://www.infowars.com/ http://www.prisonplanet.com/ http://www.infowars.net/ :Subscribe and share your login with 20 friends: http://www.prisonplanet.tv http://www.InfowarsNews.com Visit http://www.InfowarsLife.com to get the products Alex Jones and his family trust, while supporting the growth of our expanding media operation. [http://bit.ly/2dhnhbS] Biome Defense™ [http://bit.ly/2bnEj91] Bio-True Selenium™ [http://bit.ly/1WYw8jp] Vitamin Mineral Fusion™ [http://bit.ly/1QYBNBv] Joint Formula™ [http://bit.ly/1nNuR3r] Anthroplex™ [http://bit.ly/1ljfWfJ] Living Defense™ [http://bit.ly/1Iobcj2] Deep Cleanse™ [http://bit.ly/1DsyQ6i] Knockout™ [http://bit.ly/1Kr1yfz] Brain Force™ [http://bit.ly/1R5gsqk] Liver Shield™ [http://bit.ly/1cOwQix] ProstaGuard™ [http://bit.ly/1mnchEz3] Child Ease™ [http://bit.ly/1xs9F6t] WinterSunD3™ [http://bit.ly/1L3gDSO] Ancient Defense™ [http://bit.ly/1EHbA6E] Secret-12™ [http://bit.ly/1txsOge] Oxy Powder™ [http://bit.ly/1s6cphV] Occu Power™ [http://bit.ly/1rGOLsG] DNA Force™ [http://bit.ly/1nIngBb] X2 Survival Shield™ [http://bit.ly/1kaXxKL] Super Female Vitality™ [http://bit.ly/1mhAKCO] Lung Cleanse™ [http://bit.ly/1mGbikx] Silver-Bullet - Colloidal Silver™ [http://bit.ly/1xcoUfo] Super Male Vitality™ [http://bit.ly/1z5BCP9] Survival Shield - Nascent Iodine™ [http://bit.ly/1o4sQtc] Patriot Blend 100% Organic Coffee™ [http://bit.ly/1iVL6HB] Immune Support 100% Organic Coffee™ All available at - http://www.infowarsshop.com/ INFOWARS HEALTH - START GETTING HEALTHY BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE - http://www.infowarshealth.com/ Newsletter Sign up / Infowars Underground Insider : http://www.infowars.com/newsletter

12 января, 23:30

BREAKING - PIZZAGATE - CIA Director Blaming Russia For Forcing CHILD PORN On American Computers

Top US spy chief says it's possible Russia could plant child porn on American computers Director of National Intelligence James Clapper made his comments during a hearing into Russian cyber attacks during the US election During the hearing, held by the Senate Intelligence Committee, Clapper said... [[ This is a content summary only. Visit http://FinanceArmageddon.blogspot.com or http://www.figanews.com/ or http://goldbasics.blogspot.com for full links, other content, and more! ]]

12 января, 20:45

Biden accuses Trump of playing 'into the Russian narrative'

The vice president calls the claims of compromising information on Trump 'unsubstantiated,' but he blasts the president-elect for disparaging the intelligence community.

12 января, 19:01

Trump denies links with Russia as he attacks the media

DONALD Trump attacked US intelligence agencies and the media at his press conference on Wednesday as he denied explosive allegations about his ties to Russia, but admitted for the first time that Moscow

12 января, 18:12

Pompeo vows to set aside politics as CIA chief

Conservative House lawmaker sounds wary about Russia as he prepares to guide America's largest spy agency.

