• Теги
    • избранные теги
    • Люди1195
      • Показать ещё
      Страны / Регионы715
      • Показать ещё
      • Показать ещё
      Международные организации113
      • Показать ещё
      • Показать ещё
      • Показать ещё
Джеймс Клеппер
21 июня, 21:18

Former DHS Secretary: Russian Intrusion In The 2016 Election Is 'A Fact, Plain And Simple'

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); WASHINGTON ― The Obama administration’s top homeland security official warned on Wednesday that Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election was far more advanced than previously reported. Former Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson lamented that there was not enough public awareness and urgency on the issue, while defending the former administration’s reticence to publicly discuss the information in the months leading up to the election. “In 2016, the Russian government, at the direction of Vladimir Putin himself, orchestrated cyberattacks on our nation for the purpose of influencing our election. That is a fact, plain and simple,” Johnson said, testifying before the House Intelligence committee, which is conducting one of several investigations into Russian meddling in last year’s election. Echoing the testimonies of other government officials, Johnson warned that Russian interference would continue, urging congressional leaders and members of President Donald Trump’s administration to prioritize cybersecurity and take steps to prevent further intrusions into U.S. elections. Yet Trump, whose campaign is under investigation for potentially colluding with Russian officials, has maintained that reports of Russian interference were “fake news.” Attorney General Jeff Sessions, the nation’s top law enforcement official, testified before the Senate last week that he had never received or asked for a briefing on the issue. Johnson also said during his testimony that the Democratic National Committee refused the Department of Homeland Security’s attempts to help them with security precautions, after hackers obtained and released DNC emails last July. “I recall very clearly that I was not pleased that we were not in there helping them patch this vulnerability,” he said.  Members of the House panel repeatedly pressed Johnson on why the Obama administration was slow to go public with their reports on Russia’s role in the cyberattacks. Johnson defended the former administration’s cautious approach, for fear of “injecting ourselves into a very heated campaign,” he said. Without referring to Trump directly, Johnson noted that in particular, “one of the candidates, as you recall, was predicting that the election was going to be ‘rigged’ in some way.” But Johnson said that he had raised the issue with other intelligence officials and with state election officials over several months. And when he and James Clapper, then the director of national intelligence, released a public statement about the matter on Oct. 7, Johnson said that the public and the media largely ignored it. “It did not get the attention it should have” because it came on the same day as the bombshell tape of Trump bragging about sexual assault, he said. Much of the problem in the administration’s inadequate response was that the sophistication of the Russian interference was “unprecedented,” he said, particularly their ability to “dump information into the public space to influence the election.”    “No one knew how far the Russians were going to go,” Johnson said, adding that “in retrospect, I should have bought a sleeping bag and camped out in front of the DNC.” While Johnson testified that he had no evidence suggesting the Russians directly altered votes, he was still deeply concerned and had made the issue “a top priority” during his time at the DHS. “We were pushing information out the door to everybody,” he said. Johnson testified that throughout the early fall, he had offered cybersecurity support to state election officials, but some ignored the DHS’ warnings. When asked for his recommendations, Johnson said that the onus was on state election officials to adopt greater cybersecurity protections and suggested grants to fund them. Johnson’s warnings of future Russian interference echoed those of fired FBI director James Comey, who told the Senate intelligence committee earlier this month that the issue was “about as unfake as you can possibly get” — a clear reference to Trump’s claim that it was “fake news.” Johnson on Wednesday shed light on his working relationship with Comey, describing Comey as “the cop, and I am the fireman,” referring to the FBI’s role in identifying threats and the DHS’s role in “patching vulnerabilities, detecting bad actors in the system.” But he did criticize the delay in communication about the DNC hack between the FBI and DHS, noting that “there were glitches, instances where we did not communicate as effectively as we could have.” -- 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.

19 июня, 13:00

Зачем говорят о русских хакерах

Почему считается — «теорией заговора» полагать, что недовольный сотрудник Национального комитета Демократической партии передал «Викиликс» их электронные письма, но считать, что они были предоставлены Россией — никак не теория заговора? Почему? Какой сценарий вероятнее — что рассерженный сотрудник передал наносящие ущерб письма, чтобы ввести своих начальников в замешательство или что иностранное правительство взломало компьютеры Национального […]

16 июня, 18:24

Procrastinating on June 16, 2017

**Over at [Equitable Growth](http://EquitableGrowth.org): Must- and Should-Reads:** * **Brad DeLong** (2007): Tom Grubisich Is One Unhappy Camper: "Tom Grubisich... a former _Washington Post_ reporter and editor [says]... * **Kavya Vaghul**: Conservation easements and tax policies in the United States: "Deductions for conservation easement donations are taken by taxpayers in states that have small shares of conserved land... * **Bridget Ansel**: A research roundup on unpredictable schedules in the United States: "For Americans with a 9-to-5 job, it can be hard to imagine the life of a worker with an unpredictable, constantly shifting schedule... * **Janet Yellen and Nancy Marchall Genzer**: Janet Yellen Interested in Reevaluating 2% : "Nancy Marchall Genzer, Marketplace: 'Recently, a group of economists sent the Fed a letter... * **Lawrence Summers**: 5 reasons the Fed may be making a mistake : "The... paradigm... is highly problematic. Much better would be a “shoot only when you see the whites of the eyes of inflation” paradigm... * **David Cutler and Emily Gee**: Coverage Losses Under the ACA Repeal Bill for Congressional Districts in All States: "Within a decade, on average, an additional 55,000 more individuals in each congressional district, or nearly 8 percent... would lack coverage... * **Dodge Cahan...

