The real email question: Did Hillary Clinton sell US secrets?

FacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

WASHINGTON, DC - DECEMBER 06:  Former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton delivers remarks after being presented the 2013 Tom Lantos Human Rights Prize December 6, 2013 in Washington, DC. Clinton received the award for her work in the areas of women's rights and internet freedom.  (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

While the media is focusing your attention on the shiny object that is her email server, the real story is not being told. The circumstantial evidence indicates that Hillary Clinton, or members of her inner circle with her connivance, purloined highly classified US intelligence and either sold it, traded it, or used it for personal gain. This is not a conspiracy theory and it is not hyperbole. Stick with me for a moment.

The smokescreen

Via the AP:

On Monday, the inspector general for the 17 spy agencies that make up what is known as the intelligence community told Congress that two of 40 emails in a random sample of the 30,000 emails Clinton gave the State Department for review contained information deemed “Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information,” one of the government’s highest levels of classification.

The AP story, along with much of the rest of the media is trying to give two impressions:

First, the Clinton abstracted classifed information and included it in her emails, again AP

Clinton did not transmit the sensitive information herself, they said, and nothing in the emails she received makes clear reference to communications intercepts, confidential intelligence methods or any other form of sensitive sourcing.

Second, that there is all kinds of confusion about security classification

Nothing in the message is “lifted” from classified documents, the officials said, though they differed on where the information in it was sourced. Some said it improperly points back to highly classified material, while others countered that it was a classic case of what the government calls “parallel reporting” — different people knowing the same thing through different means.

We’ve all seen this behavior before with Clinton and her confederates in the media. Rose Law Firm records? Cattle futures? Whitewater? First it is “nothing to see here, move on.” Next it is “it is all so complicated, how could a somewhat addled old lady possibly keep it straight?”

This is bulls***

According to the Intelligence Community IG this is what was found in the documents David Kendall turned over on the famous “thumb drive” :
clinton ig snip

Focus your attention on  the last line. Now let’s see what this means let’s go to John Schindler of 20committee.com writing at The Daily Beast:

• TOP SECRET, as the name implies, is the highest official classification level in the U.S. government, defined as information whose unauthorized release “could cause exceptionally grave damage to national security or foreign relations.”

• SI refers to Special Intelligence, meaning it is information derived from intercepted communications, which is the business of the National Security Agency, America’s single biggest source of intelligence. They’re the guys who eavesdrop on phone calls, map who’s calling whom, and comb through emails. SI is a subset of what the intelligence community calls Sensitive Compartmented Information, or SCI. And these materials always require special handling and protection. They are to be kept in a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility, or SCIF, which is a special hardened room that is safe from both physical and electronic intrusion.

• TK refers to Talent Keyhole, which is an intelligence community caveat indicating that the classified material was obtained via satellite.

• NOFORN, as the name implies, means that the materials can only be shown to Americans, not to foreigners.

If you are interested in the permutations of security classifications at the TS level, this is a good primer.

The focus here is TK. This document the IC IG is talking about is satellite imagery. That is all it could have been. The Keyhole-series satellite is a recon satellite that produces imagery. It doesn’t produce anything else. What the IG found is not a passing reference to classified information or something State produced independently.

How did it get there?

The information we are talking about had to have originated on a highly secure network, one that was certified to handle SCIF-level information. (See page 43 for details) At some point it migrated from a SCIF to a highly secure network to Clinton’s email to her server. To get the document from the secure channel to the non-secure channel requires conscious effort. IT CANNOT HAPPEN BY ACCIDENT. This is evidenced by the fact that it appears someone stripped classifications from documents:

The claims come after the Clinton campaign stuck to the argument that the Democratic presidential candidate, while secretary of state, never dealt with emails that were “marked” classified at the time.

“Hillary only used her personal account for unclassified email. No information in her emails was marked classified at the time she sent or received them,” campaign Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri said in a statement to supporters Wednesday.

