Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Sunday January 01 2017, @05:47PM   Printer-friendly
from the more-details-as-they-occur dept.

Obama Details Actions in Response to Russian Malicious Cyber Activity

U.S. President Obama writes:

I have issued an executive order that provides additional authority for responding to certain cyber activity that seeks to interfere with or undermine our election processes and institutions, or those of our allies or partners. Using this new authority, I have sanctioned nine entities and individuals: the GRU and the FSB, two Russian intelligence services; four individual officers of the GRU; and three companies that provided material support to the GRU's cyber operations. In addition, the Secretary of the Treasury is designating two Russian individuals for using cyber-enabled means to cause misappropriation of funds and personal identifying information. The State Department is also shutting down two Russian compounds, in Maryland and New York, used by Russian personnel for intelligence-related purposes, and is declaring "persona non grata" 35 Russian intelligence operatives. Finally, the Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Bureau of Investigation are releasing declassified technical information on Russian civilian and military intelligence service cyber activity, to help network defenders in the United States and abroad identify, detect, and disrupt Russia's global campaign of malicious cyber activities. [...] [The Obama] Administration will be providing a report to Congress in the coming days about Russia's efforts to interfere in our election, as well as malicious cyber activity related to our election cycle in previous elections.

Press release. Text of Executive Order. Annex to Executive Order.

Russia Calls for Expulsion of U.S. Diplomats

Although Russia's foreign minister has asked President Vladimir Putin to expel 35 U.S. diplomats from the country in response to President Obama's actions, President Putin has so far declined to do so.

Dispute on Russia's Involvement with DNC Hacking

A WikiLeaks associate has disputed the Russian hacking narrative, saying that he was handed the documents in Washington, D.C.:

On 15 December 2016, the British tabloid Daily Mail quoted Craig Murray, a former U.K. ambassador to Uzbekistan and "close associate" of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, as saying that the Democratic National Committee's e-mails were not obtained by WikiLeaks due to the efforts of Russian hackers but were instead leaked by a disgruntled DNC operative who had legal access to them [...]

Murray said he retrieved the package from a source during a clandestine meeting in a wooded area near American University, in northwest D.C. He said the individual he met with was not the original person who obtained the information, but an intermediary.

Of course, it could be completely untrue. At the moment we have only his account to work with.


Original Submission #1Original Submission #2Original Submission #3Original Submission #4

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by jmorris on Sunday January 01 2017, @06:53PM

    by jmorris (4844) on Sunday January 01 2017, @06:53PM (#448206)

    So now we live in bizarro world where the peace and safety of the world is depending on Vladimir "KGB" Putin being the adult in the room.

    We are still stuck on the Media Narrative of "hacked elections" when there is zero evidence, and no matter how many times they are called out on this lack of evidence they ignore it and stick to their script. And wonder why their level of public trust is now in single digits, barely distinguishable from the disdain Americans feel for Congress.

    We continue to be assailed daily with "The Russians are Coming!" nonsense when the person in a position to know said this:

    -- Begin Transcript ---
    Hannity: I know you follow the news closely, I know you see the narrative, now, there is a big brouhaha in the United States, the same media by the way, that Wikileaks exposed as colluding with Hillary Clinton's campaign. With near hysteria getting up to the president and John Podesta with Hillary's campaign, claiming over and over and over again, that it's clear, the CIA says so, even though there's no new evidence whatsoever that we didn't have prior to the election, and that the FBI contradicts, and James Clapper, the National Director of Intelligence contradicts. That in fact the Russian's tried to influence the elections and this hacked information came from them. And you're saying that is outright false. That's a falsehood.

    Assange: Our source is not the Russian government.

    Hannity: So in other words, let me be clear, Russia did not give you the Podesta documents or anything from the DNC?

    Assange: That's correct.

    Hannity: Can you confirm whether or not you have information involving hacked info from the RNC?

    Assange: We received about 3 pages of information to do with the RNC and Trump, but it was already public somewhere else.

    Hannity: Okay so in other words it was nothing significant, there was nothing comparable to what happened, so what Reince Priebus said on NBC to Chuck Todd this weekend was true and NBC had it wrong.

    Assange: Well as far as we're aware of.

    Hannity: As far as you're aware of.

    Assange: Yea.

    ..... [snippage]

    Hannity: So, you can't confirm or deny if this information came from within the United States?

    Assange: We're unhappy that we felt we needed to even say that it wasn't a state party, normally we say nothing at all, but we have a conflict of interest. We have an excellent reputation and strong interest in protecting our sources, and so never saying anything about them, never ruling anyone in or anyone out, we sometimes do it, we don't like to do it, we have another interest which is maximizing the impact of our publications. Uh, and...

    (interrupted) Hannity: Could you. Let me ask you this then.

    Assange: And so here, here in order to prevent a distraction attack against our publications, we've had to come out and say 'No, it's not a State party, stop trying to distract in that way, pay attention to the content of the publication'.

    Hannity: So in other words, when you say State party, it wasn't another State like Russia or some other country.

    Assange: Correct.
    --- End Transcript ---

    Now combine with what Craig Murray says above in the summary, the cold dead body of Seth Rich that Wikileaks keeps point out and offering rewards for information related to the murder and if you can't figure out what happened here and what attention is being deflected away from then you are not smart enough for this ride.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Flamebait=1, Troll=1, Insightful=2, Interesting=1, Informative=1, Total=6
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4