Guccifer 2.0 - Game Over

Here is the Nation's own second-thoughts review of your article, consisting of a rebuttal from other VIPS members, a reply to the rebuttal from the authors of the original VIPS memo, and a third-party assessment of both arguments.
https://www.thenation.com/article/a-leak-or-a-hack-a-forum-on-the-vips-memo/

I found the third-party reviewer to be most careful and persuasive, and it essentially destroys the central premise of the claim you linked to. Basically, the metadata and download speed calculated by VIPS could have been achieved in multiple ways, including as part of a hack.

 

Clearly the poster feels that his single so called expert has superior intelligence gathering capabilities than all of our government hired experts who we taxpayers are spending billions on???RIGHT????

 

No, it hasn't been thoroughly discredited. It's been ignored because it can't be discredited.

Bill Binney was the former Technical Director of the NSA and later he became the Technical Leader for Intelligence, having developed many of the technical systems the NSA use today. His expertise covers: intelligence analysis, traffic analysis, systems analysis and a wide range of mathematical theories and probability.

Ray McGovern is a veteran CIA officer who chaired National Intelligence Estimates. He prepared the President's Daily Brief and was awarded the Intelligence Commendation Medal.

The below Memo to the President was written by them on 15th July 2018. It's a reprise of a memo they jointly wrote a lot earlier.

Meanwhile, Craig Murray, who was a former British Foreign Office Ambassador, has stated publicly - and been ignored by all media - that during a visit to the VIPS annual gathering in Washington, that he took delivery of a storage device from a source he has so far not named. That device contained the DNC emails that was passed to Julian Assange. Ray McGovern has publicly confirmed his knowledge of the meeting taking place on the night in question.

Assange has offered to provide proof that it was not Russia who provided these emails to Wikileaks. His offer has been completely ignored.

Kim Dot Com has additionally offered to prove exactly the same, but did not receive the assurances he requested to enable this hand over to take place.

There is no way the DNC emails were hacked. The speeds of the download reveal this to be impossible. It was a leak.

But no one in Washington dare disagree with the secret state that has set out to destroy a duly and democratically elected president of the United States (and I don't care for Trump at all).

This abject fear inside the Washington beltway was best put by NY Congressman, Henry Schumar, when he stated in regard to Trump taking a public stand against them:

“Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you.”

Meanwhile, a small extract from the memo that gives the all important forensic analysis:

“Forensic studies of “Russian hacking” into Democratic National Committee computers last year reveal that on July 5, 2016, data was leaked (not hacked) by a person with physical access to DNC computer. After examining metadata from the “Guccifer 2.0” July 5, 2016 intrusion into the DNC server, independent cyber investigators have concluded that an insider copied DNC data onto an external storage device.

Key among the findings of the independent forensic investigations is the conclusion that the DNC data was copied onto a storage device at a speed that far exceeds an Internet capability for a remote hack.”

The article in the OP provides much the same evidence, but in far greater technical detail.

https://consortiumnews.com/2018/07/15/memo-to-the-president-ahead-of-mondays-summit/

 

Not really. Ethereal is more factually knowledgeable on these subject than most members of this forum. The bulk of membership of here are prejudiced by their political partisanship or poor education, imo.

Your problem is that you trust what government and the media tell you - both proven liars over more decades than I even care to remember. For evidence of this statement of fact see the NYT's article I posted on another thread earlier this week (HERE), that has almost totally been ignored - which came as no surprise to me: hard truths are even harder to swallow. People find it easier to to join the Egregore rather than try to swim against the Collective tide.

 

LOL! No.

They're members of VIPS. The rebuttal of the VIPS analysis a few posts up in this thread covers their claims.

FYI, Binney left the NSA in 2001. He is now 75 years old. McGovern left the CIA in 1990. He is now 79 years old. They are no longer at the top of their games, and it has been decades since they were active in their fields.

Three completely unbacked claims by non-reliable sources. What crap.

Already refuted in this very thread.

 

It's funny how whether it comes from the Left or Right, I simply don't read the info on these articles anymore.

Both sides have shown some shady stuff that makes the old saying of "both are at fault" seem to be true.

I am sure someone talked with Russia, I am sure the DNC lied with Russia.

To call it collusion while meanwhile, DNC officials and the Clinton Foundation have worked with dozens of other nations makes me simply not care about the over the top rhetoric.

To have the RNC calling the DNC liars, meanwhile showing to do dozens of shady things themselves makes me simply not care about the over the top rhetoric.

There is one common theme, politicians lie, all of them. I don't trust anything about anyone, I simply will vote on issues and issues alone.

 

I see you don't understand what you just read.

 

They believe Guccifer 2 is a group of GRU agents because our deputy attorney general said so in a news conference. So do we believe our justice department or Adam Carter? Frankly I don't believe either one of them.

