US top spy says Russian cyber attacks a ‘major threat’

[webfact]

US top spy says Russian cyber attacks a ‘major threat’

 

 

WASHINGTON: -- Russia’s involvement in the US presidential elections was unprecedented according to America’s top spy.

 

Testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee, the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said Moscow has a long history of interfering.

 

“This goes back to the 60s, the heyday of the Cold War. Funding that they would share or provide to candidates they supported, the use of disinformation. 

But I don’t think we’ve ever encountered a more aggressive or direct campaign to  interfere in our election process than we’ve seen in this case,” said Clapper.

 

Despite dismissals from President-elect Donald Trump about the findings, the congressional hearing was told by intelligence officials Russian cyber attacks pose a “major threat” to the United States.

 

Intelligence officials describe Moscow as dangerous to a wide range of US interests because of its “highly-advanced offensive cyber program” and sophisticated capabilities.

 

Trump will be briefed by intelligence agency chiefs on Friday about hacks that allegedly targeted the Democratic Party during the election campaign.

 

 

-- © Copyright Euronews 2017-01-06

[Baerboxer]

Boo hoo! It's all so unfair. Everyone knows Hillary was next in line. Maybe they should have a re-run, and another, and another until all the reasonable, clever, caring, democracy loving voters were enough to make sure she won?

 

What a load of BS. Show us the proof then? And if this has been going on since the 60's why are we just hearing about it? Did they help Obama win 2 times? And why TF haven't the security and intelligence services done something about it?

 

Of course the USA would never interfere in some other countries elections - 555!

[craigt3365]

21 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

Boo hoo! It's all so unfair. Everyone knows Hillary was next in line. Maybe they should have a re-run, and another, and another until all the reasonable, clever, caring, democracy loving voters were enough to make sure she won?

 

What a load of BS. Show us the proof then? And if this has been going on since the 60's why are we just hearing about it? Did they help Obama win 2 times? And why TF haven't the security and intelligence services done something about it?

 

Of course the USA would never interfere in some other countries elections - 555!

You're completely missing the point.  This isn't about Trump and Hillary.  This is about a hostile foreign power trying to influence the election process.  It's been proven.  Sad some can't see this.  The proof is there.

 

There has been plenty of news reports about this over the years.  Involving Russia, China, etc.  I guess you've just not seen them?

 

Nobody is saying the US hasn't done this.  That's a deflection...

[scousesucker]

47 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

You're completely missing the point.  This isn't about Trump and Hillary.  This is about a hostile foreign power trying to influence the election process.  It's been proven.  Sad some can't see this.  The proof is there.

 

There has been plenty of news reports about this over the years.  Involving Russia, China, etc.  I guess you've just not seen them?

 

Nobody is saying the US hasn't done this.  That's a deflection...

 

They have a vested interest in keeping the Russian bogeyman there.

[craigt3365]

21 minutes ago, scousesucker said:

 

They have a vested interest in keeping the Russian bogeyman there.

They have a vested interest in providing security against threats.  Russia seems to be giving them plenty of opportunities to provide this security.  Get rid of the threats would be a great start.

Edited January 6, 2017 by craigt3365

[Jonmarleesco]

7 hours ago, webfact said:

'... the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said Moscow has a long history of interfering.'

What's the saying about the pot and the kettle?

[Jonmarleesco]

1 hour ago, craigt3365 said:

You're completely missing the point.  This isn't about Trump and Hillary.  This is about a hostile foreign power trying to influence the election process.  It's been proven.  Sad some can't see this.  The proof is there.

 

There has been plenty of news reports about this over the years.  Involving Russia, China, etc.  I guess you've just not seen them?

 

Nobody is saying the US hasn't done this.  That's a deflection...

'Nobody is saying the US hasn't done this.  That's a deflection...' BS! It's making clear that the U.S. is stunningly hypocritical.

[craigt3365]

16 minutes ago, Jonmarleesco said:

'Nobody is saying the US hasn't done this.  That's a deflection...' BS! It's making clear that the U.S. is stunningly hypocritical.

When has the US hacked a political party's computer servers in a foreign country, just before an election, and passed on the data to another organization for publishing on the internet?  Only one example is needed.  Otherwise, it's not hypocritical.

[Berkshire]

2 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

You're completely missing the point.  This isn't about Trump and Hillary.  This is about a hostile foreign power trying to influence the election process.  It's been proven.  Sad some can't see this.  The proof is there.