12 января, 18:00

Топ новостей 12 января

Дайджест «Полит.ру» – подборка из десяти наиболее заметных новостей уходящего дня. Сегодня следователи отмели версию теракта на борту Ту-154, западные СМИ распространили слухи об усилении российского военного присутствия в Сирии, «пакет Яровой» вошел в десятку главных мировых угроз инновационному развитию, в США запустили законодательный процесс отмены одной из главных реформ Обамы. В Минобороны опровергли усиление группировки РФ в Сирии   БТР на аэродроме. / mil.ru Официальный представитель Минобороны России генерал-майор Игорь Конашенков назвал «пропагандистской уткой» информацию американского телеканала FoxNews о якобы увеличении военного присутствия РФ в Сирии: «В рамках плановой ротации авиатехники в состав российской авиагруппы на авиабазе Хмеймим на днях действительно вошли перелетевшие из России 4 штурмовика Су-25, оборудованные современными навигационными системами и прицельным комплексом. Попытки ряда западных СМИ "забыть" одни факты, чтобы, уцепившись за другие, кричать о якобы "увеличении военного присутствия России в Сирии" – не более чем примитивная пропагандистская "утка"». «Пакет Яровой» вошел в топ мировых угроз инновационному развитию Американский Фонд информационных технологий и инноваций (ITIF) составил список самых жестких в мире мер по защите данных, которые могут навредить инновационному развитию. В топ-10 таких мер попал пакет антитеррористических законов, внесенных депутатом Госдумы Ириной Яровой и сенатором Виктором Озеровым. Помимо так называемого «пакета Яровой» в список попала и инициатива Москвы о введении новых правил по государственным закупкам, которые запрещают покупку иностранного программного обеспечения. "Закон Яровой" назвали самой жесткой мерой по защите данных в миреhttps://t.co/ph7wIfOPhU pic.twitter.com/vmiUjF5B3r — Лентач (@oldLentach) 12 января 2017 г. Следователи не нашли признаков теракта на обломках Ту-154 Следственная группа, ведущая поиски причины гибели Ту-154 Минобороны РФ над Черным морем по пути из Сочи в Сирию, пришла к выводу о том, что теракт как версию можно окончательно исключить, сообщает осведомленный источник. Он напомнил, что теракт изначально не рассматривался как основная версия, поскольку дозаправка самолета в сочинском аэропорту была незапланированной, а кроме штатных сотрудников и должностных лиц к лайнеру на протяжении его маршрута никто не приближался. Сенат США одобрил начало процесса по отмене Obamacare   Система здравоохранения Obamacare Американский Сенат проголосовал за начало процесса по отмене реформы здравоохранения действующего президента США Барака Обамы (так называемый Obamacare). За отмену проголосовал 51 сенатор, против — 48 человек. После голосования комитеты получат соответствующие инструкции от Сената по составлению закона об отмене Obamacare. Погибший в Чечне военнослужащий Росгвардии закрыл собой командира от пули Погибший в ходе спецоперации в Чечне военнослужащий Росгвардии спас командира своей роты. «Стрелок рядовой Хамзат Хашумов находился рядом с командиром роты спецназа. Заметив, что боевик целится в командира, росгвардеец Хашумов бросился к нему и прикрыл собой. Военнослужащий погиб, спасая своего командира», — говорится в сообщении ведомства. Также в этом бою был ранен старший пулеметчик ефрейтор Бекхан Хутаев, который от полученных ранений скончался в больнице.   Дорогие друзья! Сегодня в Курчалоевском районе Чечни бесславно завершили свой жизненный путь особо опасные бандиты, входившие в террористическую организацию. Некоторое время назад нами была получена информация о том, что близкий родственник уничтоженного в 2006 году главаря террористов Исы Мускиева получил из-за границы приказ начать активные действия по созданию сети боевиков. В результате тщательно подготовленной и проведённой в условиях повышенной секретности оперативной работы удалось раскрыть всю преступную сеть, установить главарей, узнать личности пособников, выявить места хранения оружия, боеприпасов, мин, взрывчатых веществ. В назначенный час одновременно в нескольких населённых пунктах произведены задержания десятков бандитов и их сообщников. В среду вечером в ходе спецоперации оказали вооружённое сопротивление и уничтожены четверо боевиков. Один из этой группы взят живым. Одному бандиту удалось скрыться, воспользовавшись темным временем суток, густым туманом и дождливой погодой. Место его предполагаемого задержания полностью блокировано. На рассвете участники операции перейдут к активным действиям. Уверен, что бандит будет задержан или нейтрализован. К сожалению в ходе спецоперации геройски погиб один из наших боевых товарищей. Никто из числа местных жителей не пострадал, разрушений нет. Население оказывает активную поддержку участникам операции. Обстановка в районе спокойная. #Кадыров #Кадыров #Россия #Чечня Видео опубликовано Ramzan Kadyrov (@kadyrov_95) Янв 11 2017 в 12:00 PST Разведывательное сообщество США отвергло причастность к докладу о Трампе Глава Национальной разведки США Джеймс Клэппер сообщил, что обсудил с Дональдом Трампом доклад о якобы имеющемся у России компромате на избранного американского президента: «Я подчеркнул, что этот документ вышел не из разведывательного сообщества США и что я не верю в то, что утечку могло совершить это сообщество». James Clapper called me yesterday to denounce the false and fictitious report that was illegally circulated. Made up, phony facts.Too bad! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) 12 января 2017 г. — Мне чурики, я в Белом домике pic.twitter.com/LcxZXyFAaa — ЦУР (@tzurrealism) 11 января 2017 г. Смельчак Дональд Трамп компромата не боится. @Sergey_Elkin увидел ситуацию так.https://t.co/ea8LfzJwU0 pic.twitter.com/S7l9wi5Jh1 — DW (на русском) (@dw_russian) 12 января 2017 г. Минфин предложил поднять цену на водку до 219 рублей Минфин РФ предложил поднять минимальную цену на водку. Предлагается поднять цены поставки, а также закупочные и розничные цены на алкоголь. Ведомство предложило повысить стоимость водки на 15%, до 219 рублей за 0,5 литра. Сейчас минимальная розничная цена водки составляет 190 рублей за 0,5 литра. Силуанов: оснований для роста цены на водку нет.Аполитично рассуждаешь, товарищ Силуанов! https://t.co/wy069qK533 — Мысли Перзидента (@VVP2_0) 12 января 2017 г. Власти России задумались об отмене НДФЛ для зарплат ниже МРОТ Вице-премьер РФ Ольга Голодец сообщила об обсуждении в правительстве введения прогрессивной шкалы подоходного налога, а также его отмену для россиян, чья зарплата не превышает уровень минимального размера оплаты труда (МРОТ). Она считает, что такой шаг мог бы реально повысить доходы населения, которое оказалось у черты бедности. Речь идет о тез гражданах страны, кто «получает МРОТ». Россия встала с колен: 5 миллионов получают зарплату в ₽7,5 тыс в месяц https://t.co/csuZc6kM1U — Мuд Роисси (@Fake_MIDRF) 12 января 2017 г. СМИ узнали о десятикратном увеличении пени в ОСАГО Глава комитета Госдумы по финансовым рынкам Анатолий Аксаков заявил, что во втором чтении законопроект ОСАГО может получить важную поправку. Суть изменений состоит в том, что на ремонт автомобиля в рамках ОСАГО отводится 35 дней, если хозяина автомобиля не устроит качество ремонта, он может потребовать пени за каждый день в размере 600 рублей. В настоящее время пени составляет 30-60 рублей. Новогоднее оформление Москвы обошлось в 6,69 млрд рублей На праздничное новогоднее украшение Москвы столичные власти потратили в общей сложности почти 6,7 млрд рублей. На обновление праздничной иллюминации и создание декоративных фигур было проведено более 250 тендеров на сумму 6,69 млрд рублей. Сергей Собянин:Если вы знаете, как правильно и дёшево класть плитку, что ж вы такие бедные? — Усы Пескова (@Sandy_mustache) 11 января 2017 г.