But a State Department official told Fox News that the intelligence community inspector general, who raised the most recent concerns about Clinton’s emails, made clear that at least one of those messages contained information that only could have come from the intelligence community.

“If so, they would have had to come in with all the appropriate classification markings,” the official said.

The official questioned whether someone, then, tampered with that message. “[S]omewhere between the point they came into the building and the time they reached HRC’s server, someone would have had to strip the classification markings from that information before it was transmitted to HRC’s personal email.”

This seems to be true because the Clinton campaign is pushing the “retroactive classification” story line and the IC IG implies that the images have been properly marked for their report which implies they were not properly marked when recovered.

Say what?

Now we have a situation where a person or persons downloaded highly classified images in a SCIF environment, or scanned hard copies of documents in a SCIF (cleared persons can bring electronic devices into a SCIF and there are dozens of scanner apps for smartphones and tablets. Clinton and her clique would undoubtedly be cleared.), ported those electronic files over to a non-secure computer and emailed them to someone using Hillary Clinton’s server. These particular images were emailed by or to Hillary Clinton.

If you want to stop now just remember this:

The information the IC IG is talking about a) could not have accidentally ended up in Clinton’s email,  b) it was altered to remove security classifications, and c) there has to be a reason someone selected this information, from among the wealth of top secret information Clinton had access to, to steal.

Why would anyone do that?

Now that we’ve dismissed the idea that the classified material was classified post facto, or it was mentioned in passing and accidentally ended up in Hillary’s email,  the question becomes one of a) why anyone would remove highly classified material from a secure environment, b) strip the security markings on highly classified satellite imagery and c) send it via un-secure email. These answers go to motive and state of mind. They wanted to sanitize the imagery as much as possible so no casual observer could tell it was classified (which asks another why? question which we will get to) and it was sent via un-secure email because the intended recipient did not have SCIF access.

What we know for certain is that Clinton could not have been contemplating saving this information for use in her memoirs because her memoirs would require State and Intelligence review and someone would have identified the imagery as TS//TK.

The beginning of a trail…

We know that Hillary Clinton relied to some degree on intelligence briefings sent to her by her loyalist and vicious attack poodle, Sid Blumenthal. This arrangement came to light when Blumethal’s AOL account (I am not making that up) was accessed by a Romanian hacker nicknamed ‘Guccifer.’ Via Politico:

Sidney Blumenthal did not write or know the source of any of the Libya intelligence he passed on to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the top Clinton ally told investigators on the House Select Committee on Benghazi Tuesday in a closed-door deposition.

Blumenthal, subpoenaed by the committee, also did not verify any of the intelligence he forwarded to the nation’s top diplomat. Instead, Blumenthal was copying and pasting memos from Tyler Drumheller, a former CIA operative who was looking into a Libya-related business venture, and sending them to Clinton, two people familiar with his testimony told POLITICO.

“One of the folks providing her the largest volume of information was simply and merely a conduit of someone who … may have had business interest in Libya,” said panel Chairman Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) (R-S.C.) at the end of a nearly nine-hour interview. “We have a CIA, so why would you not rely on your own vetted source intelligence agency? In this case, there was no vetting, no analysis of credibility whatsoever.”

And:

In her early months in office, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was in contact with unofficial adviser Sidney Blumenthal more often and on a wider range of topics than was previously known, a set of about 3,000 Clinton emails released Tuesday night by the State Department revealed.

While Blumenthal’s role as a provider of off-the-books intelligence reports on Libya has stirred controversy, the newly disclosed emails show he also acted as an intermediary with officials involved in the Northern Ireland peace process and shared advice with Clinton on issues from Iran to British politics to how to blame China for the breakdown of global climate talks.

Blumenthal claims he didn’t actually know anything, that he was only an intermediary passing information from a former CIA official, Iraq War critic (I know, those are redundant terms) and would-be political player named Tyler Drumheller.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had access to the world’s top intelligence agencies and their resources, but at the most turbulent moment of her tenure as the nation’s top diplomat, she received a stream of intelligence on Libya and the Benghazi attack by a former CIA official working outside the government, sources said.