Выбор редакции
15 июня, 20:00

DON’T LISTEN TO CLAPPER, HE’S A HACK: James Clapper Says Nerd Magic Can Solve Terrorist Content Fil…

DON’T LISTEN TO CLAPPER, HE’S A HACK: James Clapper Says Nerd Magic Can Solve Terrorist Content Filtering, Create Safe Encryption Backdoors. Nothing that’s happened in the last several years suggests that we can trust these people to do their jobs competently or honestly.

13 июня, 19:01

Jailed US student released by North Korea

NORTH Korea has released Otto Warmbier, an American serving a 15-year prison term with hard labor for alleged anti-state acts, US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said yesterday. The announcement came

08 июня, 18:00

Кто украл письма Хиллари?

Почему считается — «теорией заговора» полагать, что недовольный сотрудник Национального комитета Демократической партии передал «Викиликс» их электронные письма, но считать, что они были предоставлены Россией — никак не теория заговора? Почему? Какой сценарий вероятнее — что рассерженный сотрудник передал наносящие ущерб письма, чтобы ввести своих начальников в замешательство или что иностранное правительство взломало компьютеры Национального […]

07 июня, 21:54

James Comey's Opening Statement on Trump, Annotated

The former FBI director is testifying Thursday before the Senate Intelligence Committee on his interactions and conversations with the president.

Выбор редакции
07 июня, 17:18

Former intel chief: Trump asked me to 'publicly refute the infamous dossier, which I could not and would not do'

James Clapper, the former director of national intelligence, said Wednesday that President Donald...

Выбор редакции
07 июня, 15:54

Trump-Russia probe 'bigger than Watergate' says Clapper

Watergate pales into comparison with the Trump-Russia story, says ex-intelligence chief James Clapper.

Выбор редакции
07 июня, 15:37

Watergate 'pales' beside Trump-Russia allegations - James Clapper

The ex-US director of national intelligence spoke before former FBI chief James Comey's testimony.

07 июня, 14:29

Wednesday's Morning Email: ISIS Claims Responsibility For Dual Iran Attacks

TOP STORIES (And want to get The Morning Email each weekday? Sign up here.) GUNMEN LAUNCH SIMULTANEOUS ATTACKS ON IRANIAN PARLIAMENT AND MAUSOLEUM “Attackers raided Iran’s parliament and set off a suicide bomb at the Mausoleum of Ayatollah Khomeini in Tehran on Wednesday, killing up to seven people in a twin assault at the heart of the Islamic Republic, Iranian media reported.” The Islamic State has reportedly claimed responsibility for the attacks, which would be the first time ISIS has struck inside Iran’s borders. [Reuters] IN QATAR CRISIS, TRUMP SHOWS DISREGARD FOR ALLIES President Donald Trump tweeted support for the condemnation of Qatar by several of its Middle Eastern neighbors. Qatar is a longtime U.S. ally and home to a major U.S. military base, and the Pentagon isalready distancing itself from the president’s remarks. [HuffPost] ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFF SESSIONS REPORTEDLY OFFERED TO RESIGN Amid growing tensions with President Trump over his recusal from the Russia probe. Trump reportedly rejected the idea, but White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer refused to answer a question about whether Trump still had faith in Sessions Tuesday. [HuffPost] COMEY TO SESSIONS: DON’T LEAVE ME ALONE WITH TRUMP Former FBI Director James Comey reportedly confronted Sessions to ask for a guarantee he wouldn’t be left alone with the president. And The Washington Post is reporting that Trump asked the Director of National Intelligence, Daniel Coats, to urge Comey to drop the Flynn investigation. [NYT] SENATE REPUBLICANS CLOSER TO REPEALING OBAMACARE They lack the actual replacement bill yet, but are nearing a “proposal to whip and to take to the floor.” [HuffPost] NSA WHISTLEBLOWER’S PARENTS: WE FEAR FOR HER SAFETY “My biggest fear in all of this is that she’s not going to get a fair trial, she’s not going to be treated fairly, she’s going to be made an example of,” Billie Winner-Davis, Reality Winner’s mother said. And here’swhat we know about Winner. [HuffPost] TRUMP MAY LIVE-TWEET COMEY’S TESTIMONY THURSDAY We can only hope. [HuffPost] WHAT’S BREWING ‘THE BREXITER TOWN AT THE WORLD’S END’ “Tilbury is the most storied town you’ve never heard of. Some of Britain’s greatest historical milestones unfolded here. ... But Tilbury is also a community, and right now that community is in the middle of a quiet but devastating revolt.” [HuffPost] UBER REPORTEDLY FIRED 20 AFTER SEXUAL HARASSMENT PROBE After 215 HR claims. [HuffPost] GEORGE AND AMAL CLOONEY WELCOMED THEIR TWINS The couple said in a statement: “Ella, Alexander and Amal are all healthy, happy and doing fine. George is sedated and should recover in a few days.” [HuffPost] ENJOY THIS PHOTO OF BARACK OBAMA AND JUSTIN TRUDEAU HAVING A CASUAL DINNER And imagine an alternate universe while you’re at it. [HuffPost] THE 8 THINGS ER PHYSICIANS REFUSE TO KEEP IN THEIR HOUSE Yes, trampolines are included. [HuffPost] WE LOVE THESE RECYCLED CHOPSTICKS TURNED INTO HOME DECOR The detailing is amazing. [HuffPost] BEFORE YOU GO The U.S.-backed force launched the battle to capture Raqqa, Syria’s de facto capital, Tuesday. This Forbes investigation looks into how a Trump fundraiser for kids with cancer ended in reported payments to Trump properties. The EPA is looking into whether an agency staffer colluded with Monsanto. Eric Trump: Some of the folks who oppose my father “are not even people.” A man was shot outside of Notre Dame in Paris after attacking police officers with a hammer. Former National Intelligence Director James Clapper said Watergate”pales” in comparison to current events. Congrats to Scooter Gennett, who hit four home runs in a single game Tuesday. Just wish it hadn’t been against the St. Louis Cardinals... Somehow fanny packs are back in style. Even Gwyneth Paltrow is confused by these GOOP recommendations. People cannot get over how self-absorbed this best man was. Did you know there was a “Melania Trump tour” in Slovenia? The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board doesn’t have any time for Trump’s tweets. The difference between cilantro and coriander. And Ed Sheeran’s “Carpool Karaoke” with James Corden is everything we wanted it to be. -- 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.

