I am a veteran. I don’t talk about it very much, because that is what is expected. Silently do your duty, when you are finished, please disappear, and kindly forget what you learned. No one will believe you anyway. Somehow the pixels rendered, increasingly replicable by AI, are more believable when repeated over and over through a telescreen. Telescreens are real. Telescreens have always been real. During my tenure, I directly participated in two of this century’s declared wars (Afghanistan and Iraq), which began shortly after I joined the Air Force (before 9/11) over 18 years ago as of this writing. These have been the only declared wars, which launched continued multi-regional incursions that have not stopped in almost two decades now. There has been a lot of time and seeming entropy between then and now. Countries have collapsed into rubble, and to my dismay, wars both silent and open remain ongoing today.
One of the first things they told me when I showed up at the AFIWC, fresh out of Goodfellow AFB, trained as an all-source analyst, was something I will never forget: DO NOT watch network news expecting any accurate information or facts, because they often are either misinformed, bias, or just plain wrong – especially when confronting the deeper implications and connectedness of events. Watch the news only for strategic indicators of far more subtle unfolding events, and always be mindful of the sources and methods of collection. Such advice made me a little sad, but I came to understand why. As I navigate the current information landscape before me, and without the deep sources I was once was granted access to, I am back in Plato’s cave with stories that are unconvincing to my fellow blind compatriots, who believe the shadows they see are real.
We only believe it when we see it through a screen.
The kind of reporting that happens today (banter, gossip, opinion, speculation, bias) is FAR removed from real Journalism. If you can readily tell which side of the issue a reporter is on, you are seeing their bias, and any information you take away should be filed as such. Bias is not always wrong, but it can lead to grave mistakes in judgement and characterization of events. If the supporting facts of an argument or narrative can not be backed up by source material (aka supportable, reproducible, evidence), my recommendation is to move on or seek more information. Just because you hear something repeated over and over again, does not make it true. Just because you hear something repeated over and over again, does not make it true. Just because you hear something repeated over and over again, does not make it true. Just because you hear something repeated over and over again, does not make it true. IT JUST STICKS IN YOUR HEAD BETTER.
When the same unsupportable arguments are being retried over and over again, take note. 2. Local news and journalism is all but dead. This is a way bigger story then the DNC’s servers and Russia-gate (IMO). MSM scripts their (very often misleading) stories to hundreds of subsidiary stations and these scripted talking points are repeated across the world every single day. All this at a time when internet search results are provided by disguised search algorithms that can not be audited or challenged. The current global narrative and headlines are highly disturbing to me. The carelessness in reporting today, the ease at which people allow themselves to be convinced when global thermo-nuclear war is a possible outcome, is staggering.
We are at war with Eastasia. We have always been at war with Eastasia.
As far as the Russian Hacking conspiracy (Rosenstein’s words, not mine), there are many more questions implied then answers being provided.
“Key among the findings … 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. Of equal importance, the forensics show that the copying was performed on the East coast of the US” – William Binney (highest ranking, NSA whistle blower in history). This guy’s story is truly amazing. Still, this claim is disputed.
“We got the forensics from the pros that they hired which – again, best practice is always to get access to the machines themselves, but this my folks tell me was an appropriate substitute,” then-FBI director James Comey told a House Intel session Jan 2017. That’s not a feather in the cap.
“I’ll be the first one to come out and point at Russia if there’s clear evidence, but there is no clear evidence – even now. There’s a lot of innuendo, lots of circumstantial evidence, that’s it.” Devin Nunes, chair of the House intelligence committee … He may be a Trumpian, but he is presiding over the seat that has direct access to the “sensitive” classified evidence.
“I know who leaked them, … I’ve met the person who leaked them, and they are certainly not Russian and it’s an insider. It’s a leak, not a hack; the two are different things.” – Craig Murray (British former diplomat, human rights campaigner, blogger and whistleblower)
Through all of the speculation, finger pointing, and rumor mongering that I have read, few seem to be contesting that the data obtained from the DNC server breach was not true and authentic. Russian influence operations are not new, and likely (in my reasoned opinion) being conflated with the Mueller investigation as a way to save face and reinforce the “US led liberal democratic order” referred to in this DNI assessment.
Sources:
Intel Vets Challenge Russia Hack Evidence: https://consortiumnews.com/2017/07/24/intel-vets-challenge-russia-hack-evidence/
DNC Hack, Trump, William Binney: https://theintercept.com/2017/11/07/dnc-hack-trump-cia-director-william-binney-nsa/
Rod Rosenstein Holds Press Conference For Law Enforcement Announcement: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhpEfxO0XEU
DNI Russian Hacking Report: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3254239/Russia-Hacking-report.pdf
DNI Russian Hacking Report: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3254239/Russia-Hacking-report.pdf
It’s 15 July, 2018. Trump is the U.S. President. The nation is apparently “divided,” whatever that’s suppose to mean. And 12 Russian military officers (who, if true, were likely under orders and will never step foot in the U.S.) are being indicted (no trial will ever happen) for something (cyber warfare) both countries have been conducting towards each other since any time I can remember. Why these 12, and why now? Who benefits? What’s the evidence? Our Truth is protected by men who stare at goats.