12 января, 17:23

Трамп рассказал о звонке главы Нацразведки по поводу «досье с компроматом»

Дональд Трамп рассказал, что глава Национальной разведки США Джеймс Клеппер позвонил ему, чтобы осудить «ложный и недостоверный» доклад о якобы имеющемся у России компромате на избранного президента США. Об этом политик написал в своем твиттере. «Джеймс Клеппер позвонил мне вчера, чтобы осудить ложный и недостоверный доклад, который был незаконно распространен. Выдуманные, липовые факты. Очень жаль!» — написал Трамп. James Clapper called me yesterday to denounce the false and fictitious report that was illegally circulated. Made up, phony facts.Too bad! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) 12 января 2017 г. Ранее сам Джеймс Клэппер сообщил, что обсудил с Дональдом Трампом доклад о якобы имеющемся у России компромате на избранного американского президента. По его словам, в разговоре с избранным президентом он подчеркнул, что этот документ не является продуктом разведывательного сообщества США и это сообщество не виновато в его утечке. Доклад о якобы имевшихся связях избранного президента США Дональда Трампа с Россией был обнародован 11 января американскими СМИ. Он был подготовлен бывшим сотрудником разведслужбы Великобритании Кристофером Стилом. Через некоторое время СМИ рассказали, что доклад был фальшивкой.