07 июня, 14:13

Ex-intel chief Clapper: Watergate 'pales' compared to Russia probes

The Watergate scandal that led to the resignation of former President Richard Nixon “pales” in comparison to the ongoing Russia investigations that have besieged the current White House, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told reporters in Australia on Wednesday."I think if you compare the two that Watergate pales, really, in my view, compared to what we're confronting now," Clapper said Wednesday, according to a report from Reuters.Clapper, who served as director of national intelligence under former President Barack Obama, has been relatively outspoken on the issue of the Russia investigations, testifying before Congress and appearing on political television programs. He has disputed President Donald Trump’s notion that the investigations, including one each in the Senate and House intelligence committees and another under the direction of special prosecutor Robert Mueller, amount to a “witch hunt.”Clapper said it was “inexplicable” that Trump has maintained a relatively warm stance towards the Russian government despite evidence that the Kremlin sought to interfere in last year’s presidential election, an assessment that has the backing of all 17 intelligence agencies. The president’s reported decision to share highly-sensitive information with two top Russian diplomats reflects “either ignorance or disrespect, and either is very problematic,” Clapper said.

07 июня, 12:23

James Clapper: 'Watergate Pales' In Comparison To Russia Scandal

As the public learns more about the investigation into President Donald Trump’s campaign and Russia, politicians and media figures have begun to liken the scandal to Watergate. But former National Intelligence Director James Clapper took the comparison a step further. “I lived through Watergate,” he said. “It was a scary time.... I have to say, though, I think you compare the two that Watergate pales really in my view compared to what we’re confronting now.” Clapper was addressing Australia’s National Press Club in Canberra on Wednesday local time. Former spy-chief James Clapper: Watergate pales compared 'to what we are confronting now' #NPC MORE: https://t.co/2ewRSM4WqL pic.twitter.com/NFUJM3Dzfm— Sky News Australia (@SkyNewsAust) June 7, 2017 The former spy chief has been critical of Trump in the past, hitting back at the commander in chief’s claim that former President Barack Obama’s administration spied on his campaign. Trump has been unable to provide any proof that such surveillance occurred. Clapper also took issue with Trump’s attacks on U.S. intelligence agencies, calling the president’s decision to fire FBI director James Comey “egregious and inexcusable.” “I am very concerned about the assault on our institutions coming from both an external source ― read Russia ― and an internal source, the President himself,” Clapper said, according to a transcript of his speech. “Russia embarked on a campaign to interfere with our presidential election which was unprecedented in its directness and aggressiveness.” Comey, who was leading the investigation into the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia, is due to testify in front of the Senate intelligence committee on Thursday. -- 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.

07 июня, 08:54

James Clapper says Watergate 'pales' in comparison with Trump Russia scandal

Former US spy chief attacks the sharing of intelligence with Putin and says firing of James Comey ‘inexcusable’The former US director of national intelligence James Clapper says events in Washington now are more serious than the Watergate scandal of the 1970s, and that it is imperative investigators get to the bottom of the Trump administration’s links with the Putin regime.Clapper used a speech to Australia’s National Press Club on Wednesday to launch a critique of the US president, Donald Trump, describing his decision to cultivate Russia and share intelligence with the Putin regime as “very problematic”. He described Trump’s firing of the FBI chief Jim Comey as “egregious and inexcusable”. Continue reading...

05 июня, 08:46

Под силу ли Трампу «осушить болото» в Вашингтоне?

По-прежнему на пути к нормализации американо-российских отношений стоит вопрос о санкциях против России. В окружении президента больше склонны руководствоваться здесь деловыми соображениями: почему американские компании должны терять выгодные совместные предприятия с Россией, поддерживая решения Евросоюза, когда сами европейские компании готовы отказаться от санкций? Однако первая попытка ExxonMobil подтолкнуть Министерство финансов США ослабить санкционные ограничения, чтобы позволить компании возобновить совместное с «Роснефтью» предприятие по бурению в Чёрном море, закончилась неудачно. Минфин дал «разъяснение», согласно которому ограничения могут быть сняты по политическим, а не деловым мотивам.

05 июня, 06:45

Под силу ли Трампу «осушить болото» в Вашингтоне?

Америку продолжают будоражить стычки сторонников и противников Трампа. Очередным поводом для выступлений протеста почти в 130 американских городах в субботу 3 июня стало решение Трампа о выходе США из Парижского соглашения по климату. Многим американцам решение президента нравится, они приветствуют этот шаг, но ведущие американские СМИ предпочитают говорить лишь об антипрезидентских настроениях. К тому же внимание общества всё...