Since his retirement, Drumheller has also contributed to various Democratic politicians, according to records maintained by the Center for Responsive Politics. In 2005, he contributed a combined $800 to the Senate campaigns of former Sens. Mark Pryor and Mary Landrieu, and donated $500 to Rep. Bill Pascrell, D-New Jersey, in 2011, the Center for Responsive Politics said.

And…

We know at least two Clinton cronies followed her to State: Cheryl Mills (Chief of Staff) and sweet Huma Abedin (Deputy Chief of Staff). They also had Clinton foundation email addresses. Both Mills and Abedin held the status of ‘special employees’ which allowed them to hold other jobs while working at State. Mills was on the board of NYU’s Abu Dhabi campus, general counsel for NYU, and on the payroll of the Clinton Foundation. Abedin worked for an investment consultancy called Teneo Holdings and was also on the payroll of the Clinton Foundation. We don’t know their security access but it would be safe to say they saw everything Hillary did.

What happened to the imagery?

Either Clinton sent top secret material via her private email to herself to archive for grins or the Clinton server was only a way station on its way somewhere else. Simply keeping the images for some future use doesn’t make sense to me as it is a high risk-low payoff action. The more likely scenario is that something was done with the images, something that benefited one or more Clintons.

A logical route would be Clinton gets info from Blumenthal who gets info from Drumheller. Clinton sends info to Blumenthal who sends info to Drumheller.

But if Blumenthal, or someone like him, handled the outgoing classified information did they also act as a bag man, collecting money for the imagery?

What did Drumheller, or someone like him, get for his efforts if he received the imagery? Was he merely a bit player at the fringe of Democrat politics who was releasing his inner Walter Mitty by sending bulls*** intel analyses to Hillary? Maybe in hopes of become Director of Central Intelligence after her coronation? Did he get paid by Clinton? Or was the operation a quid pro quo where he received classified materials that he could sell to others and curry favor and impress others to gain access to other political players? Did someone in Abu Dhabi get the images? Or did they end up at Teneo Holdings to help bolster some investment decision? One of these answers is better than the others.

…or it could have been run of the mill Clinton corruption

Alternatively, once could ask were these images and other information used to sweeten the pot for various kleptocrats and dictators who paid extortionate amounts of money for speeches by Bill Clinton? Suppose a Third World dictator… let’s imagine in Central Asia… paid Bill Clinton… let’s just throw a number out there… $500,000 for a speech. Suppose as part of the deal that Clinton client also received satellite imagery or signal intercepts that increased their life expectancy. Is there any evidence of this? No. But neither is there any proof it didn’t happen. As we learned during the administration of GHW Bush, it is not the quality of the evidence that requires an investigation, rather it is the seriousness of the allegation.

Searching for a fall guy

Clinton’s story is “I didn’t know squat.” That is as plausible as Obama’s Justice Department wants to make it. But either someone gave her the images and she sent them or they had log in access to her email and sent them for her. Her only real defense, given her access to classified material and a Keyhole satellite image would have been instantly recognizable, is that someone used her email to send it.

But how did they get into Hillary’s email? Did Hillary handle the images? I don’t think she had the technical chops — and is way too smart — to scan/download satellite imagery, strip the security classification, and email them. Did Cheryl Mills, an attorney, do this? Lawyers do stupid stuff all the time but usually it has the patina of cleverness attached. That leaves Huma.

With no security classification, Sid Blumenthal has plausible deniablity. He can say he got the images (this is assuming that at some point he did receive them) but assumed they were unclassified.

This makes one logical fall guy Tyler Drumheller. Drumheller would instantly recognize the Keyhole imagery so stripping the security classification wouldn’t muddy the water much for him if it ever went to court. But anyone he gave/showed the imagery to would not necessarily know the source which could provide some degree of cover. Unfortunately, we will never know Mr. Drumheller’s true role in this as he visited Fort Marcy Park died of pancreatic cancer on August 2, 2015.