 

Ray McGovern, William Binney and numerous others in the business made those statements nearly a year ago, in the paper and on TV. Binney even met with Pompeo when Pompeo was head of CIA. It's not my fault you are ignorant of the truth.

Check out Disobedient Media's website. It's discussed in detail.

 

I responded in detail to another poster who made the same claim. The VIPS group is deeply split about the analysis by Binney and McGovern, and third-party observers have pretty much debunked the basis of the original VIPS analysis.

 

I thought the article generally excellent. I also found the earlier article by Patrick Lawrence, which was published by The Nation in August 2017 (HERE) and referenced in this later article, to also be excellent, if not compelling.

It all comes down to available download / transfer speeds available at the time.

I think it is pretty clear that the dissenting views of Drake, Ritter et al., are more politically motivated then technically driven. None of them have anywhere near the technical backgrounds of Binney, Folden, Loomis et al. I also thought the latter's rebuttal to the dissenting memo was clarity itself, and bolstered Lawrence's earlier statements about available speeds at the time of the event.

I am considerably less persuaded than you by the third party reviewer, who was indeed careful, as you would expect. I don't think it destroys the argument made by Binney and co, at all.

From a reading of his piece, his analysis was theoretical not actual. He presents a what "if argument", as in what if the hacker downloaded to a temporary cloud server or third party server within close proximity the throughput speeds would be possible etc. And while that is, indeed, interesting, he presents zero evidence to demonstrate that was the case in regard to the DNC servers. Nor does he state if this scenario is possible now or back when the event took place. Two years in internet terms is a very long time and many changes and speed enhancement have taken place in that time frame.

Nor do I consider his experience as stated, matches that of Binney and associates, who's experience derives from many years at the NSA etc., where technical abilities are highly classified. What I suspect is that the publisher, Karina Venden Heuvel, was in a hard place to find anyone willing to take on a mediator role that could parallel the experience of the VIPs team to act as an impartial third party.

Having said that who could possibly disagree with his conclusion that all parties (The Forensicator, Carter, VIPS and the VIPS dissenters) should exercise greater caution.

The one sector he doesn't direct his attention or this criticism to, however, are those agencies and media that continue to push the hack narrative without presenting a shred of evidence to support it. And as Binney says, the NSA and GCHQ absolutely do have the ability to capture "all electronic transfers of data". Yet they have not provided any such evidence. And I very much doubt they ever will. This can't be because they are protecting their technical abilities, when these are already in the public domain. The decision to withhold evidence surely is a political one.

In any case both the third party analyst and the VIPS dissenters have, as Binney et al noted in his rebuttal to the latter, completely ignored the statement of former UK Ambassador, Craig Murray, that he took delivery of a storage device from an "insider" during a visit to Washington that later found its way to Assange. Murray has stated: To my certain knowledge", "neither the DNC nor Podesta leaks involved Russia".

Likewise Assange's offer to provide proof to US authorities that Russia was not involved. The authorities have simply ignored his offer. Ditto, Kim Dot Com's offer to do the same. It seems evident that anything that might remotely contradict the accepted deep state narrative is automatically ignored.

Finally, I look forward to Binney's and VIPS response to the third party analysis, as I'm sure they will want to respond in due course.

 

More fool you, then.

Believing governments, politicians and the media narrative that is unbacked by any evidence is deleterious to your health.

 

Debunked? What a load of tosh you talk.

 

In these days of unrelenting outright lies thru to subtle dissembling and propaganda, I can't conceive there's anyone left who is stupid enough to believe it. Still, as they say - one born every minute?

That's for post 37 - I forgot the Reply

 

It is a bad idea even with evidence. I don't believe much of the evidence government claims either.

 

Understood. It depends on the veracity of evidence. These days I'm inclined to share your cynicism.

 

The only people who disagree with VIPS are those who benefit from the distraction provided by the Russiagate fantasy, those who benefit from the deception, the DNC and the powers that be.

I'm going with the whistleblowers, all the way. Brennan, Clapper et al have demonstrated their mendacity many times.

 

Indeed. Clapper blatantly lied to Congress about NSA surveillance (HERE). Brennan's mendacity is reporter in the Guardian (HERE).

 

What about austrailian and german and canadian trolls who post here and try to influence American public opinion?

There are many threads posted by foreigners attacking trump

But liberals who were disappointed that obama did not get his third term only care about russians

 

Are you seriously comparing posters on this forum with the lies told by senior, serving US intelligence officials? Really?

 

I am comparing you and your kind to any other foreigner who trys in influence US. public opinion over the internet

 

Further to my earlier posts here is what UK Ambassador stated in respect of the DNC and Podesta emails

(My bolding)

 

Xenophobia suits you...

 

Well, we can see why the DNC wouldn't let the FBI or DHS examine their servers and computers, huh?

 

Precisely. That remains the elephant in the room.