 

There has been plenty of news reports about this over the years.  Involving Russia, China, etc.  I guess you've just not seen them?

 

Nobody is saying the US hasn't done this.  That's a deflection...

 

I agree that the evidence is overwhelming, that the Russians did try (and successfully) influence US elections.  And there's even evidence as to motive/objective.

 

What's rarely mentioned is this:  The only way that the Russians could have been successful is if there were enough stupid people to fall for it.  The Russians didn't physically infiltrate the voting apparatus to change the vote count (as far as I can tell).  They only exposed some hacked private e-mails (and maybe some fake news).  But a good portion of the American electorate allowed themselves to be influenced.  

[connda]

James Clapper?  The guy that told the Senate that the US doesn't spy on US citizens in the US?  That James Clapper?    Ok. Sure.  lol

[KenKadz]

James Clapper is a dinosaur hold over from the 60's he references.

The real "major threat" is the Federal Agencies themselves not being able to implement proper anti hacking security.

And employees/staff who ignore the rules and regulations of IT security taught to them by their Agencies, i.e. Clinton's private servers, Podesta using "password" as a password.

[craigt3365]

8 minutes ago, KenKadz said:

James Clapper is a dinosaur hold over from the 60's he references.

The real "major threat" is the Federal Agencies themselves not being able to implement proper anti hacking security.

And employees/staff who ignore the rules and regulations of IT security taught to them by their Agencies, i.e. Clinton's private servers, Podesta using "password" as a password.

And his replacement by Trump is an even older dinosaur.

 

As as been said before, just because you forgot to lock your door, doesn't mean it's OK for somebody to break in and steal your stuff.

[boomerangutang]

4 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

Boo hoo! It's all so unfair. Everyone knows Hillary was next in line. Maybe they should have a re-run, and another, and another until all the reasonable, clever, caring, democracy loving voters were enough to make sure she won?

What a load of BS. Show us the proof then? And if this has been going on since the 60's why are we just hearing about it? Did they help Obama win 2 times? And why TF haven't the security and intelligence services done something about it?

Of course the USA would never interfere in some other countries elections - 555!

Baerboxer says; "show us the proof then?"

 

       CIA and other US intelligence services have their means for gathering intelligence. If Trump or his fans don't like the CIA's findings, are they going to continually say, "show us the proof!" 

If unidentified bomber jets were flying from Russia toward the US, would Trump and his fans say, "I won't believe you until you show us the proof!"   Then, when proof is shown, Trump and his fans would say; "That's not conclusive proof. We want more proof, ......and more proof, .....and more proof."

 

       Trump and his echoers are sounding very immature.  Trump is supremely subjective (like a 9 year old bratty girl) about every thing that comes his way.  Everything in his world is either love or hate, and those sentiments can get reversed in a NY minute, depending on whether it burnishes his ego or not.   

 

      Trump's Christmas card for 2015 showed just him in front of an Xmas tree.  No family, no kind greetings.  He's egotist #1.   What a loser he will be.  I will publicly celebrate when he's brought down in flames.

[dunroaming]

Trump has benefited by Russia's actions but cannot admit that.  He has to continue to poo poo the evidence as a mistake by the security forces because if he gave them credit then it would indicate that it is true.  Better for him to just diss the men who are trying to protect the USA from the bad guys.

[CharlieK]

7 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

Better for him to just diss the men who are trying to protect the USA from the bad guys.

 

But who are really the bad guys? Wouldn't the world maybe be a safer place if Russia and the US were friendly towards each other. 

 

Is this really about Russia helping Trump or distracting from the fact that Clinton is corrupt. Besides Obama has shown his allies they couldn't trust him. A success for the US he has not been. Arguably leaving the world less safe than before he took office.

[impulse]

The sad thing is that we can't trust a word coming out of their mouths, even when they have their hand up swearing an oath to tell the truth.  Even when they're testifying under oath to Congress.  

 

Snowden's documents and Wikileaks proved that over and over again.

 

 

Edited January 6, 2017 by impulse

[dunroaming]

4 minutes ago, CharlieK said:

 

But who are really the bad guys? Wouldn't the world maybe be a safer place if Russia and the US were friendly towards each other. 

 

Is this really about Russia helping Trump or distracting from the fact that Clinton is corrupt. Besides Obama has shown his allies they couldn't trust him. A success for the US he has not been. Arguably leaving the world less safe than before he took office.

