CB Saint Posted 1 December, 2010 Share Posted 1 December, 2010 If the US intelligence information is so damned important and secret, how come two and a half MILLION people could access the system, and why was it so easy to extract it ? After 9/11 when they discovered that they could have done more if the right people had the information available, congress passed a bill requiring that the info be issue to, well, just about everyone. Kinda bit them on the 4rse didn't it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 1 December, 2010 Share Posted 1 December, 2010 you think ours is any different..? it is called sharing with your partners...also, it was one person (apparently) that got this info...not leaked through 2 million people If it is so important, you put systems in place that prevent data extraction; you can lock out USB or other exchangeable media, you set 'read-only' attributes, you inhibit 'copy & paste' functionality, etc. In this way as many people as you want can read the data, but you can sure as hell ensure that the whole database is not simply downloaded and carried out in some PFC's pocket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 1 December, 2010 Share Posted 1 December, 2010 If it is so important, you put systems in place that prevent data extraction; you can lock out USB or other exchangeable media, you set 'read-only' attributes, you inhibit 'copy & paste' functionality, etc. In this way as many people as you want can read the data, but you can sure as hell ensure that the whole database is not simply downloaded and carried out in some PFC's pocket. im sure that was done..but how do you stop people in high levels of intelligence who are cleared to have access to material from doing this..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 1 December, 2010 Share Posted 1 December, 2010 I think it's more than likely that this info was released on purpose by the US anyway, it's all handy propaganda for their campaign against North Korea and Iran. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 1 December, 2010 Share Posted 1 December, 2010 im sure that was done..but how do you stop people in high levels of intelligence who are cleared to have access to material from doing this..? If he wasn't authorised to copy the data to a USB stick, he shouldn't have been able to - the technology is quite simple and widely available, we use it at work. If he was authorised to copy it away, it should have been logged and monitored,- such a download should have flagged up an immediate warning. Again, we do this so how come the US military don't appear to ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 1 December, 2010 Share Posted 1 December, 2010 If he wasn't authorised to copy the data to a USB stick, he shouldn't have been able to - the technology is quite simple and widely available, we use it at work. If he was authorised to copy it away, it should have been logged and monitored,- such a download should have flagged up an immediate warning. Again, we do this so how come the US military don't appear to ? what if he was..we have the same very safeguards at work..you simply cannot download sensitive info UNLESS you are cleared to.......how do you stop those who are cleared to from doing it one day..? simple answer...you simply cant..you have to trust your vetting procedures when taking people on in high clearance roles..and I can tell you, those procedures are very in depth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 1 December, 2010 Share Posted 1 December, 2010 I don't disagree with your principle and whislt you may like to bash those papers it was rather more than just those publications that took Bliar, Browns & Campbell's lies. What about the bulk of the parliamentary Labour party (and indeed the Tories mistakenly believing him) and most of his disciples or are you suggesting they are followers of the Mail & Telegraph as well?. It is convenient to blame those papers but I think you will find most people trusted the Prime Minister at his word (as indeed we should be able to). The fact that he and the Labour party lied to the country is not the fault of those papers. The war was the fault of Blair and his cronies in government (inc those now in the shadow posts) not any newspaper. a child could see they were all lying, those mps on all sides knew, bloody half the schoolchildren in england went to march against it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 1 December, 2010 Share Posted 1 December, 2010 Now a Canadian government adviser calls for Assange to be 'assassinated' - and it turns out (Special K - specially for you) that, according to ITN, Huckabee wants both Manning and Assange executed - 'anything less would be too kind'. We're currently witnessing one of the most sickening displays of rage against whistleblowers ever seen by the political classes, who, in recent years have grown comfortable and cynical in their manipulations, lies and ruthless profiteering. By rights, and law, anyone threatening someone's life is potentially committing a crime and should be arrested and charged. Don't hold your breath though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 1 December, 2010 Share Posted 1 December, 2010 How the bejeezus did all this get into the hands of a humble private? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 1 December, 2010 Share Posted 1 December, 2010 i think wikileaks is brilliant its what the internet is supposed to be for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 2 December, 2010 Share Posted 2 December, 2010 i think wikileaks is brilliant its what the internet is supposed to be for. Too right. And as a certain Thomas Jefferson (US president and main author of the Declaration of Independence) once said: All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 2 December, 2010 Share Posted 2 December, 2010 As for another (would-be) US president, Sarah Palin likens Assange to Al Qaeda, and has criticised the Obama administration for failing to use 'all necessary means to respond to and defeat Wikileaks.' (Twitter) Doesn't quite have the Jeffersonian ring about it, does it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint in Paradise Posted 2 December, 2010 Author Share Posted 2 December, 2010 I am a tad surprised that Sarah Palin hasn't asked that good friend of the U.S. ( North Korea ) to assist with finding the Wiki bloke To think, that woman could have been a heart attack away from being President Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 2 December, 2010 Share Posted 2 December, 2010 Badger wrote Again, we do this so how come the US military don't appear to Thats an interesting question badger. quite a few years ago I did a semi secret course witht he americans in omerammegau. It was strange as you tokk notes during the day and had to hand them in at night you couldnt take them with you. You got them back the next day. with your notes heavily censensored with indelible ink or basically cut out. almost something out of porridge. The strange thing is have the notes I had written were classed unrestricted in the uk military and highly confidential with the yanks Given their paranoia about sensitive information they have cocked up big time if a GI joe has done all this damage. I suspect there is a cover up going on you just don't blame a gi joe . there were others involved its a conspiracy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manji Posted 2 December, 2010 Share Posted 2 December, 2010 I think it's more than likely that this info was released on purpose by the US anyway, it's all handy propaganda for their campaign against North Korea and Iran. Spot on. Israel has benefitted as well. For example if you read the leaks closely nowhere does it say Iran has missiles that can hit Europe its just some US Embassy guys opinion. You would get that from reading our newspapers. In fact Russian Intelligence at the time said it was impossible that Iran had those missiles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotty Posted 2 December, 2010 Share Posted 2 December, 2010 I can't make up my mind whether he's a cyber hero for making all ths information available and causing governments/individuals to squirm or a dangerous, egocentric **** risking world stability and diplomacy? this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GenevaSaint Posted 2 December, 2010 Share Posted 2 December, 2010 what if he was..we have the same very safeguards at work..you simply cannot download sensitive info UNLESS you are cleared to.......how do you stop those who are cleared to from doing it one day..? simple answer...you simply cant..you have to trust your vetting procedures when taking people on in high clearance roles..and I can tell you, those procedures are very in depth Sorry TDD you're wrong on this one, there are lots of layered controls that could be put in place to stop this sort of data removal. No military installation should have write access to USB devices (keys, ipods, hard drives) and write access to CD/DVD drives should be disabled. Email systems should have filters in place although this would be more challenging. No users should have admin rights to their desktops or laptops. Systems where this data is stored should have logging and tracking software in place to look for malicious activity. Access to gmail, hotmail, facebook etc should be blocked. Oh BTW, these controls are in place in 100's of normal companies that I've been to. By all means give people access to the data they're allowed to see, but not download it from systems and distribute it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Saint Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 So now wikileaks has published a list of installations and companies worldwide who are critical to US national security including a number in the UK. This is the sort of i8nformation leak that will get people killed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 Released documents so far: 931 out of 250,000. This might run for a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
franny Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 So now wikileaks has published a list of installations and companies worldwide who are critical to US national security including a number in the UK. This is the sort of i8nformation leak that will get people killed. ahh but it is OK since it is free speech don't you know (as long as it is me and my loved ones that do not suffer) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgeweahscousin Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 Gone too far. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11923766 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 Personally I think this Wiki leaks "scandal" is all a bit lame. I was hoping for some tasty scandal, but as one foreign diplomat told Hillary Clinton "you should see what we're saying about you". It's all a storm in a tea cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 So now wikileaks has published a list of installations and companies worldwide who are critical to US national security including a number in the UK. This is the sort of i8nformation leak that will get people killed. lol. You under estimate Al Queda. They'd know all that anyway. People have visions of them hiding in caves, but they have the Iranians etc keeping them updated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 How on earth did the 9/11 attackers work out what might be 'critical' if they didn't have access to this information ? Who would think that the White House and the Pentagon might be important components of the US military-industrial complex. Some clues to "critical" installations, ( by this cable's definition ): Does it have bl00dy great dish antennae ? Is it a friggin' great pylon carrying high tension cables ? Does it say US Navy on the side / deck / nameplate, etc ? Is it a factory manufacturing weapons components ? Is it a nuclear power station ? etc, etc They're hardly secret installations, I can see one of them from my house ! ( Well from the sea wall 100 yards away ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 How on earth did the 9/11 attackers work out what might be 'critical' if they didn't have access to this information ? Who would think that the White House and the Pentagon might be important components of the US military-industrial complex. Some clues to "critical" installations, ( by this cable's definition ): Does it have bl00dy great dish antennae ? Is it a friggin' great pylon carrying high tension cables ? Does it say US Navy on the side / deck / nameplate, etc ? Is it a factory manufacturing weapons components ? Is it a nuclear power station ? etc, etc