airiefairie: (Default)
[personal profile] airiefairie
"We want to know what led to this so we can hopefully try and prevent something like this from happening in the future."

These words by Dr. David Relman, an infectious disease expert and microbiologist at Stanford University, pretty much sum up the overall conversation surrounding the origins of COVID-19 in 2021. Did come from a lab? Was it an inter-species transfer? Or maybe something else? Surely in time the answer will become clearer, right?

But now, 3 years after the start of the pandemic which still disrupts our daily lives, the US is only adding more uncertainty about what really happened in Wuhan in late 2019. The Department has assessed that the COVID-19 pandemic most likely originated from a lab leak in China:

https://www.skynews.com.au/world-news/united-states/covid19-most-likely-caused-by-a-laboratory-leak-says-united-states-energy-department-in-shocking-new-report/news-story/657846c69334b91bec31de96ae88a51d

Read more... )
fridi: (Default)
[personal profile] fridi

I wonder how much of the equipment from the balloon will be saved...

Suspected Chinese spy balloon flying above U.S. shot down off Carolina coast

Strangely enough, the Chinese explanation that the balloon was a weather balloon that went off its projected course because of weather conditions which exceeded the balloon's ability to maintain its intended course, has been accepted by almost everyone who knows anything about the conditions that existed in the upper atmosphere at the time.

The baying hounds of ignorance, on the other hand, staunchly maintain that it was a "spy balloon". Whether they are going to point to the fact that the balloon wasn't recovered for examination is **P*R*O*O*F** that it was a "spy balloon equipped with a self-destruct mechanism" remains to be seen.

PS - You do know that a helicopter that had been rigged with a grappling hook that had specially sharpened tines could theoretically have snagged the balloon and brought it back to the US so that all America could see the "spy equipment" that was mounted on it - don't you?

Anyway, I'm sure you were waiting for this, so here's a meme dump on the subject: MEMES OMG!
nairiporter: (Default)
[personal profile] nairiporter
Hey folks! Just wondering what signs do you use to indicate high intelligence in a person.

I was reading up on it and found a few lists. Some of the things made sense to me, things like high adaptability, openness to new experiences and a good sense of humour, among others.

Have you ever been around someone who you consider very smart? How does he/she behave?

And do you think that you are a very smart person too? ;-)

Let's discuss.
fridi: (Default)
[personal profile] fridi
Now we know why US is so afraid of Huawei, there's just no back door in the network system for US to peek through. ;-)

U.S. spied on Merkel and other Europeans through Danish cables

And this was during Obama's time. You know, the Nobel Peace Prize winner. The US spied on a key ally and "friend". Mock quotes mine.

Can we expect some sanctions on the US and Denmark now please? I mean, China is a bad guy, sure, and Russia definitely is a bad guy, doing all that spying and stuff, and meddling in other countries' affairs and all that. Sanctions, anyone? Hey, where is everyone going? Hello?
johnny9fingers: (Default)
[personal profile] johnny9fingers
The new Mick Herron dropped on the 4th Feb; Slough House.

(I give it a hearty recommend BTW.)

But rather than spoilers I wanted to talk about how reality bleeds into a lot of current spy novels. And also how it seems that the international Intelligence community has finally tired of Uncle Vlad's way of doing things. I mean it's obvious that our spooks talk to novelists working on spook stories; and writers like Herron are included in one of the outer loops of the intel community - moving closer depending on their "soundness", no doubt.

Anyway, over the years I may have alluded to all the rumours about Uncle Vlad's time as a Berlin operative; that he was well-known in certain communities, and even had a future in them had he so chosen. (When it comes to spooks, quis custodiet ipsos custodes normally means spook-watchers like me.)

So, on page 40 of Slough House, Herron has this:

'"Rah-rah-rah Putin, homicidal Russian queen." Gay porn lost a superstar when he went into despotism, right? Could have been the new Joe Dallesandro.'

And later on the same page He calls Uncle Vlad "The Kremlin's Gay Hussar."

Methinks the pics will go viral soon. That seems to be the way these things work.

But even if the pics come out will it actually damage Auntie Uncle Vlad?
luzribeiro: (Default)
[personal profile] luzribeiro
Let this sink in:

Russian government hackers are behind a broad espionage campaign that has compromised U.S. agencies, including Treasury and Commerce
and
Pompeo Says Russia Was Behind Cyberattack on U.S.

Can we expect that Trump finally retaliate? Or he will keep playing like nothing has happened? Is Trump protecting Putin's gang Ozero/KGB, or afraid of Muscovites?