12 января, 17:12

Exposing The Man Behind The Curtain

“When you attack a country,” John McCain, the long-serving Republican Senator from Arizona, who chairs the influential Senate Armed Services Committee, told reporters on December 30, 2016, during a visit to Ukraine, a nation locked in a quasi-Civil War with Russian-backed separatist rebels, “it’s an act of war.” McCain was referring to allegations of Russian involvement in the hacking of servers belonging to the Democratic National Committee (DNC), and the release of emails purportedly thus stolen to Wikileaks for the purpose of undermining the candidacy of Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election. “And so we have to make sure that there is a price to pay,” McCain concluded, “so that we can perhaps persuade the Russians to stop these kind of attacks on our very fundamentals of democracy.” McCain’s words echoed those of the White House, which just the day prior had published a “fact sheet” explaining its decision to expel 35 Russian diplomats and their families from the United States.  “Russia’s cyber activities were intended to influence the election, erode faith in U.S. democratic institutions, sow doubt about the integrity of our electoral process, and undermine confidence in the institutions of the U.S. government,” the “fact sheet” proclaimed.  “These actions are unacceptable and will not be tolerated.” And, as if to underscore the point, that same day the FBI and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published a 13-page “Joint Activity Report” (JAR) on what it called “Grizzly Steppe,” or malicious cyber activity by Russia “to compromise and exploit networks and endpoints associated with the US elections.” Long on allegation and short on evidence, the JAR stated that its work “expanded” upon an earlier joint statement issued by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (IDNI) and DHS on the U.S. elections, issued October 7, 2016, which made similar claims without citing any evidence that sustained the charge (note: the JAR contained a disclaimer that DHS “does not provide any warranties of any kind regarding any information contained within”.) A week later, the Obama administration continued to make its case against Russia when the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), James Clapper, released a classified Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA), “Russia’s Influence Campaign Targeting the 2016 US Presidential Election” that the President had ordered back on December 16, 2016.  Clapper briefed President Obama on its findings on Thursday, January 6, 2017 before briefing President-elect Trump and select members of the U.S. Congress on Friday, January 7, 2017. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) released an unclassified version of its ICA later that same day.  “We assess,” the unclassified ICA stated in its “key judgments” section (noting that “its conclusions were identical to those in the highly classified assessment”), “Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election.  Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency.  We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.  We have,” the unclassified ICA concluded, “high confidence in these judgments.”  The Intelligence Community, by the very nature of its work, operates in the shadows, away from the kind of public scrutiny that is a necessary function of any representative democracy. The explanation of the estimative language used in the ICA’s findings is instructive here.  “Judgments,” the ICA noted, “are not intended to imply that we have proof to show that something to be a fact.” This caution against certainty extended to the “high confidence” the ICA assigned to its stated conclusions.  “High confidence in a judgment does not imply that the assessment is a fact or certainty.” As the ICA warned, “Such judgments might be wrong.” “The intelligence community is not perfect.”  Thus spoke DNI Clapper before a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee on January 5, 2017, shortly before the ICA was released.  “We are an organization of human beings, and we’re prone sometimes to make errors.” The Intelligence Community (IC), by the very nature of its work, operates in the shadows, away from the kind of public scrutiny that is a necessary function of any representative democracy.  This is an especially resonant point, given the circumstances and subject matter of Clapper’s testimony: the assessment of the Intelligence Community on matters pertinent to the highest expression of the electoral processes that underpin American democracy – a presidential election. Errors have been made by the Intelligence Community in the past and, given the punishing reality of a fair and open society, and the scrutiny of a free press contained within, these failures have been exposed – sometimes ruthlessly so – for all the world to see.  From the reversal of the Intelligence Community’s stance on the possible military dimensions of Iran’s nuclear program, underestimating the scope and reach of the threat of the Islamic State, and the exaggeration of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, the shortcomings of the intelligence assessments and estimates conducted by the IC over the past two decades – the period spanning the careers of those who continue to provide the analysis that underpinned these highlighted erroneous conclusions and findings – the public history of the failures of the judgment of the American intelligence community is extensive and uncomplimentary. These failures are furthered when one incorporates the shortcomings of American intelligence analysis behind the failure to accurately predict the Russian actions against Georgia in 2008, the annexation of the Crimea in 2014, and the intervention in Syria in 2015 – in short, the track record of the very intelligence community that produced the ICA addressing allegations of a Russian influence campaign targeting the 2016 US Presidential election is not impressive. “I don’t think,” DNI Clapper told the Armed Services Committee on January 5, 2017, “the intelligence community gets the credit it’s due for what it does day in and day out to keep this nation safe and secure.”  The Director then continued: “You only need walk into the lobby of CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) and look at the stars on the wall or the front lobby of NSA (National Security Agency) and the number of intelligence people that have paid the ultimate price in the service of their country.” There are 117 stars carved into the white marble surface of the CIA’s Memorial Wall; another 176 names are etched into the polished black granite of the NSA’s Memorial Wall.  