05 июня, 03:50

Hillary Clinton's Deceptive Blame-Shifting

Authored by Robert Parry via ConsortiumNews.com, Hillary Clinton has grown even more insistent that she was not at fault for her stunning election defeat last November, claiming that 1,000 Russian “agents” and their American collaborators were a decisive factor, a bizarre twist that further locks the Democrats into their evidence-light “Russia-gate” obsession. Hillary Clinton at the Code 2017 conference on May 31, 2017. In comments at a California technology conference on Wednesday, Clinton also repeated one of her favorite falsehoods – that all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies unanimously concluded that Russia hacked Democratic emails and ran a covert influence campaign against her. Referring to a report released by President Obama’s Director of National Intelligence (DNI) on Jan. 6, Clinton asserted that “Seventeen agencies, all in agreement, which I know from my experience as a Senator and Secretary of State, is hard to get. They concluded with high confidence that the Russians ran an extensive information war campaign against my campaign, to influence voters in the election. They did it through paid advertising we think; they did it through false news sites; they did it through these thousand agents; they did it through machine learning, which you know, kept spewing out this stuff over and over again. The algorithms that they developed. So that was the conclusion.” But Clinton’s statement is false regarding the unanimity of the 17 agencies and misleading regarding her other claims. Both former DNI James Clapper and former CIA Director John Brennan acknowledged in sworn testimony last month that the Jan. 6 report alleging Russian “meddling” did not involve all 17 agencies. Clapper and Brennan stated that the report was actually the work of hand-picked analysts from only three agencies – the Central Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency and Federal Bureau of Investigation – under the oversight of the DNI’s office. In other words, there was no consensus among the 17 agencies, a process that would have involved some form of a National Intelligence Estimate (or NIE), a community-wide effort that would have included footnotes citing any dissenting views. Instead, as Clapper testified before a Senate Judiciary subcommittee on May 8, the Russia-hacking claim came from a “special intelligence community assessment” (or ICA) produced by selected analysts from the CIA, NSA and FBI, “a coordinated product from three agencies – CIA, NSA, and the FBI – not all 17 components of the intelligence community,” the former DNI said. And, as Clapper explained, the “ICA” was something of a rush job beginning on President Obama’s instructions “in early December” and completed by Jan. 6. Clapper continued: “The two dozen or so analysts for this task were hand-picked, seasoned experts from each of the contributing agencies.” However, as any intelligence veteran will tell you, if you hand-pick the analysts, you are really hand-picking the conclusion since the agency chiefs would know who was, say, a hardliner on Russia and who could be trusted to deliver the desired product. On May 23, in testimony before the House Intelligence Committee, former CIA Director John Brennan confirmed Clapper’s account about the three agencies involved. “It wasn’t a full inter-agency community assessment that was coordinated among the 17 agencies, and for good reason because of the nature and the sensitivity of the information trying, once again, to keep that tightly compartmented,” Brennan said. In other words, Clinton’s beloved claim that all 17 intelligence agencies were in agreement on the Russian “hacking” charge – an assertion that the “fact-checking” group Politifact has certified as “true” and that has been repeated endlessly by the mainstream U.S. news media – is not true. It is false. Gee, you might even call it “fake news.” The Mysterious ‘Agents’ But Clinton’s false claim about the intelligence consensus was not her only dubious assertion. Her reference to the 1,000 Russian “agents” is not contained in the Jan. 6 report, either. It apparently derived from unconfirmed speculation from Sen. Mark Warner, D-Virginia, who mentioned this claim at a news conference on March 30, admitting that he didn’t know if it was true. President Donald Trump being sworn in on Jan. 20, 2017. (Screen shot from Whitehouse.gov) Warner, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said: “We know about the hacking, and selective leaks, but what really concerns me as a former tech guy is at least some reports – and we’ve got to get to the bottom of this – that there were upwards of a thousand internet trolls working out of a facility in Russia, in effect taking over a series of computers which are then called botnets, that can then generate news down to specific areas.   “It’s been reported to me, and we’ve got to find this out, whether they were able to affect specific areas in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, where you would not have been receiving off of whoever your vendor might have been, Trump versus Clinton, during the waning days of the election, but instead, ‘Clinton is sick’, or ‘Clinton is taking money from whoever for some source’ … fake news.” Of course, many stories about Clinton being sick or her taking money from special interests weren’t “fake news.” In late 2012, she suffered from a blood clot and – during the 2016 campaign – she was staggered by a bout of pneumonia. She also was paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for speeches to Wall Street and other groups. Warner didn’t specify where his information about the “trolls” came from but it paralleled a claim by freelance journalist Adam Chen who asserted in a podcast with Longform that Russian “trolls” began writing favorably about Trump in late 2015. (The CIA/FBI/NSA report also apparently alluded to the same report without mentioning the name of the journalist or specifying the number of alleged “trolls.”) “I created this list of Russian trolls when I was researching,” Chen said, referring to a 2015 reporting project that he turned into a rather thinly sourced New York Times Magazine article accusing a Russian oligarch of funding a professional “troll” operation in St. Petersburg, Russia. “I check on it once in a while, still. And a lot of them have turned into conservative accounts, like fake conservatives. I don’t know what’s going on, but they’re all tweeting about Donald Trump and stuff.” Although such “troll” and “hacking” complaints are treated as a one-way street – coming only from the evil Russians – the reality is that U.S. intelligence agencies, their allies and U.S.-government-funded “non-governmental organizations” have mounted similar operations against Russia and other targets. It is always difficult to nail down precisely where such operations are originating, but the Russians have cited previous cases of malicious hacking aimed at senior officials, including Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev, whose accounts were hacked in 2013 and 2014 including publication of a false resignation and a confession of wrongdoing. In 2015, the “Panama Papers,” a vast trove of documents purloined from a Panamanian law firm, became an investigative project that involved a USAID-funded news outlet and led to attacks on President Vladimir Putin for corruption even though his name did not appear in the documents. So, this high-tech spy-vs.