 

Well one man's "bad guy" is another man's hero I guess.  You raise a good point and I suppose the "bad guys" are the ones who conduct themselves in ways that go against our idea of what is acceptable.  If you feel that the way that Putin runs his country is OK and that he treats everyone in a fair, balanced way and how you would want to be treated then he is not a bad guy at all.  Ditto the President of the USA.  If you feel that Putin and Trump are cut from the same cloth and want the same goals then all is well in your world.

[CharlieK]

Just now, dunroaming said:

 

Well one man's "bad guy" is another man's hero I guess.  You raise a good point and I suppose the "bad guys" are the ones who conduct themselves in ways that go against our idea of what is acceptable.  If you feel that the way that Putin runs his country is OK and that he treats everyone in a fair, balanced way and how you would want to be treated then he is not a bad guy at all.  Ditto the President of the USA.  If you feel that Putin and Trump are cut from the same cloth and want the same goals then all is well in your world.

 

Like being politically correct, or is being politically correct just another way of stopping people saying what they think? Freedom is relative, if you have money you can have a certain amount of freedom to live your life as you want. if you don't then you are in the treadmill a slave to the system. 

 

Are Americans more free than Russians, There is probably as much inequality in the US as Russia.  Besides there is so much noise about this hacking you have to wonder why it's in the news for so long, and what is it a smokescreen for? 

 

Maybe ask the Afghanis who was worse the Russians or the Americans, I wonder how Iraqis feel about America? obviously it's all the blame of Russia!    

[dunroaming]

1 hour ago, CharlieK said:

 

Like being politically correct, or is being politically correct just another way of stopping people saying what they think? Freedom is relative, if you have money you can have a certain amount of freedom to live your life as you want. if you don't then you are in the treadmill a slave to the system. 

 

Are Americans more free than Russians, There is probably as much inequality in the US as Russia.  Besides there is so much noise about this hacking you have to wonder why it's in the news for so long, and what is it a smokescreen for? 

 

Maybe ask the Afghanis who was worse the Russians or the Americans, I wonder how Iraqis feel about America? obviously it's all the blame of Russia!    

 

So both the USA and Russia are flawed.  You are comparing which one is more flawed than the other?

 

"Freedom is relative, if you have money you can have a certain amount of freedom to live your life as you want. if you don't then you are in the treadmill a slave to the system."

 

Can see that you have certainly nailed your colours to the flag there.  Trump would be proud of those sentiments.

[boomerangutang]

        As important a factor in the whole equation is the large portion of American voters who voted for Trump.  They proved how easily duped/manipulated they can be - both by Trump and by Putin's cyber agents. The US is unsafe to the extent its people dwell in stupid realms.   Stupid people put Trump in power, so now all Americans (easily-duped and others) will suffer under his dangerous rule.

 

         Incidentally, lap dog Pence just came out publicly - dissing US intelligence services - while supporting (what choice does he have?) Trump's idiotic praising of Putin, Assange and others of their ilk.   Russkies and other foreigners are laughing at Trump and his sheeple for electing such a dufus as leader.

 

 

 

[CharlieK]

11 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

So both the USA and Russia are flawed.  You are comparing which one is more flawed than the other?

 

no, just that both are as bad or as good as each other. 

12 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

 

Can see that you have certainly nailed your colours to the flag there.  Trump would be proud of those sentiments.

Surely that is the unreality of the American dream? lol

But it is fact, you can do a lot more with money than you can without. 

[A1Str8]

Don't worry, this old system is collapsing anyway. There's no need to be concerned with something that's dying. 

[dunroaming]

5 minutes ago, CharlieK said:

 

no, just that both are as bad or as good as each other. 

Surely that is the unreality of the American dream? lol

But it is fact, you can do a lot more with money than you can without. 

 

"no, just that both are as bad or as good as each other."

 

Not sure that the USA have openly killed journalists that go against them or advocated the use of chemical weapons against civilians or bombing Aid convoys and hospitals.  Still there is now the opportunity with Trump in the driving seat.

 

"Surely that is the unreality of the American dream? lol

But it is fact, you can do a lot more with money than you can without." 

 

It is true that you can do a lot more with money than without.  But there are some who use their money for the benefit of others as well as themselves and there is the school of Trump.