The majority of the CIA names are those of paramilitary officers, killed under combat-like circumstances; the same can be said for the military and civilian cryptologists listed by the NSA – most met their fate flying classified intelligence collection missions during the Cold War, manning listening stations during the Vietnam War, or – in the largest single incident resulting in loss of the life of NSA personnel (34) – onboard the USS Liberty when it was attacked by Israel in 1966. Conflating the sacrifice of the heroes on these two memorials with the analysts who are responsible for some of the greatest intelligence failures in American history denigrates the service of those who died in the service of the United States.  It is also part and parcel of an overall policy of politicization and obfuscation that has surrounded the allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. Not a single NSA operator, FBI Special Agent, or CIA analyst died – or had their life placed in danger – because of the alleged Russian cyber activity, or the investigations carried out by American intelligence and law enforcement officials and agencies in response to the same.  Conflation and exaggeration, however, have been the hallmark of the Obama administration’s response to allegations of Russian interference in the presidential election process. One of the most glaring examples of this is the singling out by the Intelligence Community of the leadership of Russia for directing the alleged cyber attacks on the U.S. elections, without citing any evidence to underpin that conclusion, and the decision of the White House to expel 35 Russian diplomats, inclusive of several described as serving Russian intelligence officers, in response to the cyber attacks on the DNC. The Russian diplomats were kicked out of the country void of any mention of specific evidence linking the diplomats to the illicit cyber activities in question.  By conflating the two events (the expulsion of the diplomats and the release of the joint FBI/DHS “Grizzly Steppe” Joint Activity Report occurred on the same day – December 29, 2016), the Obama administration made a conscious and concerted effort to create and reinforce perceptions designed to link Russian intelligence services and the cyber attacks against the DNC where no evidence exists – at least none that has been released publicly.  Even more disturbing – especially within the context of a nation that holds freedom of speech and a free press in such high regard – is the conflation made in the intelligence community’s assessment of the activities of Russian “state-controlled” media outlets, in particular the content of specific programming critical of American democratic processes and specific candidates for office, with accusations that Russia was behind the theft and subsequent publication of information that proved embarrassing, and damaging, to the Democratic Party and its candidate for President, Hillary Clinton. Two issues emerge from this act.  First, in the minds of the U.S. Intelligence Community (as expressed through its Russian assessment), form appears to trump substance, in so far as the source of information seems to negate whether or not the information is accurate.  This is a particularly telling theme in the present matter, where the question of how the information stolen from the DNC and John Podesta came into the possession of Wikileaks seems to have taken priority over the accuracy and content of that information, and the tangential notion that the American public, when exposed to accurate information pertinent to decisions necessary in an electoral process, has somehow been “manipulated.” The very act of being skeptical, however, is difficult in an environment where the intelligence is sold as virtually unimpeachable. And, given the role that the leaking of unsubstantiated classified information from anonymous government sources to the American media has played in underpinning the public arguments made by the Intelligence Community on the Russian role in the cyber attacks on the DNC, the irony behind the ICA findings about the role of Russian media in shaping American public opinion is palpable. Second, and perhaps more important, is the chilling effect the conflation of being critical of a source and questioning the veracity of what has been reported has on the very act of skeptical inquisition that marks a free society’s relationship with its public servants.  Efforts have been made to link any person or entity that takes a critical approach to the issue of Russian involvement in the U.S. election process as somehow being an agent – witting or otherwise – of Russia (a November 24, 2016 Washington Post story – “Russian propaganda effort helped spread ‘fake news’ during election, experts say” –serves as a case in point; again, the irony that this report appeared in the same paper that served as the primary conduit for anonymously sourced leaked intelligence information sustaining both the Intelligence Community and Obama administration’s case against Russia should be lost on no one.) Somehow, however, the act of questioning whether the intelligence community got it right on the Russian ICA has been turned into an act of denigration.  “There’s a difference between skepticism and disparagement,” DNI Clapper told the Armed Services Committee, after being asked by Senator Claire McCaskill about the “trashing of the intelligence community.” The very act of being skeptical, however, is difficult in an environment where the intelligence is sold as virtually unimpeachable.  In response to a question by Senator McCain asking if the intelligence community stood by its assertions in its October 7, 2016 statement that it was confident the Russian government directed the thefts and disclosures of information, and that these actions were intended to interfere in the Presidential election, DNI Clapper responded that “We stand, actually more resolutely on the strength of that statement than we did on the 7th of October.” “We have 17 intelligence agencies, civilian and military, who have all concluded that these espionage attacks, these cyberattacks, come from the highest levels of the Kremlin, and they are designed to influence our election.”  This statement was false when it was made by Hillary Clinton, on October 9, 2016, referring to the aforementioned October 7 joint statement by DHS and the ODNI; as was the case for the Russian ICA, the joint statement drew upon only three of the 16 agencies (the 17th is the ODNI, which is a coordinating body, not a separate intelligence agency), the only intelligence agencies involved in crafting the underlying assessments and judgments were the FBI, CIA and NSA. When one dissects the nuts and bolts that hold the Russian ICA together, the framework is actually quite weak.  The FBI, the sole agency responsible for intelligence derived from a domestic source (i.e., the DNC server and John Podesta) has acknowledged that it has had no direct access to the servers involved, and was compelled to carry out its investigation based upon the technical report of a private cyber security company, Crowdstrike, brought in by the DNC in April 2016. Rather than sharing the technical details of the cyber intrusion with the National Cyber Communications Integration Center (NCCIC), as is the norm, the DNC ordered Crowdstrike to instead share its report with the Washington Post, which wrote a front-page story on June 14, 2016 that reported, as fact, the assertions by Crowdstrike that Russian intelligence was behind the cyber attacks on the DNC.  