Source: The real email question: Did Hillary Clinton sell US secrets? | RedState

Scientists reveal Jewish history’s forgotten Turkish roots

 

New research suggests that the majority of the world’s modern Jewish population is descended mainly from people from ancient Turkey, rather than predominantly from elsewhere in the Middle East.

The new research suggests that most of the Jewish population of northern and eastern Europe – normally known as Ashkenazic Jews – are the descendants of Greeks, Iranians and others who colonized what is now northern Turkey more than 2000 years ago and were then converted to Judaism, probably in the first few centuries AD by Jews from Persia. At that stage, the Persian Empire was home to the world’s largest Jewish communities.

According to research carried out by the geneticist, Dr Eran Elhaik of the University of Sheffield, over 90 per cent of Ashkenazic ancestors come from that converted partially Greek-originating ancient community in north-east Turkey.

His research is based on genetic, historical and place-name evidence. For his geographic genetic research, Dr Elhaik used a Geographic Population Structure computer modelling system to convert Ashkenazic Jewish DNA data into geographical information.

Dr Elhaik, an Israeli-born geneticist who gained his doctorate in molecular evolution from the University of Houston, believes that three still-surviving Turkish villages – Iskenaz, Eskenaz and Ashanaz – on the western part of an ancient Silk Road route were part of the original Ashkenazic homeland. He believes that the word Ashkenaz originally comes from Ashguza – the ancient Assyrian and Babylonian name for the Iron Age Eurasian steppeland people, the Scythians.

Referring to the names of the three Turkish villages, Dr Elhaik points out that “north-east Turkey is the only place in the world where these place-names exist”.

web-ashkenazi-jews-2-getty.jpg
Ulta-orthodox Ashkenazic Jews during a protest in Jerusalem last year (Getty Images)

 
From the 690s AD onwards, anti-Jewish persecution by the Christian Byzantine Empire seems to have played a part in forcing large numbers of Jews to flee across the Black Sea to a more friendly state – the Turkic-ruled Khazar Empire with its large Slav and other populations.

Some analyses of Yiddish suggests that it was originally a Slavic language, and Dr Elhaik and others believe that it was developed, probably in the 8th and 9th centuries AD, by Jewish merchants trading along some of the more northerly Silk Roads linking China and Europe.

By the 730s, the Khazar Empire had begun to convert to Judaism – and more people converted to the faith.

But when the Khazar Empire declined in or around the 11th century, some of the Jewish population almost certainly migrated west into Central Europe. There, as Yiddish-speaking Jewish merchants came into contact with central  European, often German-speaking, peoples, they began to replace the Slav words in Yiddish with large numbers of German and German-derived words, while retaining some of its Slav-originating grammar. Many Hebrew words also appear to have been added by that stage.

The genetic modelling used in the research was based on DNA data from 367 Jews of northern and eastern European origin and more than 600 non-Jewish people mainly from Europe and western Asia.

Dr Elhaik says it is the largest genomic study ever carried out on Ashkenazic Jews. His research will be published in the UK-based scientific journal, Genome Biology and Evolution.

Further research is planned to try to measure the precise size of the Semitic genetic input into Jewish and non-Jewish genomes.

Source: Scientists reveal Jewish history’s forgotten Turkish roots

Map Not included in this article:

Ashkenaz Areas of Origin Outlined in Red –

genesis_ancient_world [Ashkenaz] x666

Notice the distant origin compared to the location of Palestine. Palestinians are of Semitic origin. Askenaz have no blood ties to Palestine The So-called, Self-Styled “Jews” of today going back to Ancient times are not genetic Semites, but Turkish Mongols. This makes them GENTILES, being that they are descended from Japheth, son of Noah.  Regardless of any ancestral conversion to Reactionary post-Temple “Judaism”.

It’s fair to say, most of those calling themselves “”Jews” do not adhere to the Torah/Bible as authoritative. But it must be admitted since they use Biblical nomenclature to claim rights to Palestine; genetic origins must in fact be taken into account. Which shows that most, if not all so-called “Jews” have no Semetic roots in Palestine.