-spy game – if that’s what it is – does not appear to be originating entirely from the Russian side of the street. But the U.S. intelligence community is not going to divulge what it knows about the attacks against Russia, only what it can “assess” about Russia’s possible attacks against Western targets. No Self-Criticism Neither, of course, are Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party eager to engage in a serious self-criticism about how they managed to blow an extremely winnable race against an extraordinarily flawed candidate in Donald Trump. Rather than look at their own missteps and misjudgments, they are presenting themselves as innocent victims. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry listens to Russian President Vladimir Putin in a meeting room at the Kremlin in Moscow, Russia, at the outset of a bilateral meeting on July 14, 2016. [State Department Photo] In Wednesday’s interview – after misrepresenting what the Jan. 6 report actually said – Clinton suggested that the Trump campaign must have colluded with the Russians in “weaponizing” the data. “How did they know what messages to deliver?” Clinton asked. “Who told them? Who were they coordinating with, or colluding with? … [The Russians] were conveying this weaponized information and the content of it. … So the Russians — in my opinion and based on the intel and the counterintel people I’ve talked to — could not have known how best to weaponize that information unless they had been guided. … Guided by Americans and guided by people who had polling and data information.” Although Clinton lacked any proof of this convoluted accusation, she cited as her “best example” the fact that “within one hour, one hour of the ‘Access Hollywood’ tapes being leaked [in which Trump was caught boasting about groping women], within one hour, the Russians — let’s say WikiLeaks, something — dumped the John Podesta emails.” However, if you changed the context of this claim slightly – and made a similar jump in logic – you would surely be labeled a nutty conspiracy theorist, but instead Clinton has drawn nods of agreement for this wholly unsubstantiated speculation. Yet, besides blaming the Russians and WikiLeaks for her loss, Clinton spread the blame even wider, for instance, to The New York Times for focusing too much on her decision to use a private email server while Secretary of State – “they covered it like it was Pearl Harbor” – and for the Times’ Nate Silver publishing optimistic odds on her chances for victory. “I also think I was the victim of a very broad assumption I was going to win,” she said. Clinton also placed blame on the Democratic National Committee for lacking money and sophisticated technology. “I get the nomination. So I’m now the nominee of the Democratic Party. I inherit nothing from the Democratic Party,” she said. “I mean it was bankrupt; it was on the verge of insolvency; its data was mediocre to poor, nonexistent, wrong. I had to inject money into it.” Yet, when Clinton was asked about some of her own “misjudgments,” she slipped back into the defensive posture that contributed to her troubles as a presidential candidate. For instance, regarding why she gave lucrative speeches to Goldman Sachs between her time leaving the State Department and announcing her White House run, she answered coyly, “They paid me.” When pressed on the point, Clinton retreated behind the sanctity of the 9/11 terror attack and the issue of women’s rights. Reminded that “you’re not somebody who needed that money for the next week’s shopping, and you knew you might run, so why do it?” – she responded: “The most common thing that I talked about in all those speeches was the hunt for Bin Laden. You know, that was one of the central missions that I felt from the time the towers fell on 9/11 as a Senator from New York.” Then, Clinton added, “you know, men got paid for the speeches they made. I got paid for the speeches I made. And it [the paid-speech issue] was used, and I thought it was unfairly used.” Blocking Witnesses So, while the Democrats dig themselves deeper into the so-far empty pit of blaming Russia for their electoral disaster, the Russia-gate investigation continues to take on other curious aspects, such as an unwillingness to hear from some of Donald Trump’s advisers who have been named in accusations and who have volunteered to testify publicly. Former Trump foreign policy adviser Carter Page. On Wednesday, Carter Page, a Navy veteran and businessman who had lived in Russia, announced that his plans to defend himself in testimony next week before the House Intelligence Committee had been placed on hold by the Democrats. Rep. Adam Schiff of California, the ranking Democrat on the committee and a major sparkplug powering the investigation, offered a curious denial of Page’s complaint while confirming the truth of it. The New York Times, which has been another advocate for blaming Russia, phrased the postponement of Page’s testimony as if Page were the unreasonable one, reporting: “Representative Adam Schiff … dismissed accusations from Carter Page, another Trump adviser who is under scrutiny, that the committee is preventing him from testifying. Mr. Schiff …. said the investigation would first review relevant documents before interviewing witnesses.” In other words, Page, who has been portrayed via intelligence leaks to the news media as essentially a traitor, won’t be given the opportunity to defend his reputation until Schiff and the other Democrats decide the time is ripe. Yet, it’s not as if the House Intelligence Committee has not taken public testimony about Russia-gate. For instance, former CIA Director Brennan was allowed to speak indirectly about Page and other possibly treasonous Americans amid media reports naming Page as one of those suspected Russian “agents.” Normal investigations grant the people under attack at least the opportunity to defend themselves and their reputations in a timely fashion, rather than make them live under the cloud of suspicion without having a chance to state their case. If their sworn testimony is later undermined by evidence developed by investigators, the witnesses can be called back and called out on possible perjury. So, it’s not as if Schiff and the other Democrats are surrendering prerogatives by letting Page testify now rather than later. Indeed, Page would be putting himself in legal jeopardy if he is caught lying. Even the Republican-driven “Benghazi investigation,” which also had the look of an over-the-top “witch hunt,” gave Secretary of State Clinton and other Obama administration officials multiple opportunities to explain their response to the Sept. 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate. But, so far, a similar courtesy has not been extended to the targets of the Russia-gate investigation.