Both the FBI and NSA are reported to have been tracking intrusions into the DNC server dating back to July 2015.  But, as the Crowdstrike information confirms, these cyber events were associated with known cyber activity known as Advanced Persistent Threat (APT) 29, which Crowdstrike subsequently named “Fancy Bear.” The NSA reportedly briefed select Congressional leaders about the APT 29 activity as early as July 2015, but insisted that this information remain closely held in order to protect an ongoing intelligence collection effort designed to trace the cyber intrusion back to its source. While the NSA and the FBI were deeply involved in monitoring the APT 29 intrusion, however, another intrusion is alleged to have taken place, this time by a separate cyber activity known as APT 28, or “Cozy Bear.”  The Crowdstrike technical findings, as reported by the Washington Post, associate APT 28/”Cozy Bear” with the Russian military’s Main Intelligence Directorate, or GRU.  There is good reason to believe that Crowdstrike is the only source of information about the APT 28/”Cozy Bear” intrusion; even after information from the DNC was made public by Wikileaks, no action was taken to alert John Podesta that his personal emails had been stolen.  This indicates that neither the FBI nor NSA were aware of that particular intrusion; the FBI didn’t interview Mr. Podesta about the breach until October 9, 2016 – two days after the initial batch of his personal emails was published by Wikileaks.)  This reinforces the notion that the specific attribution of the Russian GRU to the DNC cyber intrusion is solely the product of a private cyber security firm on the payroll of the DNC, and not the FBI or NSA. DNI Clapper, in his testimony of January 10, 2017 before the Senate Select Intelligence Committee, noted that cyber intrusions like that which occurred at the DNC leave a trail that can be followed, and that this was precisely what had happened in this case.  While DNI Clapper declined to discuss the specific tradecraft involved in “following the cyber trail”, Edward Snowden, the NSA contractor-turned-whistleblower who leaked thousands of highly classified documents to news outlets in 2013, has shed some insight into the possible sources and methods relied upon by the NSA to trace the July 2015 cyber attack on the DNC server back to Russia.  Snowden highlighted one NSA analytical tool in particular – Xkeyscore, as being extremely useful in tracking the identity of hackers.  “Even if the attackers try to obfuscate origins,” Snowden tweeted, “#XKeyscore makes following exfiltrated data easy.” According to the documents released by Snowden, the real-time detection and monitoring capability of XKeyscore would have allowed the NSA to trace the cyber attack detected on the DNC server back to specific command and control servers, the electronic communications associated with those servers, and identify the specific keyboard type used to create the code and related electronic communications between the hacker and the malware that was imbedded in the DNC’s system.  XKeyscore would have allowed the NSA to attribute the cyber intrusion of the DNC server to APT 29 (and even APT 28, if they were able to track that intrusion as well.) APT 28/”Cozy Bear” and APT 29/”Fancy Bear” represent cyber tools and methodologies, not individuals or groups.  Their affiliation into quantifiable entities is a byproduct of analysis carried out by government and non-government cyber security players who have detected, over time, patterns of related activity that lent themselves to specific, if somewhat nebulous, attribution.  The specific linkage between these cyber activities and the intelligence services of Russia are a matter of speculation based upon analysis of the countries and institutions targeted by actors using these tools and methodologies, and forensic examination of the malware involved that suggests a Russian origin. But there is no specific proof. Crowdstrike attributes its claims that Russian intelligence was behind the DNC cyber intrusion to a report by the German domestic intelligence service (BfV) about a cyber attack on the German Parliament in 2015. “Many of these attack campaigns,” the German report, published in January 2016, noted, “have technical similarities, such as malicious software families, and infrastructure  ― these  are important indicators of the same authorship. It is assumed that both the Russian domestic intelligence service FSB and the military foreign intelligence service GRU run cyber operations.”  Assumed, not known. One must keep in mind the fact that the German BfV was using XKeyscore at the time to track the parties who launched the cyber attack against the German Parliament; the best they could do was come up with an assumption. The attributions made in the ICA to the Russian intelligence services regarding the cyber attacks on the DNC server, and others, are not as solid as DNI Clapper has led his audience to believe.  Neither is the element of intent.  There have been reports in the media of intercepted Russian communications, and Clapper himself informed the Senate Select Intelligence Community on January 10, 2017 that the ICA also made use of human sources.  But there is no “smoking gun” that specifically links President Putin, as claimed in the ICA, to the theft of the emails from the DNC and John Podesta, and the release of these emails to Wikileaks and other outlets; the attribution is purely the result of analysis on the part of those who prepared the ICA. In the intelligence business, there is no higher crime than the politicization of intelligence (save perhaps the outright falsification of data with the intent to mislead – itself a politicized act.)  Former CIA Director Robert Gates addressed the problem of politicized intelligence back in 1992, and his words resonate today.  Gates defined the politicization of intelligence as the deliberate distortion of “analysis or judgments to favor a preferred line of thinking irrespective of evidence,” usually occurring when intelligence products “are forced to conform to policymaker’s views.” Director Gates noted that it was proper for policymakers, such as the President of the United States and Congress, to request specific intelligence products that address issues of importance to them.  This was the bread and butter of the intelligence business.  However, Gates said, it would be improper for a policymaker to dictate the “line of march” that he or she expected the analysis contained in any such requested product to take.  On December 9, 2016, President Obama ordered the intelligence community to conduct a thorough review of the Russian cyber interference into the U.S. presidential election of 2016.  