 

The Evolution of The War on Terror – An Israeli Mega-Fraud

Why is there no serious national debate on ending the War on Terror? How can it be that there is no discussion in the presidential campaigns or from the media pundits about ending the multi-trillion-dollar fraud known as the War on Terror?  It reminds me of the quote of Voltaire:  To determine the true rulers of any society, all you must do is ask yourself this question: Who is it that I am not permitted to criticize?

Why is no one criticizing the War on Terror and calling it the fraud that it is? The decision to wage the disastrous War on Terror is a political decision, made by the U.S. president as the commander-in-chief. Since it began in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, there have only been two presidents who have approved waging the fraudulent War on Terror, George W. Bush and Barack Obama. It will be a crucial question facing the next president, so why is it not being debated?

After 14-and-a-half years of the War on Terror the U.S. has spent trillions of dollars, waged war across the Middle East and North Africa, and destroyed the lives of millions of people, many of them American. At least seven nations have been devastated under the guise of fighting terrorism:  Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Sudan, Yemen, and Somalia.  In spite of all the money spent and lives lost, more people are dying from terrorism than ever, particularly in the nations where the War on Terror has been waged. It is not really a war against terrorism, but a “War of Terror” in which terrorism, mostly false-flag operations, plays the key role.

All of the indications point to the War on Terror going down as the biggest boondoggle or criminal scam in history, yet no one running for the highest office in the land is calling for it to come to a screeching halt. Why not?

As Mike Lofgren wrote in a recent article about Donald Trump and the War on Terror:

The “war on terror” is the longest continuous war in US history. Taxpayers have ponied up over $4 trillion to wage it. Yet the consensus of our intelligence community is that we are more in danger than ever. Did we spend more than $4 trillion to make ourselves less safe? Let us unpack the contradictions.

Terrorism in the United States is statistically a negligible cause of mortality: One is about as likely to die from being crushed by a flat-screen TV, and more likely to die falling in the bathtub than from terrorism. Imagine if we had spent $4 trillion to cure cancer or heart disease. Nevertheless, nearly every word US government officials have uttered about the matter during the last 15 years has been designed to instill dread of terrorism in the population. And it has worked.

AN ISRAELI MEGA-FRAUD

The War on Terror is a massive deception, conceived and promoted since the late 1970s by Benjamin Netanyahu and the Israelis. To explain how it evolved I have put together some of the basic facts in a timeline.


1977 – The Likud party of terrorist leaders, headed by Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir, comes to power in Israel.

Begin, born in Russia, has a long history of using terrorism to achieve his goals.

1942 – After coming to Palestine, Begin becomes the head of the Irgun, a terrorist group with an extremist Zionist ideology of Greater Israel based on the ideas of Vladimir Jabotinsky and his New Zionist Organization. When Jabotinsky dies in New York in 1940, Benzion Netanyahu, the Polish-born father of Benjamin Netanyahu, becomes the head of the NZO.

1946 – Four years after coming to Palestine, in a terror operation carried out with the Haganah, Begin orders the bombing of the King David Hotel, British military headquarters in Palestine, killing 93.

1974 – Begin declares himself “The Father of Terrorism”. In 2006, Benjamin Netanyahu speaks at a 60-year anniversary of the bombing of the King David Hotel, attended by the Jewish terrorists who carried out the bombing. The U.S. media does not cover the event.

1977 – Begin and his Likud party of terrorist leaders comes to power in Israel in what is called “the revolution.”


1978 – Menachem Begin invades Lebanon up to the Litani River under the guise of fighting terrorism. Israeli troops do not leave South Lebanon until 2000 – 22 years later.

1978 – Arnon Milchan, a high-level Israeli intelligence agent, makes his first movie in which a passenger plane crashes into a skyscraper. Milchan later becomes a Hollywood movie mogul. In the mid-1980s Milchan is caught smuggling components for Israel’s illegal nuclear arsenal, but not indicted. His employees are charged with his crimes.

