“Russian hackers” and “propaganda” being used as excuse to threaten freedom of speech
By now, everyone has heard of this infamous, anonymous “Russian hacker” who has infiltrated USA elections. And somehow, under the direction of Putin himself, this person or group allegedly elected Donald Trump to the presidency. If true, this would have dire implications for the meaning of freedom in our elections.
In case the absurdity of this accusation isn’t apparent, allow me to articulate the reasons why it holds no weight whatsoever. Following the evidence in this article, (or rather, lack thereof) one will begin to question how anyone buys into this hysterical fabrication against Russia.
- Denial by Julian Assange.
As the story goes, Russia somehow leaked the DNC hacks to Wikileaks, while keeping the RNC leaks under wraps. The only problem with this story is that Assange himself has stated that the leaks came from directly within the DNC itself, not Russia. Russia had nothing to do with it. Neither did Putin. According to Assange:
“The Clinton camp has been able to project a neo-McCarthyist hysteria that Russia is responsible for everything. Hillary Clinton has stated multiple times, falsely, that 17 US intelligence agencies had assessed that Russia was the source of our publications. That’s false – we can say that the Russian government is not the source,” Assange told the Australian broadcaster as part of a 25-minute John Pilger Special, courtesy of Dartmouth Films.
In addition to this, there are also several experts who explain why these assertions do not align with reality.
- Analysis by William Binney
For those unaware, William Binney designed the NSA’s surveillance system. He left the NSA due to ethical concerns about what bulk data collection meant for freedom, another in-depth subject not to be covered here. In short, Binney finds it ridiculous that the Russians had any involvement in the DNC hacks. He points out that there is no evidence for this claim:
“This is a big mistake, another WMD or Tonkin Gulf affair that’s being created until they have absolute proof” of Russian complicity in the DNC hacks, he charged during a Newsweek interview. He noted that after the Kremlin denied complicity in the downing of a Korean Airlines flight in 1983, the U.S. “exposed the conversations where [Russian pilots] were ordered to shoot it down.” Obama officials “have the evidence now” of who hacked the DNC, he charged. “So let’s see it, guys.“
As it turns out, Binney is not the only expert questioning these far-fetched accusations.
- John Mcafee statements
John Mcafee created one of the world’s premier anti-virus software systems. He also ran for the Libertarian Party’s candidacy in 2016. Again, here we have another example of a cyber security expert calling out the Obama administration on its utter fabrication. With regard to the FBI Joint Analysis Report:
“McAfee argues that the report is a “fallacy,” explaining that hackers can fake their location, their language, and any markers that could lead back to them. Any hacker who had the skills to hack into the DNC would also be able to hide their tracks, he said
“If I was the Chinese and I wanted to make it look like the Russians did it, I would use Russian language within the code, I would use Russian techniques of breaking into the organization,” McAfee said, adding that, in the end, “there simply is no way to assign a source for any attack.”
So we see that the very basis of the “Russia did it” meme cannot be true under any circumstances. There exists no possible way of knowing the Russians did it. Understanding the fallacy behind this idea leads one to the question: why now?
- Suspicious Timing of the Accusations
One simple question arises out of all this: why has it only come to light now? Of course, the suggestion was brought up during the campaign that so-called “Russian hackers” MAY, at some point, possibly “hack the election”, whatever that means. And as to be expected, with this narrative implanted in the matrix, it was then seized upon once Trump emerged victorious. What a convenient excuse for the failed campaign of Hillary Rodham Clinton. Consider this – if it was known that someone may “hack the election”, why were precautions not taken to ensure it wouldn’t happen? Why has this only come out after Trump won? So many things do not add up here.
Not only does the entire idea make zero sense whatsoever, but no evidence has ever been presented that could possibly lead one to believe it.
- Lack of Evidence
Of all the reasons not to believe this Russian hacking conspiracy, this one is the simplest and most obvious. Not a single shred of evidence has been conjured to back these baseless accusations. Not one. Absolutely nothing. The only thing that even comes close involve some shadowy, vague reports from intelligence agencies suggesting that it might have been Russians, but they really can’t say for sure, and have no concrete evidence. This ought to be a red flag. And as stated earlier, these reports have come under question by experts who highlight the fallacious nature of the statements made.
All in all, this conspiracy theory has to be one of the craziest ever concocted by mainstream fake news media. In addition, the fact that this has been used to justify cracking down on so-called “Russian propaganda” has serious implications for the meaning of freedom of speech. Now anyone who presents a viewpoint contrary to the establishment narrative may be labeled a Russian agent, and therefore censored. While that may sound hyperbolic, Orwellian legislation has already been passed to just this end.
This begs the question, will the author of this article be branded as such? Am I indeed an “agent of Russia”? Did Putin himself force me to write this article? And, most importantly, does this justify censoring my views and writings?
I encourage the reader to question and research this fake news.
What do you think? Are Russians responsible for the election of Donald Trump? Even if this hacking accusation were true, does it justify curtailing freedom of speech? Leave your thoughts in a comment below.