One of the critical issues to be addressed in the review was whether or not the intent of any Russian intervention was to tilt the election in favor of one candidate – Donald Trump – over another – Hillary Clinton. “This happened at the highest levels of the Russian government,” Obama announced on December 16, 2016 – perhaps the clearest example of the senior-most policy maker dictating the “line of march” expected from the analysis underpinning the requested intelligence assessment. The ICA, by its own admission, contains no “fact,” but rather a series of assessments based upon analysis derived from unknown sources.  The Russian hacking case, as presented in the ICA, isn’t about fact, but rather public opinion.  The declassified ICA was not produced for the benefit of the President or Congress – they already had their classified briefings, and were aware of the conclusions.  The declassified ICA was produced for public consumption, designed from the start to sway public opinion in a manner that influenced the composition of the cabinet, and policies of the administration, of President-elect Donald Trump.  In this light, the release of the declassified ICA was, in every sense of the word, a political act, with the intelligence contained therein, by definition, politicized. It was interesting to note that DNI Clapper told the Senate Select Intelligence Committee, in open session on January 10, 2016, that the State Department, in particular its Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) was excluded from participating in the preparation of the classified ICA because of “sensitivity of sources.”  This seems to be a unique circumstance, as the Senator who asked the question noted; INR analysts possess the highest level of security clearances that grant them access to a broad range of highly classified sources of intelligence. The implication inherent in DNI Clapper’s revelation is that the classified information relied upon by the Intelligence Community was so specific as to its nature, and so critical and central to the judgments made in the ICA, that it could not be worked around to the extent necessary to shield its specific source from the analysts in the INR.  This exclusion, however, would cut across the entire intelligence community, given the “need to know” caveats attached to most, if not all, sensitive information of this nature.  If this was, indeed, the standard applied, then it would also exclude from participation in preparation of the ICA many of the CIA’s own analysts, and most, if not all, of the academics recruited to fill positions within the National Intelligence Council, the arm of the ODNI responsible for overseeing the production of multi-agency assessments like the ICA on Russian involvement in the 2016 presidential election. If DNI Clapper is telling the truth, then the ICA was prepared in a manner that violated the very tradecraft regarding the preparation of intelligence community analytical products he proudly cited to underpin the credibility of the ICA.  It also implies that the intelligence community was comfortable with excluding from one of the most important assessments of Russian intent in modern times the very agency, the Department of State, that deals with the Russians on a broad spectrum of issues on a daily basis, and as such would be ideally positioned to weigh in on issues such as Russian intent – especially that of its leader, Vladimir Putin. DNI Clapper’s testimony on the lack of INR participation brings to mind his infamous testimony before the very same Senate Select Intelligence Committee, on March 12, 2013, when asked about the existence of a classified intelligence collection program.  Rather than declining to comment on the question, Clapper responded simply, “No.”  Subsequent disclosures by Edward Snowden showed that Clapper had lied.  When confronted with this lie, Clapper explained that he “responded in what I thought was the most truthful, or the least untruthful manner.” The exclusion of the State Department’s intelligence bureau (historically one of the most insightful and inquisitive members of the Intelligence Communities whose questioning of what otherwise would be consensus opinion is more often than not proven correct – witness the INR footnotes in the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction) should serve as a red flag for Congressional intelligence oversight committees.  The Senate Select Intelligence Committee has already established a select group to investigate the intelligence sources used to underpin the ICA; DNU Clapper has promised to support their work. More important, at least from the perspective of the American public, is the request made by the Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Devin Nunes.  In a letter dated December 12, 2016, Chairman Nunes requested DNI Clapper to have the Office of Analytic Integrity and Standards prepare, for release to the committee, an analytic and tradecraft review of any Intelligence Community assessments related to alleged Russian involvement in cyber activities related to the U.S. presidential election.  Such an inquiry would delve into the very processes of analysis and assessment, and answer the kind of “who said what, when, and based on what information” questions that would expose any potential politicization of intelligence that may have occurred in the production of the ICA. In the closing scenes of the classic 1939 movie, “The Wizard of Oz”, Dorothy, played by Judy Garland, confronts the “Wizard,” a giant talking head. “The Great Oz has spoken!” the giant talking head proclaims. But one of Dorothy’s companions pulls back a curtain next to the giant head, revealing a short pudgy man manipulating a contraption, and speaking into a microphone.  The man – the “Wizard of Oz” – sees Dorothy as he speaks.  “Oh…I…Pay no…attention to that man behind the curtain.  The…Great…Oz…has spoken!” The ICA on Russian influence operations in the 2016 U.S. presidential election has been published, at least in unclassified form.  There is a concerted effort by the White House, many members of Congress, and a surprisingly unquestioning American media to accept the ICA and its judgments at face value. DNI Clapper has spoken, not once, but several times.  It is imperative that Representative Nunes follows through on his request for an analytic and tradecraft review of the ICA, especially when the ICA delves into matters that have been classified by Senator John McCain and others as constituting “an act of war.” America has a right to know the truth about the man behind the curtain. Scott Ritter served as an intelligence officer in the U.S. Marines from 1984-1995, specializing in arms control and disarmament in both the former Soviet Union and Iraq.  He is the author of numerous books, including the Deal of the Century: How Iran Blocked the West’s Road to War, to be published in March 2017 by Clarity Press. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