The dacha cooperative Ozero was founded in 1996 by Vladimir Smirnov (head), Vladimir Putin, and some other guys who had a series of secret meetings in their dachas (villas) around St.Petersburg, near Lake Komsomolskoye (hence the name of the group Ozero, meaning lake). But it was nothing like those ridiculous adventures from the Peculiarities of the Russian Fishing and Hunting movies. Although there probably was vodka, and lots of it.

Read more... )
johnny9fingers: (Default)
[personal profile] johnny9fingers
When this crossed my desk I felt I had to comment:

www.theguardian.com/world/2019/dec/10/murdered-chechen-separatist-zelimkhan-khangoshvili-had-killed-on-russian-soil-says-putin

And I wondered how the German press portray the politicians of any stripe who are or were, er, um, apologists for Uncle Vlad’s extra-judicial actions?

So if something like this happened in your nation; and folk died because of some odd external, Russian-linked action, how would you feel about the folk who deflected, temporised, defended, or apologised for such things? I mean to say, let due process take its course and then take action. “Beyond reasonable doubt” used to be the benchmark.

Then I wondered; can we blame the Ukraine yet?

Now it may well be that Zelimkhan Khangoshvili was a nasty, evil man, with murderous sins staining his soul. So Uncle Vlad goes for the low-hanging fruit that everyone wants rid of; but establishing and re-enforcing a precedent that it is ok to send assassins into any territory to kill your enemies.

So my questions to the panel are as follows:

Is it likely that someone other than the Russians offed Khangoshvili?
If it was a Russian action, was the extra-judicial killing justified or was it murder?
And if it was murder, what action by Germany seems appropriate and proportionate?

[personal profile] edelsont
In a recent dispatch from the alternate universe that is Donald Trump's brain, we learn that that he had “smiled” when North Korea described Joe Biden recently as a “fool of low I.Q.” The White House spokeswoman, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, also said that Mr. Trump and Mr. Kim’s government “agree in their assessment” of Mr. Biden.  (www.nytimes.com/2019/05/28/us/politics/trump-biden-north-korea.html)

Later in the day, Mr. Biden chose to take the high road in response: “I’m not going to get down in the mud wrestling with this fella.”
 
Probably a sound strategy, in general.  But in this case, I think maybe he could have had it both ways.  Would he have been "getting down in the mud" if he had replied with something like this?
 
"I don't know about you, Mr. President.  But speaking for myself, I don't think that an endorsement from Kim Jong-un is something that I would choose to brag about."
 

Trump...

12/6/18 09:54
johnny9fingers: (Default)
[personal profile] johnny9fingers
Some time ago I opined that Trump's finances were so opaque that we couldn't really judge him on the finance issue.

I also suggested that there may be a set of metrics with which we could assess Trump's policies in the light of possible collaboration with "external policy makers".

Now the metrics involved alienating the US's traditional allies, and courting the regimes who were the US's traditional opponents.

(As as disclaimer: I think that a NK deal would be a good thing if it happens, whoever manages to make it happen.)

However, trade wars with the G7, requesting the readmission of Russia to the G7 nations, and subsequent rapprochements with Russia et al, do look to be lining up Trump on the side of Uncle Vlad, alongside others like Arron Banks and Nigel Farage in the UK, and a few other Europeans.

The single greatest intelligence operation of all time has left odd bedfellows of the fellow-travellers. Boris, and Rees-Mogg etc are all aligning themselves with Trump and Uncle Vlad, despite knowing the intel available. As for folk like Assange, well....

So given the fact that Uncle Vlad has gotten away with it all, what can we expect from the next branch of geopolitical manoeuvrings?

I'd suggest a complete re-integration of Russia into the world community at the behest of someone other than the US, but with the US's backing.
We can forget about Crimea and the Ukraine, we can forget about nerve agents, and we can forget about all sorts of other activities which have subverted various western polities; because none of that will matter if Russia and the US work in tandem in time to Uncle Vlad's marching music.

But what is becoming obvious is that our intelligence services are not fit for purpose in the modern world. If I can work this stuff out, so can they. Instead they are so preoccupied with Muslim terrorism that they are prepared for our polities to be subverted in other ways by non-Muslims with other agendas.

As for me, common sense indicates I should learn to suck up to Uncle Vlad, his minions, and his agenda. Everyone else has, and I suppose it makes sense.
[identity profile] dreamville-bg.livejournal.com
He's not free yet, but Assange is allowed a breath of fresh air... at least metaphorically.

Julian Assange: Sweden drops rape investigation

Watch the British police arrest him on the way to the airport. For what, you ask? For existing. Or more hilariously, for breaking bail on a non existent case. He has served a multi-year sentence. Even the cheapest lawyer would get him off the hook with ease. So that leaves extradition. I bet the US deep state still wants him to suffer an accident.