They're hardly secret installations, I can see one of them from my house ! ( Well from the sea wall 100 yards away ). A lefty speaking sense. This will not happen often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 A lefty speaking sense. This will not happen often. Your recognising it is even more of a rarity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Saint Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 How on earth did the 9/11 attackers work out what might be 'critical' if they didn't have access to this information ? Who would think that the White House and the Pentagon might be important components of the US military-industrial complex. Some clues to "critical" installations, ( by this cable's definition ): Does it have bl00dy great dish antennae ? Is it a friggin' great pylon carrying high tension cables ? Does it say US Navy on the side / deck / nameplate, etc ? Is it a factory manufacturing weapons components ? Is it a nuclear power station ? etc, etc They're hardly secret installations, I can see one of them from my house ! ( Well from the sea wall 100 yards away ). Those are the obvious ones and to be fair they probably have security to match. It is the less obvious, softer targets which are more worrying. It will be a lot easier to target one of those as it probably doesn't have the same risk as targeting a military installation, but can still deliver a significant impact to the US. These are a few mentioned; Cobalt mine in Congo; anti-snake venom factory in Australia; Insulin plant in Denmark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 Those are the obvious ones and to be fair they probably have security to match. It is the less obvious, softer targets which are more worrying. It will be a lot easier to target one of those as it probably doesn't have the same risk as targeting a military installation, but can still deliver a significant impact to the US. These are a few mentioned; Cobalt mine in Congo; anti-snake venom factory in Australia; Insulin plant in Denmark You have a point now you've listed these companies. I'll grant you that. Grossly irresponsible naming firms like these and it does put employees in danger. This could be the fastest U Turn since Nick Clegg decided tuition fee's were a good idea. Sanity is restored and I no longer agree with a lefty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 ........and I no longer agree with a lefty. Thank f()ck for that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 Thank f()ck for that You don't have to us that homosexual smiley, i know when you're joking because as Lefties go you're almost normal. P.S going off on a tangent why are there so many posters with badger in their names? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 Those are the obvious ones and to be fair they probably have security to match. It is the less obvious, softer targets which are more worrying. It will be a lot easier to target one of those as it probably doesn't have the same risk as targeting a military installation, but can still deliver a significant impact to the US. These are a few mentioned; Cobalt mine in Congo; anti-snake venom factory in Australia; Insulin plant in Denmark Even with one of these, who is going to target an insulin production facility in Denmark in order to target the US ? Go for off duty military personnel in Germany, or anything else more obviously identifiable with the States. By the definition of the full list, just about every economic or industrial site in the western world is of importance to the US, and therefore 'at risk'. It's far too general, and the response is predictably alarmist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 Even with one of these, who is going to target an insulin production facility in Denmark in order to target the US ? Go for off duty military personnel in Germany, or anything else more obviously identifiable with the States. By the definition of the full list, just about every economic or industrial site in the western world is of importance to the US, and therefore 'at risk'. It's far too general, and the response is predictably alarmist. I've been briefed by my company (and it isn't mcdonalds before View from The Bedroom forgets he has me on ignore) about the risk of terrorist attacks because of our tenuous links with the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 P.S going off on a tangent why are there so many posters with badger in their names? The most powerful native British land mammal. ( Either that or we are grey haired, short sighted, irritable, tunnel dwellers ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 The most powerful native British land mammal. ( Either that or we are grey haired, short sighted, irritable, tunnel dwellers ). It's also a term used to decribe a ladys private parts. Thankyou for the clarification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 I've been briefed by my company (and it isn't mcdonalds before View from The Bedroom forgets he has me on ignore) about the risk of terrorist attacks because of our tenuous links with the US. But are there any companies with 'tenuous' links to the US that would not have been known as such were it not for this document ? I would suspect not, therefore it's a non-story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 But are there any companies with 'tenuous' links to the US that would not have been known as such were it not for this document ? I would suspect not, therefore it's a non-story. That isn't the point. The point is that now certain companies have been named in big neon lights it makes them a target because terrorists seek publicity. A bomb exploding at an insulin plant last week would have been a story, but a bomb exploding at the said plant now is a major story. Do you see? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 That isn't the point. The point is that now certain companies have been named in big neon lights it makes them a target because terrorists seek publicity. A bomb exploding at an insulin plant last week would have been a story, but a bomb exploding at the said plant now is a major story. Do you see? I understand the point you are making perfectly, I just reject the premise on which it is founded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 I understand the point you are making perfectly, I just reject the premise on which it is founded. That doesn't make sense. It's like saying i've convinced you that David cameron is taking the right steps to sort out the mess created by Labour, but you don't think he's taking the right steps. Let me try again. Put yourself in the mindset of a terrorist. Don't you think it'd be a feather in your cap to commit an atrocity at an unprotected civilian installation a a direct result of the lakse security of US agencies. It would humiliate the Americans. It would be huge story. It would be ideal and easy. I think these named companies are in grave danger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 Don't you think it'd be a feather in your cap to commit an atrocity at an unprotected civilian installation a a direct result of the lax security of US agencies. It would humiliate the Americans. It would be huge story. It would be ideal and easy. I think these named companies are in grave danger. Sorry I don't - I'd just sit back and watch the fallout from the leak; all the confusion caused by additional security measures put in place due to the 'threat', all the panicked media stories, all the false alarms, will be doing my job for me. Maximum impact for minimum risk. And when I did decide to take my place in Paradise with the multitude of virgins, I would ensure I took 'true' infidels with me - I think that multitude would be far greater had I taken out, for instance, a US General, rather than a Danish lab technician. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 Sorry I don't - I'd just sit back and watch the fallout from the leak; all the confusion caused by additional security measures put in place due to the 'threat', all the panicked media stories, all the false alarms, will be doing my job for me. Maximum impact for minimum risk. And when I did decide to take my place in Paradise with the multitude of virgins, I would ensure I took 'true' infidels with me - I think that multitude would be far greater had I taken out, for instance, a US General, rather than a Danish lab technician. I asked you to put yourself in the mindset of a Islamic Terrorist, not a ginger student. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 Im not being obnoxious at all on the contrary I have not discounted the fact that these rape allegations maybe trumped up charges. and I stand by my comments if he is innocent of the allegations then he should go back to Sweeden and prove his innocence. I was under the impression that the burden of proof was on the prosecution to prove guilt, not the other way around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 I was under the impression that the burden of proof was on the prosecution to prove guilt, not the other way around. On the radio a few days ago, ( I think it was Friday ), his British lawyer said that the Police, the US authorities, the Swedish state prosecutor, and several 'interested' journalists and foreign lawyers were all aware of where he was, but nobody seemed to be actively pursuing any legal action. It was also stated that the Swedish prosecutor had specifically reiterated, at that time, that her view was that there was no case to answer, as had been ruled in August. Subsequently, mysteriously, interest has apparently been renewed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 On the radio a few days ago, ( I think it was Friday ), his British lawyer said that the Police, the US authorities, the Swedish state prosecutor, and several 'interested' journalists and foreign lawyers were all aware of where he was, but nobody seemed to be actively pursuing any legal action. It was also stated that the Swedish prosecutor had specifically reiterated, at that time, that her view was that there was no case to answer, as had been ruled in August. Subsequently, mysteriously, interest has apparently been renewed. The Yanks will frame him, that is for sure. They framed poor OJ and Jacko. One can sometimes underestimate the intelligence of Americans but in these cases the Jurers restored our faith in the land of the free. Sadly this is not always the case and the standrads have slipped, most notably in post 1960 Alabama. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 wiki leaks went a bit far today.. some of the locations published have directly put the security alert up...some right here in the UK and painted a big target on previously unknown sites Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 Agree, these latest leaks are just pointless and reckless and serve no purpose except to aid terrorism. This Wikileaks bloke needs to watch his ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 His Lawyer looks a bit of a sleeze bag, a dodgy suit and that hair style he needs to see gok for a total makeover Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 The reckon he is liviing in the South Of England http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11929034 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 6 December, 2010 Share Posted 6 December, 2010 wiki leaks went a bit far today.. some of the locations published have directly put the security alert up...some right here in the UK and painted a big target on previously unknown sites apparently the "list" was offered up to the americans to censor if they wished but it was ignored as the information was common knowledge anyway, and not sensitive. The mainstream media are hyping it all up and thus turning it into something more dangerous than it is. As usual Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamster Posted 7 December, 2010 Share Posted 7 December, 2010 [quote=aintforever;907695Agree, these latest leaks are just pointless and reckless and serve no purpose except to aid terrorism. This Wikileaks bloke needs to watch his ass. If i were one of the baddies I might consider assasinating Allange myself. Who would believe that it wasn't them (The US) behind it? Believe nothing, trust no-one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 7 December, 2010 Share Posted 7 December, 2010 lol. You under estimate Al Queda. They'd know all that anyway. People have visions of them hiding in caves, but they have the Iranians etc keeping them updated. No they don't. The Iranians are Shia; al Qaeda are Sunni. They each hate each other more than they both hate the Americans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now