[Morch]

6 hours ago, impulse said:

The sad thing is that we can't trust a word coming out of their mouths, even when they have their hand up swearing an oath to tell the truth.  Even when they're testifying under oath to Congress.  

 

Snowden's documents and Wikileaks proved that over and over again.

 

 

 

But, for some reason, we are to expected to place unquestionable trust in Wikileaks and Snowden?

[impulse]

6 hours ago, Morch said:

But, for some reason, we are to expected to place unquestionable trust in Wikileaks and Snowden?

 

I don't trust them, either.  But I only use those names as examples of whistleblowers and the entities that publish the leaked information.  Like Daniel Ellsberg and Bastion Obermayer, to whom I owe a debt of gratitude.  And others would line them up against a wall and shoot them if they could get away with it.

 

And, like the Panama Papers and the Pentagon Papers before them, thousands to millions of documents paint a picture that may be a lot different than what's been claimed by the people mentioned in those documents.

 

[craigt3365]

14 hours ago, impulse said:

The sad thing is that we can't trust a word coming out of their mouths, even when they have their hand up swearing an oath to tell the truth.  Even when they're testifying under oath to Congress.  

 

Snowden's documents and Wikileaks proved that over and over again.

 

 

But it's been proven Assange has lied.  Can't believe him either.  IMHO, he was never a credible source.

[craigt3365]

14 hours ago, CharlieK said:

 

But who are really the bad guys? Wouldn't the world maybe be a safer place if Russia and the US were friendly towards each other. 

 

Is this really about Russia helping Trump or distracting from the fact that Clinton is corrupt. Besides Obama has shown his allies they couldn't trust him. A success for the US he has not been. Arguably leaving the world less safe than before he took office.

Russia has invaded and occupied several countries lately.  Killing innocent civilians in the process.  Georgia, Ukraine, Chechnya, Moldova.  I've yet to see the US do that.  Yes, there's been wars in the Middle East, but Russia's in there also, as are dozens of other countries.  Hard to saw what Russia has done there isn't bad.

 

This isn't 100% about the elections.  Nor Obama's performance.  It's about national security and a hostile foreign power who definitely tried (and maybe did) influence a national election.  Along with all the other hacks they've done over the years.

 

Time to get tough and fight back.  I can guarantee if Russia backed down, so would the US.  It happened after the end of the cold war, it can happen again. But it takes 2 to tango, and doesn't seem Putin is interested in this right now.

 

As the OP states, what Russia is doing is a major threat to the security of the US.  No denying that.

[craigt3365]

14 hours ago, CharlieK said:

 

Like being politically correct, or is being politically correct just another way of stopping people saying what they think? Freedom is relative, if you have money you can have a certain amount of freedom to live your life as you want. if you don't then you are in the treadmill a slave to the system. 

 

Are Americans more free than Russians, There is probably as much inequality in the US as Russia.  Besides there is so much noise about this hacking you have to wonder why it's in the news for so long, and what is it a smokescreen for? 

 

Maybe ask the Afghanis who was worse the Russians or the Americans, I wonder how Iraqis feel about America? obviously it's all the blame of Russia!    

No comparing Americans to Russians.  Their lives are completely different.  Russians aren't free to travel.  Aren't free to start their own political party.  Don't have freedom of the press.  As for inequality:

 

http://www.rferl.org/a/russia-billionaire-wealth-inequality/25132471.html

Quote

A new report on global wealth has determined that Russia now has the highest level of wealth inequality in the world -- with the exception of a few small Caribbean nations where billionaires have taken up residency.

The annual global wealth study published by the financial services group Credit Suisse says a mere 110 Russian citizens now control 35 percent of the total household wealth across the vast country.

 

It's a good time to be in Putin's inner circle. LOL

[boomerangutang]

Trump and the sheeple he surrounds himself with, are proving their idiocy every day........

 

npr.org/2017/01/06/508520414/on-intelligence-and-election-hacking-trump-and-his-team-continue-to-miss-the-point

 

npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/01/06/508568241/putin-ordered-influence-campaign-to-help-trump-u-s-intelligence-report-says

[impulse]

1 hour ago, craigt3365 said:

But it's been proven Assange has lied.  Can't believe him either.  IMHO, he was never a credible source.

 

I don't believe him, either.  But I'm inclined to believe the hundreds of thousands of whistleblower documents he's been instrumental in publishing.