Wikileaks proves CIA has no credible evidence of Russian hacking
by Don Hank
Foreword: My friends occasionally warn me about appearing to be too friendly toward Russia, as if such were possible.
So why do I focus so much on Russia? Five reasons come to mind:
1-I have studied Russian language and literature for most of my adult life, on both the undergraduate and graduate levels. During my studies, I came to love and admire the Russians based on what I have learned about them. They are for the most part courageous, intelligent, sensitive, honest, persevering and long suffering, to mention but a few of their merits.
2-In recent years, I have watched the Western world deteriorate to a situation that by now seems beyond repair. There is hatred between left and right, between the races, between Mexicans and US citizens, between Muslims and Christians, and there is a press and political class that encourage this, and that foments hatred of the more mild-mannered Muslims while embracing the more intolerant and violent ones, as I showed here. The press and politicians constantly stir up wars that we inevitably lose or that destroy whole nations and regions, and the elites are at a loss to articulate why (although it ought to be obvious why they do this, as I explained here). There is no change in sight. In comparison to Russia, the latter seems like a paradise, even to the most objective observer.
3-To keep up with the language, I read almost all the speeches and interviews delivered by Putin in the original Russian. I also have read his biography in his native tongue. It is no exaggeration to say I feel as if I had known him all my life and I know how he will react in each situation. In diplomacy, he seems to be heeding the words of Christ.
4-The most formidable danger facing the world is nuclear war and the media and political class seem hell-bent on starting a war with Russia. From what I have read, partly in the Russian press, I am convinced that either of China or Russia could destroy the entire US in a matter of minutes with their hardware (which is why I posted this).
5-Of all the issues that the msm and politicians lie about and distort, all things touching Russia are by far the most distorted and misunderstood. I would be a bad person if I snoozed through this barrage of lies and false narratives, and, given all the research I have done and my educational background, I simply can’t do that.
After all, why would someone with years of research under his belt in precisely this life or death issue not want to counter the obvious lies about Russia? Should I care that some racist Westerners will think ill of me and call me a pinko or a commie – even though the West is adopting the model of the USSR while Russia has learned its lesson about tyranny the hard way and has backtracked to a conservative, sane and healthy way of life and public policies?
The breaking news about the CIA is that Wikileaks has received a data trove proving they have been using Russian software and malware to create fake “evidence” that the Russians are hacking US officials.
Firstly, the sly press interpreted this, eg, here, as follows:
WikiLeaks’ Attack on U.S. Intelligence
“The release of the CIA’s hacking tools is a victory not for the American public but for Russia.”
In other words, in Slate’s view, making the public aware of the truth is not a victory for the people? So is it a victory for them to be uninformed? I guess so. Moreover, calling it exclusively a victory for Russia implies we have lost something. So clearing the path to a detente with Russia, a nuclear power, is a bad thing – no matter that it might be a step to avoiding a nuclear holocaust?
Wired goes even further, saying that even though the CIA had tools to fake Russian hacking, there is no indication that they used them.
Right. So if a man with a stocking over his head is carrying a bag of burglar tools and is standing outside a freshly-broken window of your home, don’t jump to conclusions and call the police or anything.
But ok, let’s suspend disbelief and say it does not prove the Russians did not hack US officials. But Wired and the rest of the CIA hit men journos omit to tell us what it does prove: That all the hard “evidence” of Russian hacking is now null and void, because the only “evidence” was Russian characters in docs supposedly left by the “hackers” but now we know that this is not proof it was the Russians and not the CIA itself, which previously had given non-credible evidence, such as the scope of the data dump and the “motive” – as if Bernie Sanders supporters had no motive whatsoever to leak this information to the public. If the CIA has no evidence, how is this undocumented theory of a Russian hack a print-worthy story?
The CIA’s claim that they found Russian “fingerprints” all over the files that were left by the hackers, including characters from a Russian keyboard, was a stupid thing to say because the Russians are a lot smarter than to leave that kind of trail. And the Russians don’t lie to the press in ways that can easily be detected. (If you compare the Russian press with the Western press, you will see that the latter often prints things that are later disproven and presents viewpoints not supported by the facts, as evidenced by the Russian hacking narrative). If you follow the Russian press, eg, Sputnik, Russia Today, TASS, Ria Novosti, etc, you therefore do not see obvious exaggeration and lies. Ask yourself: Why would a country with almost no public debt need to lie about its economy, for example, to a country with a $20 trillion debt? Why would it need to lie about its foreign relations when it does not start color revolutions and create chaos throughout the world? Why would it lie about its treatment of its citizens when no scandal has ever broken over spying on its own people, or when no riots occur in its cities or when its president has as high as 85% approval in the polls (which never happened in the US, ever!)? Etc. Observant students of Russia and Putin and their modus operandi know the Russians did not hack our officials. So when Putin said several months back that the Russian Federation does not interfere in elections of other countries, he was telling the truth. How did I know? Because, as I explained in my articles Putinology 101 and The Putin Principle, Russia has long stated as part of its public policy statement and publicity program that, unlike the West, they do not meddle in other countries’ internal affairs, for example, as the US did at the Maidan in Kiev, causing a bloody illegal coup that led to an ongoing civil war and wrecked the country socially and economically. Meddling is exclusively Western MO. Russia must avoid all appearances of meddling, especially in US internal politics, because non-interference is what they have been trying to promote throughout the world, creating a stark contrast to the US and showing the public that their hands-off policy really works by establishing trust and respect in foreign relations. So far this policy has led to excellent relations with even the most difficult states, including NATO member Turkey, which, despite the Turkish shootdown of the Russian fighter over Syria, now has better relations with Russia than with any Western country (Holland just recently refused to let Erdogan’s plane land at a Dutch airport; Merkel refuses to let Erdogan campaign among Turkish residents of Germany). The iron-clad Russian non-interference principle is why Putin was very circumspect in his description of Trump, calling him yarki, which when applied to persons, only means roughly “colorful,” not “bright” as it was wrongly translated in the Western media (BTW, I am a technical translator by trade and Russian is one of my languages). Trump foolishly said Putin had called him a genius. Hardly! Trump’s over-the-top claims have contributed to this own downfall by creating the illusion that Putin supported his campaign, even though Putin repeatedly said he did not support either candidate and will work with either one that is elected.
Russia has in Vladimir Putin one of the most gifted diplomats and statesmen who ever lived. The US is at best in the hands of bungling amateurs. And that is putting it diplomatically. After all, I would not want a Russophobic Neocon saying I am a Kremlin stooge.