12 января, 17:01

Разведка США осудила публикацию компромата на Дональда Трампа

Директор Национальной разведки США Джеймс Клеппер в ходе телефонной беседы с Дональдом Трампом выступил с осуждением опубликованных сообщений о компрометирующих материалах, касающихся избранного главы государства.

12 января, 16:25

Spy chief's move for Trump detente is derailed, via tweet

The president-elect provides a very different readout of his call with James Clapper in a move that one former CIA official calls a ‘hardening of positions.’

01 октября 2014, 00:30

«Исламское государство» — проект американского происхождения

Подняв флаг борьбы с «Исламским государством» (ИГ), США наносят теперь авиаудары по позициям ИГ не только в Ираке, но и в Сирии. Делается это без согласия правительства Сирии и без принятия соответствующего решения Советом Безопасности ООН. Начинают оправдываться опасения Москвы и Тегерана на тот счёт, что целью ракетно-бомбовых ударов является окончательное уничтожение сирийской инфраструктуры. По заявлению представителя Пентагона Джона Кирби, США нанесли авиаудары по 12 нефтеперерабатывающим заводам в Сирии. Якобы их контролировали боевики-экстремисты. Таких атак по позициям ИГ, говорит Джон Кирби, «будет больше». Здесь следует напомнить, что мятеж в Сирии, продолжающийся четвёртый год, стал разрастаться практически синхронно с подписанием 25 июня 2011 г. в Бушере меморандума о строительстве нового газопровода Иран – Ирак – Сирия. Борьбу американцев с правительством Башара Асада справедливо называют войной за нефть и газ. Дамаск попал в число врагов Америки в 2009 году, когда Асад отказался принять американский план строительства газопровода из Катара в Европу. Вместо этого Сирия предпочла сделку с Ираном, дав согласие на участие в строительстве газопровода через Ирак к своим портам на Средиземном море. Именно тогда всемирную известность приобрели слова бывшего госсекретаря США Генри Киссинджера: «Нефть слишком важна, чтобы оставлять ее арабам». Создание халифата на обширной территории Ирака и Сирии ведет к потере Соединенными Штатами (ExxonMobil Corporation) и Великобританией (BP и Royal Dutch Shell) позиций в нефтегазовом секторе Ирака и возможности доступа (после приближаемой американцами смены режима в Дамаске) к сирийским запасам углеводородов. Пока террористы ИГ воевали с сирийскими правительственными войсками, они американцев устраивали, но как только они вторглись в Ирак и объявили о создании собственного государства, Америка объявила им войну. Никаких двойных стандартов у США здесь нет. Налицо неизменное стремление американской элиты к мировому господству, и война с «Исламским государством» – всего лишь локальная операция. В позиции США много нестыковок и противоречий, а объясняются они тем, что Вашингтону всё труднее диктовать свои условия остальному миру. Нет сомнения в том, что Сирия остается для США главной мишенью на Ближнем Востоке, в том числе с точки зрения реализации планов по ослаблению России. «Исламское государство» — это проект американского происхождения, его цель — создание мощной дестабилизирующей волны, которая распространится вглубь Евразии. На первом этапе, переключая внимание международного сообщества на борьбу с ИГ, американцы подготавливают под шумок свержение президента Башара Асада. Именно так оценивают односторонние действия Вашингтона против «Исламского государства» многие страны мира. Поэтому не получилось у Обамы и формирование «широкой» коалиции. Американцам удалось добиться возмещения своих расходов монархиями Персидского залива (Бахрейн, Катар, Саудовская Аравия и ОАЭ), удалось склонить Иорданию предоставить свою инфраструктуру, привлечь к нанесению авиаударов некоторых союзников по НАТО - Великобританию, Францию, Бельгию и Данию. По данным Госдепартамента, 54 страны и три международные организации - ЕС, НАТО и Лига арабских государств – тоже обещали внести в эту кампанию свой вклад. Однако анонсированное Джоном Керри «всемирное» участие в коалиции не состоялось. Доверие к Америке осталось лишь у немногих. Мир еще не забыл, как в 2003 году США вторглись в Ирак без санкции ООН. Вашингтон тогда заявлял, что Ирак ведёт разработки оружия массового поражения и разоружить его нужно силой. Голосование в СБ ООН по этому вопросу так и не состоялось, поскольку Россия, Китай и Франция дали понять, что наложат вето на любой проект резолюции, подразумевающий применение военной силы против Ирака. Тогда, как и сейчас, США вызывающе пренебрегли международным общественным мнением, агрессия против Ирака началась, страна была разрушена, и последствия этого мы наблюдаем по сей день. Сегодня история повторяется. Джеймс Клеппер, глава Национальной разведки США, во время своего ежегодного выступления перед сенатской комиссией по разведке (29 января 2014) отчитался в угрозах, нависших над Америкой. Коснулся он и Сирии, сообщив ничему не соответствующие данные о составе «повстанцев». Его главный тезис состоял в том, что на 80% это «умеренные» противники режима, которые вполне могут принимать финансовую помощь США, за предоставление которой американский сенат в свое время тайно проголосовал. Теперь эти «умеренные» в одночасье превратились в непримиримых террористов, и против одной из их организаций американцы начали войну. Заметим: не против террористов вообще, а лишь против «Исламского государства». Интересно, а что думают руководители американской разведки об «умеренности» группировки «Джебхат ан-Нусра», этого сирийского отделения «Аль-Каиды»? В ответ на авиаудары по территории Сирии лидеры «Джебхат ан-Нусра» уже заявили о готовности противостоять Америке совместно с ИГ. Своими действиями американцы консолидируют терроризм. В эфире телеканала CBS Обама заявил, что в свое время американским военным удалось нанести поражение «Аль-Каиде» в Ираке, после чего организация «ушла в подполье», но «за последние два года, воспользовавшись хаосом во время гражданской войны в Сирии, боевики смогли восстановить свои силы». О том, что хаос и гражданская война в Сирии - прямое следствие действий США на Ближнем Востоке, американский президент не сказал. Председатель Объединенного комитета начальников штабов США генерал Мартин Демпси считает, что для успешной борьбы с группировкой «Исламское государство» в Ираке и Сирии необходимо провести наземную операцию. По мнению Демпси, нужно принять политическое решение и ввести войска в эти страны. Если это произойдёт, дестабилизирующая волна начнёт распространяться за пределы Сирии и Ирака, ряды террористов пополнятся новыми непримиримыми бойцами, а перед военно-промышленным комплексом США откроются захватывающие дух перспективы.