31 мая, 23:57

James Clapper And The Revolving Door Of Corruption In The Military Industrial Complex

Via Disobedient Media James Clapper is known for many things: Being accused by Colonel W. Patrick Lang of “damn near destroy[ing] the DIA.” Withholding information from lawmakers and not having a good reputation in the intelligence committees for being orostraightforward and actively forthcoming. Lying under oath in 2013. Receiving the Rosemary Award for having the worst open-government performance of 2013. Being derided as “another old hack in a job without teeth” by the global intelligence organization Stratfor and describing Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood as “largely secular.” Underestimating the war in Syria while also underestimating ISIS and overestimating the fighting capability of the Iraqi army. Stating that changes to the Benghazi reports were not made for political reasons, and that there was “no attempt to mislead the American people about what happened in Benghazi.” Having US senators remove a section of an intelligence bill requiring the White House to disclose information on “noncombatant civilians” killed by US drone strikes overseas. Lying to Congress by asserting that Julian Assange has been indicted for a sex-crime and falsely claiming under oath that there was no release of Republican data during the 2016 presidential elections. Clapper also has contended that he played in integral role in reporting on the presence of WMD’s in Iraq, stating that “my fingerprints were on that national intelligence estimate, I was in the community then” as well as his involvement in the manipulation of military intelligence reports. However, there is one aspect of Clapper’s history that has not received as much media coverage: his involvement with private intelligence contractors at the heart of corruption and inefficient defense policy. I. Booz Allen Hamilton James Clapper, who served as the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) from August 9, 2010 – January 20, 2017, was appointed by President Barack Obama to succeed Bush appointee Mike McConnell. While both men were appointed to their position by Presidents from opposing parties, both have one thing in common: Booz Allen Hamilton. Before being appointed by President George W. Bush to serve as the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence in 2006, Clapper was an executive on the board of Booz Allen Hamilton. Similarly, Mike McConnell was Senior Vice President at Booze Allen Hamilton before his promotion to serving as DNI. In the aftermath of Clapper being appointed to DNI in 2010, McConnell returned to Booze Allen Hamilton where he become the Vice Chairman in 2011. In 2010, during his nomination hearing, Clapper was asked about the close relationship between the federal government and contractors. Clapper responded by defending the private sector’s role, stating: "I worked as a contractor for six years myself, so I think I have a good understanding of the contribution that they have made and will continue to make." In fact, the relationship between the federal government and Booz Allen Hamilton is so close that as Bloomberg noted, one could: “Name a retired senior official from the NSA or the CIA or the various military intelligence branches, and there’s a good chance he works for a contractor—most likely Booz Allen. Name a senior intelligence official serving in the government, and there’s a good chance he used to work for Booz Allen.” What is the significance of this? As reported in September of 2016, “For the first time since spy agencies began outsourcing their core analytic and operational work in the late 1990s, the bulk of the contracted work goes to a handful of companies: Leidos, Booz Allen Hamilton, CSRA, SAIC, and CACI International.” In other words, there is almost a complete monopoly on defense contracting in the U.S.. There is a club, and only former government employees are able to join it. II. Booz Allen Hamilton History Through Clapper’s Tenure as DNI Throughout Clapper’s tenure as Director of National Intelligence, Booz Allen Hamilton has had a series of problems in maintaining the intelligence secrets of the U.S. government. In 2011, the hacking collective, Anonymous, broke into a server operated by Booz Allen Hamilton, disclosing log-in credentials including 90,000 military email addresses and passwords. This information contained the login information for personnel from CENTCOM, SOCOM, the Marine Corps, Air Force facilities, Department of Homeland Security, Department of State, as well as other private sector contractors. According to Anonymous, Booz Allen Hamilton, despite working with federal government on defense matters, lacks security. Anonymous targeted Booz Allen Hamilton due to the company’s involvement in the controversial SWIFT surveillance program. The Privacy Commission of Belgium, where the SWIFT program is headquartered, declared that the surveillance was a violation of European privacy laws. Despite this hack, Booz Allen Hamilton continued to receive government contracts. In February 2012, the Air Force proposed the debarment of the Booz Allen office in San Antonio, Texas, along with five of its employees, after a senior associate allegedly shared protected, non-public information regarding information technology support services contact that would have given Booz Allen an unfair competitive advantage. The Air Force agreed to lift their suspension of Booz Allen after the company agreed to pay the Air Force a $65,000 penalty. In 2013, Edward Snowden stole a significant amount of data from Booz Allen Hamilton before passing it to Wikileaks. These leaks showed the massive government surveillance being conducted by the NSA, in violation of American's Fourth Amendment Rights. However, one important detail that was vaguely mentioned was that Edward Snowden was and employee of Booz Allen Hamilton. More importantly, Snowden was an employee for Booz Allen for less than three months. While the information provided by Snowden has been extremely beneficial to the American people, it should be concerning to all Americans that an employee can pass a federal background check, and leak highly classified information to the public after being employed for three months. In fact, as reported by Reuters, hiring screeners at Booz Allen Hamilton found possible discrepancies in Snowden’s resume, but the company still chose to employ him. This raises questions of how competent these contracting agencies are in performing simple background checks. However, despite the “Snowden leaks”, the company would continue to win government contracts, as months later, Booz Allen would become one of 16 other companies to win a $6 billion contract, becoming one of the largest unclassified cybersecurity agreements in U.S. history. Some of the most notable contracts awarded to Booze Allen in 2013 included: June 17, 2013: $133 million award from GSA for program, tech, & sustainment IT support to assist PM TR & Product Mngmnt (PdM) Offices to procure & field tactical radio network communication systems. June 21, 2013: $25.8 million award from the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) to provide program and technical support to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Office of Policy in coordination