1978 – Milchan’s first movie features a plane into high-rise attack exactly like those that occurred 23 years later in New York City.


1979 – Benjamin Netanyahu and his father start the Netanyahu Institute on Terrorism and hold an international conference in Jerusalem to start the global propaganda push for a “War on Terror.” The premise and data are seriously flawed but the spark is lit for the “War on Terror.” Netanyahu spends the next 22 years promoting the idea that the United States and the western democracies should engage in a global “War on Terror” to defeat those groups resisting Israeli occupation of Palestinian land – and attack the states that support them. George Bush, candidate for vice president, speaks at the conference saying the U.S. would use its military force to wage war on terrorism.

1980 – Isser Harel, the former head of Israeli intelligence (Mossad and Shin Bet) predicts that Arab terrorists will attack the tallest towers in New York City, twenty-one years before 9/11.


1982 – Israel invades Lebanon a second time under the guise of “fighting terrorism”.

1983 – “Islamic Jihad” bombs U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, killing 241.

1984 – The U.S. responds to terrorism by withdrawing forces and shelling Lebanon.

1983 – The “War on Terror” needs a foe, so Israel starts arming and training radical jihadists in Pakistan. Ehud Barak is the head of Israeli military intelligence (AMAN) at this time.

1983 – Ehud Barak is head of Israeli military intelligence (AMAN) as Israel arms and trains the Hezb-e Islami faction of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. Author Peter Bergen states that “by the most conservative estimates, $600 million” in American aid through Pakistan “went to the Hizb party, … [the] party had the dubious distinction of never winning a significant battle during the war, training a variety of militant Islamists from around the world, killing significant numbers of mujahideen from other parties, and taking a virulently anti-Western line.” In 1994, the group merges into the Taliban and Al Qaida.

OSAMA “Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Al-Qaida, literally ‘the database’, was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians.” – Robin Cook, British Foreign Secretary (1997-2001), writing in The Guardian, July 8, 2005.

2000 – Arnon Milchan’s television partnership with Rupert Murdoch produces a film in which a passenger plane is remotely hijacked and flown into the World Trade Center. The program airs on FOX TV in March 2001 and is viewed by millions across America.
September 11, 2001 – Calling for “an operational, concrete, war against terror,” Ehud Barak is in the London studio of BBC World television blaming Osama bin Laden for the terror attacks – before the towers have even fallen. Barak is blaming the very same cadre of Islamic militants that his military intelligence agents armed and trained in Afghanistan in the 1980s. Barak’s analysis becomes the official explanation for the events of 9/11.

2001 – The Israeli strategy known as the “War on Terror” becomes reality as the U.S. military wages war in Afghanistan. Here, the Israeli chief of staff meets with the Zionist Neo-Cons who have made plans to overthrow 7 Middle East nations in five years.

2007 – General Wesley Clark explains the secret war plan to “take out seven countries in five years” – Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran. Five of these targets have already been engaged. This is the real goal of the “War on Terror”.

2008 – Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister and head of the Likud party, tells Israelis: “We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq.”

Netanyahu’s benefit for Israel comes at a very high cost for Americans.

Isn’t it time to quit the Zionist fraud known as the “War on Terror?”
Support Christopher Bollyn’s efforts to expose the deception of our time.
Sources:
Bergen, Peter L., Holy War, Inc.: Inside the Secret World of Osama bin Laden, Free Press, 2001

Bollyn, Christopher, “Solving 9-11 Ends the War,” March 2016

Cook, Robin, “The struggle against terrorism cannot be won by military means,” Guardian Unlimited, July 8, 2005

Hilali, A. Z. US-Pakistan Relationship: Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan, Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005

Lofgren, Mike, “Blowback: Donald Trump Is the Price We Pay for the War on Terror,” Truth-out.org, March 1, 2016

Rashid, Ahmed, Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia, New Haven, 2000

  • See more at: http://bollyn.com

Real Stream Media