As for the so called other whistleblower... )
[identity profile] mahnmut.livejournal.com
So, after essentially handling a lost election to Trump on a silver plate, FBI director Comey suddenly becomes too much of an inconvenience for the guy he single-handedly made president, as he reveals he's looking into possible links between Russia and the Trump campaign - and gets duly fired for it. How beautiful! Long live democracy, and the separation of powers!

Oh, and Trump surrogates like Kellyanne Conway get grilled by the media about this, and most of them fail to make a sound case on Dear Leader's behalf - but so what? The deed is done already. And no one seems to be able to do anything about it. The president has removed an FBI director for investigating him. Cool.

Not that it took a lot of effort, what with Republicans in charge, but the Russians have succeeded with Phase 2 of their effort to invade the US... they have succeeded at totally disrupting the operations of their primary enemy's government (Phase 1 having been to install a buffoonish puppet into the executive office).

It's almost scary how easily these things happen.
[identity profile] debunkgpolitics.livejournal.com
Originally posted by [livejournal.com profile] debunkgpolitics at Former NSA Advisor and U.N. Ambassador Rice on Charges of Spying on the Trump Campaign
The April 4, 2017 interview with Ms. Rice https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpjN4iEz9Ooraised additional questions that would prove or disprove claims that she assisted in spying on the Trump Campaign.
In the beginning, she gave a fictional example of when unmaking a name would be necessary. Plus, Ms. Rice said that sometimes unmasking a name is sometimes okay (~5:35). Both points are sensible, as identifying the American can help officials better assess whether there is a serious threat. She later said that the White House would/could not have directed intelligence agencies to spy on political opponents (~11:14).
Another revealing point Ms. Rice made is that she, along with any other NSA Advisor, receives information based on what the intelligence community (IC) considers important (~11:58). Thus, the NSA Advisor is subject to the discretion of other intelligence officials, who have their own standard process of whether to specifically identify an American (~6:23).
Ms. Rice also said that possible Russian interference in the 2016 Presidential election was revealed about six months ago.
Ms. Rice is correct in that interference in any U.S. Presidential election is a grave concern for the IC. Thus, the IC had every reason to unmask the name of an American conversing with Russian to properly investigate the matter. Clearly, the IC found identifying Gen. Mike Flynn necessary.
The pertinent questions are:
1. Did she request reports concerning possible Russian interference in the election?
2. Why would anyone reveal Gen. Flynn to the public rather than keep is identity internal?
3. How long did the IC monitor Gen. Flynn? Interfering with an election and investigating a threat to national security takes a while.
4. How much of the monitoring did Ms. Rice follow? Surely, she would have been regularly provided reports of an attempt to interfere with a national election.
[identity profile] nairiporter.livejournal.com
Interesting piece here about this new "Putin has sensitive compromising intel on Trump" debackle:

Everything you need to know about the Russian art of ‘kompromat’

Essentially, it explains what a "kompromat" is (compromising material), and how the Russians have developed it into art during the golden age of the KGB. Unlike their US counterparts, where politicians tend to use damaging information about opponents during election campaigns, aiming to discredit them and torpedo their campaigns, thus winning elections (i.e. the information tends to surface and make a splash in public space)

In Russia things are otherwise. Such information is actually seldom released. Rather, it is used to blackmail important politicians into doing your bidding: you force them to do you favours, and play by your tune for the entire duration of their term. It is an art in a twisted way, because it requires a lot of skill, persistence, and the knowledge to use the information in the appropriate moment in the best way possible.

Read more... )
[identity profile] luvdovz.livejournal.com
CIA and FBI Now Agree: Russians Hacked to Help Trump

All right. Let's clear something out. To all those who are fuming over Putin's intervention in the US election, I'd like to remind that trying to manipulate elections is actually a well-known American sport. It was the CIA that started their work by intervening in foreign elections as early as 1948, when they influenced the outcome of the Italian elections. There's a book by Tim Weiner about it, called Legacy of Ashes. The purpose was to halt the advancement of the communists in Italian politics.

It was shortly thereafter that that CIA engineered the coup against Mossadegh in Iran. He was the democratically elected leader, right? Wasn't America supposed to be promoting democracy? Well, not really. The US conspired together with the British to install the Shah. We all know what happened after that. Axis of Evil? You created it, and now you're complaining about it!

And then there was Guatemala, Chile... The list could go on for quite a while. Hell, it even includes Japan, the paragon of post-war democracy! The liberal democrats there came to dominate Japanese politics in the early decades of that democracy. Sounds good - except that happened largely thanks to millions of dollars of covert CIA donations. We don't want the people to choose the wrong politicians, do we?

So let`s see now )
[identity profile] luzribeiro.livejournal.com
Bombshell Secret CIA Report Says Russia Aimed To Steal White House For Trump
"A shocking secret CIA assessment has concluded that Russia interfered with the U.S. presidential election expressly to help Donald Trump win, according to an exclusive report Friday by The Washington Post."

