Regarding the Friday 13th indictment of Russian nationals, the talk of the town in this chapter (except for the World Cup, which is on at the moment, last day), we're seeing a fork in the road when it comes to the readership, itself a small percentage of those who care.
Reader A is seeing all the details sprinkled therein, with specific servers in Arizona and Illinois, unit numbers within the GRU, and of course specific names, and is impressed, ready to believe. Knowing the indictment is unlikely to result in a trial, Reader A is willing to presume the story is true, skipping that step (a trial with evidence), and go from there.
Reader B is thinking of Colin Powell's detailed presentation regarding Iraqi WMDs ("aluminum tubes") and may in general have the view that a big part of spy stuff is crafting stories to look believable ("yellow cake").
The assassination of JFK comes to mind as well (I've been watching Jerry Kroth's latest). Some people even don't believe the moon landings happened (I think they did). They're skeptics by nature, especially around anything Cold War flavored.
These are not the only two camps of course.
For example, Reader C may think, like Reader A, that the story holds water, is probably true, but we should be thanking Russian intelligence for doing the job investigative journalists no longer do.
Reader D thinks more like Reader B, but also thinks the intelligence community is now global and this is its way of moving conflicts between major powers out of nuclear hot war space and into the cyber arena, which is for the better.
I haven't even mentioned Nine Eleven and probably should. Once again, major events that have changed the face of history, do not always build much consensus.
People agree on the magnitude but not on the significance. The many mutually conflicting stories cancel each other out to some degree. For example, as a student of Col. Fletcher Prouty, I don't believe the Gary Powers U2 was "shot down".
Understanding these forks in the road helps with analysis as we move forward, as it becomes easier to understand people's thinking when we remember we don't share the same past.
As for me personally, I have some sympathy for Readers B and D, but want to keep an open mind.
The indictment suggests Guccifer 2.0 is a persona, not a person, and that part I'm thinking might be true, but then who invented him? He seems to have implicated the GRU rather overtly, with those Word templates. If he was a Russian invention, he was not that smart.
Reader A and Reader B therefore have some overlap. Reader A thinks the Russians have been caught red handed (retro pun intended) precisely because they were sloppy about the coverup.
Stories that Guccifer 2.0 was actually a disguise for Russians came out well before the indictment. People doing searches will again reach different conclusions. Reader A sees a consistent story shaping up. Reader B sees collusion as a cabal seeds the media.
I'm probably sympathetic to Reader B because I don't think politicians in the UK did a convincing job of proving Russians poisoned the Skripals with fancy nerve agent. Nor did I buy the following April, 2018 chemical weapons attack story in Syria. The debunkers seemed more credible.
I do think people make stuff up to incite sentiments and also to increase that sense of being under surveillance. I believe that's a big part of spy craft: writing believable science fiction.
I think those in a prosecuting / investigative role have little choice but to press forward with their story. In for a penny, in for a pound. The goal should be to tie off loose ends.
For example, the "AMS panel" in Arizona maybe counters a line of reasoning raised by some retired NSA types suggesting the metadata was inconsistent with any transcontinental data transfer. The indictment adds that the files were compressed.
These details go towards addressing the "leak versus hack" forking, providing more ammo to Reader A.
What I noticed in the forty eight hours following the release of the indictment was how hard it was to find any official Russian reaction. This was not a focus of any of the news stories I could find, but for a paragraph here and there. We'll likely be getting more along those lines in the next few days.
I'm more interested in the Russian counter-spin than on whatever CNN has to say. I prefer RT to CNN, any day, thanks to the Americans who work for RT USA.
I'll go upstairs now and see if I can find the World Cup on Fox. I'm in the Steve Holden Chair of Computer Science in my living room, which is propped up with a log in the back.
Carol, my 89 year old mom, is trying to get ready in time for Quaker meeting, however I don't see us getting there in time, even though my car is back from repairs at K&M near 50th and Division. We'll likely make it for social hour.
Congratulations France. I managed to catch just the last five minutes. Someday I'm hoping to go back and watch a compilation of highlights, from all the games.