and management of its policy research and assessment. July 23, 2013: $78 million in competitive contract actions to support critical national health offices in its first quarter of fiscal year 2014. August 2, 2013: $900 million to support the integrated cybersecurity and Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance (C4ISR) operations of the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center Atlantic (SCC Atlantic). August 22, 2013: $243 million award from Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR)/NAWCAD Pax River to provide technical products & engineering services for JPALS, N-UCAS & UCLASS programs. Booz Allen Hamilton would continue to be awarded many notable contracts throughout 2013. In August 2013, when asked how Booz Allen is able to continue to be awarded such high profile contracts, Joe Newman, communications director for the watchdog group Project on Government Oversight, responded: “When you start talking about these contractors at the top of the list, a lot of times they’re what we call ‘too big to suspend or debar. Their tentacles are so deep in the government that it’s very hard for the government to punish them.” Newman went on to state that firms such as Booz Allen have a personal advantage, in that they not only spend millions on lobbying, but that, “Former executives of Booz Allen are in government, and people in government have gone into Booz Allen’s payroll; they know each other—they look out for their friends.” In October 2016, it was reported that another employee of Booz Allen was found to be in unauthorized possession of Top Secret information. Harold T. Martin III, who worked as a contractor to the NSA through the consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton, was found to be in possession of approximately 50,000 gigabytes, enough to store 500 million documents containing images and text. This information ranged from 1996 to 2016, and included a document regarding specific operational plans against a known enemy of the United States and its allies. The Justice Department disclosed that these documents included the names of covert intelligence officers were among the pilfered data. However, despite the arrest of a former employee in possession of Top Secret information, Booz Allen profit margins would not be hurt. In fact, despite this arrest, Booz Allen’s stock hit historic highs since it went public in 2010. Booz Allen’s stock would be upgraded from “neutral” to a “buy” rating, increasing the value from $33 to $41. III. Booz Allen Hamilton Is Owned By The Controversial Carlyle Group Booz Allen also acts as a subsidiary for a larger holding company with controversial connections to international private equity group which has troubling ties to figures linked to terrorism and oppressive regimes. In May 2008, Booz Allen Hamilton was purchased by the Carlyle Group. In 2010, the same year that James Clapper was appointed Director of National Intelligence, Booz Allen Hamilton went public. By 2013 the Carlyle Group owned 95.66 million shares, around 69% of company, which was valued at about $1.66 billion. The Carlyle Group is a global alternative asset manager with $162 billion of assets under management across 287 investment vehicles. The Washington Post has noted that as of March 31, 2010, Booz Allen Hamilton’s reported operating income of less than $200 million on revenue of $5.1 billion. However, within only 3 years, revenue rose to $5.8 billion, as operating income doubled to $446 million. As the Post notes, while sales rose slowly, profit margins rose dramatically, which explains how, “bottom line earnings went from $25 million in fiscal 2010, to almost nine times that in 2013.” Reports have indicated that this surge in profits was due to a massive influx of government spending. In 2013, it was further reported that company filings showed that 99% of Booz Allen’s overall revenue came from the federal government. In 2016, it was reported that 97% of Booz Allen’s overall revenue came from the federal government. On October 31st, 2001, The Guardian reported that the family of Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden was listed as one of the firm's multi-million dollar investors. The Bin Laden family is reported to have been invested in the Carlyle Group for six years.  In fact, as a member of the board, former President George H.W. Bush is also reported to have visited the Bin Laden family in Saudi Arabia twice on the firm's behalf. On January 8th, 2011, ABC News reported that Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, considered by many to be an oppressive dictator, was using tear gas in order to disperse crowds of protestors. However, these tear gas canisters were labeled “Made in U.S.A.” and were being produced by Combined Systems International of Jamestown, Pennsylvania. Combined Systems International is partially owned by Point Lookout Capital and the Carlye Group. In 2012, the relationship between the Carlyle Group and the Middle East was further revealed with the release of the Global Intelligence Files by Wikileaks. According to an email from September 19, 2007, David Marchick, former Deputy United States Assistant Secretary of State who served in the Clinton Administration, represented the Carlyle Group in a sale of aviation assets to Dubai Aerospace Enterprise, in the United Arab Emirates. In 2016, after the release of the Panama Papers, the identity of another major investor in the Carlyle Group was brought to light. This investor was none other than billionaire George Soros. According to the Panama Papers, it was revealed that Soros Capital set up an offshore company in the Cayman Islands for the purpose of investing private equity with the Carlyle Group. Soros has spent hundreds of millions to support various anti-government movements, including the Women’s March, the People’s Climate March, the Tax Day protests and far left Berkeley protest group Refuse Fascism. The ACLU also began actively organizing and training protest movements just one month after Soros sank $35 million into the group. On May 26th, 2017, Disobedient Media reported that Soros was also supporting groups who were using the net neutrality movement as a means of promoting censorship of alternative and conservative media outlets. James Clapper's close affiliation with a defense industry riddled with corruption and firms who have specifically affiliated with figures who openly engage in hostile behavior towards the United States severely calls his credibility into question given the central role he has played in informing the U.S. government and public on matters pertaining to the current administration. Clapper has in the past disingenuously tried to claim that the Russian government intervened in the 2016 U.S. presidential elections, while also admitting that there was no evidence of Russia affecting the vote tallies in any U.S. states. Given the current U.S. president's public commitment to cutting back on fraud, corruption and waste in all sectors of the U.S. government, the professional ties of those speaking as authorities on American political issues are of high importance. Clapper's indicate that they incentivize him to defend harmful and unethical practices, and will influence him to mislead rather than speak truthfully to the American people.

