Former UK ambassador: I’ve met DNC Wikileaks leaker, and it’s an insider,...

Former UK ambassador: I’ve met DNC Wikileaks leaker, and it’s an insider, not a Russian

179
0
Craig Murray, former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, said he's met the Wikileaks leaker and he's not a Russian.
Craig Murray, former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, said the Wikileaks leaker is not a Russian.
Craig Murray, former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, said he's met the Wikileaks leaker and he's not a Russian.
Craig Murray, former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, said the Wikileaks leaker is not a Russian.

On Saturday, the UK Guardian quoted Craig Murray, a former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan and a close associate of Julian Assange, who said in no uncertain terms that he has met the Wikileaks leaker, whom he described as an insider and not a Russian.

According to the Guardian:

The Kremlin has rejected the hacking accusations, while the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has previously said the DNC leaks were not linked to Russia. A second senior official cited by the Washington Post conceded that intelligence agencies did not have specific proof that the Kremlin was “directing” the hackers, who were said to be one step removed from the Russian government.

Craig Murray, the former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, who is a close associate of Assange, called the CIA claims “bullshit”, adding: “They are absolutely making it up.”

“I know who leaked them,” Murray said. “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.

“If what the CIA are saying is true, and the CIA’s statement refers to people who are known to be linked to the Russian state, they would have arrested someone if it was someone inside the United States.

“America has not been shy about arresting whistleblowers and it’s not been shy about extraditing hackers. They plainly have no knowledge whatsoever.”

Writing on his own blog, Murray added:

I have watched incredulous as the CIA’s blatant lie has grown and grown as a media story – blatant because the CIA has made no attempt whatsoever to substantiate it. There is no Russian involvement in the leaks of emails showing Clinton’s corruption. Yes this rubbish has been the lead today in the Washington Post in the US and the Guardian here, and was the lead item on the BBC main news. I suspect it is leading the American broadcasts also.

A little simple logic demolishes the CIA’s claims. 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 destabilise 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.

As Julian Assange has made crystal clear, the leaks did not come from the Russians. As I have explained countless times, they are not hacks, they are insider leaks – there is a major difference between the two. And it should be said again and again, that if Hillary Clinton had not connived with the DNC to fix the primary schedule to disadvantage Bernie, if she had not received advance notice of live debate questions to use against Bernie, if she had not accepted massive donations to the Clinton foundation and family members in return for foreign policy influence, if she had not failed to distance herself from some very weird and troubling people, then none of this would have happened.

The continued ability of the mainstream media to claim the leaks lost Clinton the election because of “Russia”, while still never acknowledging the truths the leaks reveal, is Kafkaesque.

Meanwhile, Sen. [score]Claire McKaskill[/score], D-Mo., among others, seem to be pushing war with Russia over Trump’s election.

“This should be not only about protecting us going forward, but this is a form of warfare for Vladimir Putin — who is a thug and a bully and has the friends around the globe that we don’t want to be friends with. For him to be trying to impact our elections, we have to — there has to — he has to be held accountable,” she said Sunday.

Here’s video of that comment:

“The worst thing about all this is that it is aimed at promoting further conflict with Russia,” Murray said.  “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. As thankfully the four year agony of Aleppo comes swiftly to a close today, the Saudi and US armed and trained ISIS forces counter by moving to retake Palmyra. This game kills people, on a massive scale, and goes on and on.”

Related:

If you haven’t checked out and liked our Facebook page, please go here and do so.

And if you’re as concerned about Facebook censorship as we are, go here and order this new book:

Banned: How Facebook enables militant Islamic jihad
Banned: How Facebook enables militant Islamic jihad – Source: Author (used with permission)

 

Trending Now on Conservative Firing Line!