Trump denies CIA report that Russia intervened to help him win election
"President-elect Donald Trump said he does not believe the CIA’s conclusion that Russia intervened in the election to help him win, attributing the assessment to Democrats who supported Hillary Clinton and claiming repeatedly that the U.S. intelligence community has “no idea” what might have happened."

First, how could he know what some hackers from another country did or did not do? Of course he'll say he doesn't believe it. And of course, for his supporters, belief is everything. Fact doesn't matter.

Read more... )
[identity profile] abomvubuso.livejournal.com
Recently relevant case in point: Laos. Obama did try to heal old wounds while visiting the South-East Asian country. He was actually the first US president to visit Laos - ever. Still, the country has half a century old grudge with the US. The American invasion in Laos had all the features of a horror thriller movie from the Vietnam War times. One only with losing sides in it. And the biggest loser of them all was of course the people of Laos.

They were relentlessly bombed by the US between 1964 and 1973. The first 5 years were actually secret war - even the US Congress was kept in the dark about it. The US unloaded over 2 million tons of bombs over Laos, many of them never exploding. 1/3 of the country is still covered with cluster bombs today, many are still taking lives. Some regions will probably never be fully cleaned.


Read more... )
[identity profile] mahnmut.livejournal.com
The Saudi question! The missing 28 pages! Who did it? It's 9-11 all over again!

That's right. The long-awaited classified files comprising of 28 pages telling us nothing new, have been declassified at long last. And, expectedly, they don't tell us, well anything new. Saudi Arabia the government "probably" wasn't involved in 9-11. But some Saudi officials might have been. That ambassador for example. He met with some of the 9-11 attackers and aided them in settling in the US just prior to the actual attack, it seems. Was he acting on his own? Was he a rogue operative? A cell in the vast network of Al Qaeda that the Saudis claim they've been actively fighting against on their soil? Predictably, these 28 pages don't tell us any of that. But quite a few eyebrows being raised from all of this, is quite natural, given the circumstances:

A newly declassified section of an investigation into the 9/11 attacks alleges connections between Saudi officials and the perpetrators.

Once more, we have to re-live the entire drama of 9-11. Why now, some might ask. I dunno, perhaps Obama is trying to make up for some missed opportunities from throughout his tenure, now that his sojourn in the White House is fast coming to a close? Make a lasting impact of some sorts? Maybe he doesn't care if the US-Saudi relations would get any much worse than they already are (and hey, aren't they icy at this point!)

Point is, these 28 pages aren't giving us anything conclusive. No lid is being removed from a huge bowl of stinking secrets. We're all left disappointed in the utter lack of surprises there.

Of course, most of us "know" in "our guts" that there must have been a Saudi involvement. It just can't be that these guys acted without any help from a relatively powerful intelligence service. But if we're expecting the truth to be presented to us on a silver plate, just like that, it ain't going to happen. Not within at least a couple more decades, I predict.

Then it wouldn't even matter that much. And that's the catch.
[identity profile] luvdovz.livejournal.com
There's a certain sense of confusion in some European and Asian capitals right now about the fact that the current US administration, with a remarkable persistence that's worthy of a much nobler cause, keeps insisting on deposing Assad in Syria - what's more, they want to do it before the terrorist groups there have been eliminated. I.e., right here, right now. But putting short-term goals ahead of long-term consequences is not something that should be a surprise as far as US foreign policy is concerned, is it.

Hillary Clinton, the "presumed" nominee of the Democrats, is the one prominent presidential candidate to support this view. The arguments in favor of that proposal are as well-known as they're unconvincing. The Department of State and the White House seem to believe that the root cause for all the mess in Syria and the ascent of the Islamic State is none else but Assad himself (omitting to mention how the US invasion of Iraq was what really unlocked the gates for the ascent of extremism; plus some other reasons that are not so convenient to know, and are therefore discussed even less). Even more amazing is the belief that some sort of "moderate" opposition does indeed exist in Syria, and not only that, but it's capable of replacing the current oppressive regime, and oppose the the terrorists adequately. I'm sure most people with a brain have figured out by now that this is much closer to fantasy than reality.

Read more... )

Credits & Style Info

Talk Politics.

A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods

DAILY QUOTE:
"The NATO charter clearly says that any attack on a NATO member shall be treated, by all members, as an attack against all. So that means that, if we attack Greenland, we'll be obligated to go to war against ... ourselves! Gee, that's scary. You really don't want to go to war with the United States. They're insane!"

January 2026

M T W T F S S
    12 34
5 678 91011
12 13 1415 161718
19 202122 232425
262728293031