30 мая, 00:20

Sperry: How Team Obama Tried To Hack The Election

Authored by Paul Sperry, op-ed via NYPost.com, New revelations have surfaced that the Obama administration abused intelligence during the election by launching a massive domestic spy campaign that included snooping on Trump officials. The irony is mind-boggling: Targeting political opposition is long a technique of police states like Russia, which Team Obama has loudly condemned for allegedly using its own intelligence agencies to hack into our election. The revelations, as well as testimony this week from former Obama intel officials, show the extent to which the Obama administration politicized and weaponized intelligence against Americans. Thanks to Circa News, we now know the National Security Agency under President Barack Obama routinely violated privacy protections while snooping through foreign intercepts involving US citizens — and failed to disclose the breaches, prompting the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court a month before the election to rebuke administration officials. The story concerns what’s known as “upstream” data collection under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, under which the NSA looks at the content of electronic communication. Upstream refers to intel scooped up about third parties: Person A sends Person B an email mentioning Person C. Though Person C isn’t a party to the email, his information will be scooped up and potentially used by the NSA. Further, the number of NSA data searches about Americans mushroomed after Obama loosened rules for protecting such identities from government officials and thus the reporters they talk to. The FISA court called it a “very serious Fourth Amendment issue” that NSA analysts — in violation of a 2011 rule change prohibiting officials from searching Americans’ information without a warrant — “had been conducting such queries in violation of that prohibition, with much greater frequency than had been previously disclosed to the Court.” A number of those searches were made from the White House, and included private citizens working for the Trump campaign, some of whose identities were leaked to the media. The revelations earned a stern rebuke from the ACLU and from civil liberties champion Sen. Rand Paul. We also learned this week that Obama intelligence officials really had no good reason attaching a summary of a dossier on Trump to a highly classified Russia briefing they gave to Obama just weeks before Trump took office. Under congressional questioning Tuesday, Obama’s CIA chief John Brennan said the dossier did not “in any way” factor into the agency’s assessment that Russia interfered in the election. Why not? Because as Obama intel czar James Clapper earlier testified, “We could not corroborate the sourcing.” But that didn’t stop Brennan in January from attaching its contents to the official report for the president. He also included the unverified allegations in the briefing he gave Hill Democrats. In so doing, Brennan virtually guaranteed that it would be leaked, which it promptly was. In short, Brennan politicized raw intelligence. In fact, he politicized the entire CIA. Langley vets say Brennan was the most politicized director in the agency’s history. Former CIA field operations officer Gene Coyle said Brennan was “known as the greatest sycophant in the history of the CIA, and a supporter of Hillary Clinton before the election. I find it hard to put any real credence in anything that the man says.” Coyle noted that Brennan broke with his predecessors who stayed out of elections. Several weeks before the vote, he made it very clear he was pulling for Hillary. His deputy Mike Morell even came out and publicly endorsed her in the New York Times, claiming Trump was an “unwitting agent” of Moscow. Brennan isn’t just a Democrat. He’s a radical leftist who in 1980 — during the height of the Cold War — voted for a Communist Party candidate for president. When Brennan rants about the dangers of strongman Vladimir Putin targeting our elections and subverting our democratic process, does he not catch at least a glimpse of his own reflection? What he and the rest of the Obama gang did has inflicted more damage on the integrity of our electoral process than anything the Russians have done.  

28 мая, 18:38

Clapper on Kushner-Russia reports: My ‘warning light was clearly on’

Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said Sunday that he and the intelligence community were “very concerned” about reports that White House adviser Jared Kushner discussed establishing secretive back channels with the Kremlin. “I will tell you that my dashboard warning light was clearly on, and I think that was the case with all of us in the intelligence community, very concerned about the nature of these approaches to the Russians,” the former intelligence chief told Chuck Todd on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”While Clapper declined to confirm or corroborate reports that Kushner, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser, discussed creating communications channels with Russia that would have evaded U.S. monitoring, he said the reports are troubling given Russia’s history of seeking to undermine American democracy.“If you put that in context with everything else we knew the Russians were doing to interfere with the elections and the historical practice of the Russians … we were concerned,” he said.Clapper said that although he did not see any “smoking-gun evidence of collusion” between the Trump campaign and Russian officials while serving in the federal government, he thinks the information coming out of the ongoing congressional and FBI probes “certainly arouses your concern about what is going on.”“I have to say, at the time I left, I did not see any smoking-gun evidence of collusion, but it certainly was appropriate, given all the signs, certainly appropriate for the FBI to investigate.”The former intelligence chief also said that the dialogue between Kushner and Russian diplomat Sergey Kislyak — which reportedly took place between Trump’s election triumph and the end of President Barack Obama’s presidency — may have violated the spirit of the presidential transition. “We have a time-honored custom that we have one president and one administration at a time,” Clapper said, “and oncoming administrations don’t get a head start before the end of the current president’s incumbency.”

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.