Former British Ambassador: Russia Election Hack Conspiracy Theory is Kafkaesque

Former British Ambassador Says Russia Election Hack Conspiracy Theory is *Kafkaesque

[* Characteristic or reminiscent of the oppressive or nightmarish qualities of Franz Kafka’s fictional world.~TLB ed.]


by Kurt Nimmo

For the political class and the establishment media, fantasy has become hard, cold fact: Russia hacked the US election.

There is absolutely no evidence of this.

The New York Times, The Washington Post, ABC News, NBC News, Politico, on and on, the entire establishment media is feeding on a lie given credence by an organization that has lied, cheated, and killed people for almost 70 years—the CIA.

On Monday, outgoing Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, said Donald Trump colluded with WikiLeaks and the Russians.

“Someone in the Trump campaign organization was in on the deal. I have no doubt. Now, whether they told [Trump] or not, I don’t know. I assume they did. But there is no question about that,” Reid told The Huffington Post. “So there is collusion there, clearly.”

“Don’t put blindfolds on,” Reid said, urging us to believe the agitprop put out by the Mighty Wurlitzer, the CIA, and the illogical conclusions of the Democrats, echoed by millions who no longer believe in democratic elections, or what passes for democratic elections.

Craig Murray, Britain’s former ambassador to Uzbekistan, on Monday dispelled the myth in a post on his blog.

“A little simple logic demolishes the CIA’s claims,” he writes. “The CIA claim they ‘know the individuals’ involved. Yet under Obama the USA has been absolutely ruthless in its persecution of whistleblowers, and its pursuit of foreign hackers through extradition. We are supposed to believe that in the most vital instance imaginable, an attempt by a foreign power to destabilize a US election, even though the CIA knows who the individuals are, nobody is going to be arrested or extradited, or (if in Russia) made subject to yet more banking and other restrictions against Russian individuals? Plainly it stinks. The anonymous source claims of ‘We know who it was, it was the Russians’ are beneath contempt.”

“I know who leaked them,” Murray told The Guardian. “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.”

Murray writes that the fantasy embraced by Democrats and passed off as truth by the establishment media is Kafkaesque.

“The worst thing about all this is that it is aimed at promoting further conflict with Russia. This puts everyone in danger for the sake of more profits for the arms and security industries—including of course bigger budgets for the CIA.”

He told Russia’s Sputnik the claim is “absolute nonsense” and added that it “is extremely amusing for the CIA to be accusing another country of interfering in domestic elections, when interfering in other country’s domestic elections on scores of occasions is what the CIA has done to effect regime change for the last 70 years so really; this is almost beyond satire.”

Back in August, NSA whistleblower William Binney said the DNC leak was not the work of Russia, but rather a disgruntled intelligence worker. He said the hacker was motivated by Hillary Clinton’s disregard for national security.

Despite this, the fantasy lives on. “Donald Trump is increasingly alone in questioning conclusion that Moscow stole emails from Democrats and Hillary Clinton’s campaign,” insists The Wall Street Journal.

Establishment Republicans have joined Democrats in calling for an investigation. Ten members of the Electoral College sent an open letter to James Clapper, director of national intelligence. They argue it will be impossible to fulfill their constitutional obligations unless they know “whether there are ongoing investigations into ties between Donald Trump, his campaign or associates, and Russian government interference in the election.”

This is the last ditch effort to overturn the election and install Hillary Clinton in the White House. It is unlikely the electors will change the election result. However, after Trump is inaugurated, there may be an attempt to impeach him using bogus “evidence” cooked up by the CIA and passed off as gospel truth to a gullible public, especially Democrats.


Original article

TLB finds other timely articles at Balcklisted News

About the author Kurt Nimmo


Join UsFind out about our great new TLB Project Membership package and benefits, add your voice and help us to change the world!

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.