3 ms·

Weird article: >U.S. officials said that they had no evidence President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine or his top lieutenants were involved in the operation, or

by r721 4y ago

Weird article: >U.S. officials said that they had no evidence President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine or his top lieutenants were involved in the operation, or that the perpetrators were acting at the direction of any Ukrainian government officials. >U.S. officials said there was much they did not know about the perpetrators and their affiliations. The review of newly collected intelligence suggests they were opponents of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, but does not specify the members of the group, or who directed or paid for the operation. >Officials who have reviewed the intelligence said they believed the saboteurs were most likely Ukrainian or Russian nationals, or some combination of the two.

roundandround 4y ago
This sounds similar to the nonsense that packets from China mean Chinese attackers.. Every country is capable of recruiting people who speak Russian and/or Ukrainian, and many wanted no way back. If these people are government independent in origin, it still wouldn't surprise me if it later comes out that multiple governments had infiltrators to the group that were the only ones pushing hard enough to make it happen.. I think the FBI realized that some "militant" student groups were almost entirely passive aside from FBI and police sponsored infiltrators.
KarlKemp 4y ago
It could also be some Russian opponent of Putin, maybe in business or someone like Nawalny.
we_never_see_it 4y ago
>Officials who have reviewed the intelligence said they believed the saboteurs were most likely Ukrainian or Russian nationals, or some combination of the two. This actually validates my thesis that Russia was behind the attack to blame Ukraine. It is also very concerning that this type of "intel" only came into light after Republicans took control of the house. There is no word how much Trump and Republicans have influenced this "intel".
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  While the intelligence (like law enforcement) community is very heavily Republican, there is very little reason to suspect that the Republican's majority in the House has a substantial impact on the internal political bias in executive branch agencies.
- vintermann 4y ago
  If Russia was behind this attack to blame Ukraine, isn't it weird that they blamed UK first, then (after Hersh's article) Norway and US? In fact, even now, they're refusing to accept the theory that Ukraine was involved. I think you should question your thesis.

by r721 4y ago

roundandround 4y ago

This sounds similar to the nonsense that packets from China mean Chinese attackers.. Every country is capable of recruiting people who speak Russian and/or Ukrainian, and many wanted no way back. If these people are government independent in origin, it still wouldn't surprise me if it later comes out that multiple governments had infiltrators to the group that were the only ones pushing hard enough to make it happen.. I think the FBI realized that some "militant" student groups were almost entirely passive aside from FBI and police sponsored infiltrators.

KarlKemp 4y ago

It could also be some Russian opponent of Putin, maybe in business or someone like Nawalny.

we_never_see_it 4y ago

>Officials who have reviewed the intelligence said they believed the saboteurs were most likely Ukrainian or Russian nationals, or some combination of the two. This actually validates my thesis that Russia was behind the attack to blame Ukraine. It is also very concerning that this type of "intel" only came into light after Republicans took control of the house. There is no word how much Trump and Republicans have influenced this "intel".

dragonwriter 4y ago
While the intelligence (like law enforcement) community is very heavily Republican, there is very little reason to suspect that the Republican's majority in the House has a substantial impact on the internal political bias in executive branch agencies.
vintermann 4y ago
If Russia was behind this attack to blame Ukraine, isn't it weird that they blamed UK first, then (after Hersh's article) Norway and US? In fact, even now, they're refusing to accept the theory that Ukraine was involved. I think you should question your thesis.