Snowden confirms NSA created Stuxnet with Israeli aid

reply to post by crazyewok

Reduceing but not getting rid off. There reduceing to what a 1000 nukes? Thats still enough to obliterate a country.

Not really considering just how big some Us enemies are truth be told America has more enemies than it does nukes.

The entire premise behind nukes was mutually assured destruction which is no longer applicable today.

With hatered, cash and the will anyone can get a nuke from an 'unfriendly' country and be used on the US or it's allies.

Considering countries like Iran with generations of indoctrination to hate the US is a recipe for armageddon or two bit terrorist organization like Hezzbollah, and Al queda that Iran is on very friendly terms.

Originally posted by neo96


With hatered, cash and the will anyone can get a nuke from an 'unfriendly' country and be used on the US or it's allies.

That threat exists not only to the USA but to most western country.

But it would only be one or two nukes at most. If so a Nuclear response would not be needed to defend one self.

If its a terrorist then you cant retaliate against anyone not Nuclear anyway not without makeing more people hate you.

And if its another country? Well you could crush them with your vast conventinal miliatry with no doubt the support of most the west and maybe even China or Russia as they dont want rouge states miss useing nukes. Nukeing would only cause vast civilian causality anyway for no reason but petty revenge.

Originally posted by EA006
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

What he revealed from his new role in the NSA is what would be available to him on a daily basis. He wasn't working in a KFC and discovered the colonels secret recipe and blew the whistle. He wouldn't have had to dig at all i don't think.

I don't know how this all works precisely, as I've not been in the world he was a lower level worker within. However, I'd be rather surprised ..in fact, outright shocked to learn than a network admin in any position of U.S. Government had access to the general selection of everything by virtue of that networking job.

His previous leaks have been within line with what he would have been expected to see and directly work with as a Network admin/support expert. The hacking out against others from NSA facilities....the monitoring...all of it would fall into the area of network operations at the technical level. So, the leaks he's claimed have been credible by his credible access with reasons to see it.

Stuxnet or far more sensitive things, as some attribute to him now for leaks, seems pretty far off the reservation. I mean, I DO know that clearances don't mean you automatically have access to EVERYTHING classified at that level across an agency or Government. Need to know still applies. Why would he have needed to know about Stuxnet? No one has suggested his talents ran in that direction? As far as UFO leaks, which I also mentioned in my last post as some attributing to him? I think he was mountains of distance below and away from that area of Government and most other "good stuff"......assuming such an area does actually exist.

reply to post by crazyewok

If its a terrorist then you cant retaliate against anyone not Nuclear anyway not without makeing more people hate you.

I am an American people hate me either way.

Stuxnet was a good deal. It kept Iranian nuclear ambitions in check (even for a while) and at the same time did not require going to war with the fanatic nation. More Stuxnets please!

reply to post by seabag

I know many of you hope and pray this happens but US will never devolve to third world status, nor will anyone attempt to take US on militarily. Come back and tell me this if US loses its reserve currency status then we'll reevaluate the situation.

I think you're entirely correct on this. The U.S. is declining, and we all see it...but declining is a relative term in a global sense. The US may simply be powerful among equals among world powers instead of a Super-Power as we've become accustomed to being. It sure isn't headed lower unless the citizens destroy the place from the inside. (Though, some do seem determined to try)

Originally posted by neo96
[

I am an American people hate me either way.

Really?

I think thats sad you think that.

I dont hate Americans.

I hate the American Goverment as it stands now, I hate ignorant war hungry rednecks that refuse to try and understand the outside world or cling on to fake ideas

But I would not want to see mass deaths or the USA fall into the thrid world (well I woudnt shed any tears if Washington DC got vaped but I think most Americans would like to see that too )


I dont hate the normal everyday Americans who are no diffrent that me. I have been to the USA and 90% of you seem like good honnest people (though a little naive at times) even those in your millitary seen on the whole honrable people.

I think in most of Europe or in the Uk at least uou would be treated as a freind as long as your in that 90%.


The problem is that 10% of total Douche bags........... and we in europe have that same problem. Unfortunatly that 10% seems to be the ones that get into power and once there you just cant shift them. For the USA though it gets a bigger backlash because it is the super power and the thing is people expect more from the Superpower that around.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by seabag

 

I know many of you hope and pray this happens but US will never devolve to third world status, nor will anyone attempt to take US on militarily. Come back and tell me this if US loses its reserve currency status then we'll reevaluate the situation.

I think you're entirely correct on this. The U.S. is declining, and we all see it...but declining is a relative term in a global sense. The US may simply be powerful among equals among world powers instead of a Super-Power as we've become accustomed to being. It sure isn't headed lower unless the citizens destroy the place from the inside. (Though, some do seem determined to try)

History tells us that the US is headed for more than that. All of the West is, actually.

This is not the first time this merry-go-round has sang this tune. And, as it stands, I see no real indication that we are nearing the end of the ride, or jumping off early.

I have a problem with Snowden's revelations. He knows way too much. he's become an expert on everything the NSA does or did. Yet the only time he directly worked for the NSA was as a security guard at the University of Maryland, Later he was a contractor employee working for Dell. Looks to me like this is close to the timeline.

2004: Enlisted, washed out of Special Forces after 4 months
2005: NSA Security Guard at U of M
2006: CIA IT Specialist, a computer guy
2007-08: CIA covert in Switzerland worked IT security
2009-2012: Dell employee contracted to NSA in Japan
2013: Booz, Allen, Hamilton, in Hawaii, fired after three months

Yes, he had a Top Secret (SCI) security clearance. Supposedly he worked for Booz, Allen specifically to gather intelligence he could leak, was caught and fired for it. Part of the issue was that he lied on his resume and claimed education he did not have. he didn't even graduate high school and got a GED. His subsequent education was sporadic at best. he never finished anything. Except a brief stint as a security guard, he never worked directly for the NSA

The problem I have is that I don't see him being in a position to learn all these "secrets." Intelligence is on a "need to know" basis, and he simply was not in a position of needing to know about much of anything he has talked about. Now, you could say that he intentionally hacked the information, but there is really no information that he did so, especially not extensively.

To believe Snowden you have to believe that as a Dell employee in his twenties he was given extensive access to a wide variety of NSA activities, enough to compromise national security. His accounting of his Swiss "undercover" activities sounds very cloak and dagger, but he was an IT person, not an operative. So what we have here is a guy who has played fast and loose with the facts we know about. He could, of course, be repeating rumor, gossip, and innuendo from being in that environment. But I doubt he has anywhere near the extensive knowledge he claims.

He certainly has made a name for himself, but I suspect he's another Walter Mitty.

Good observations... then the milion dollar question remains... Why are they letting him spread lies... Why not deny it? People wouldn't believe it, but still why allow the masses to blindly follow what he says.

The only thing that pops in my mind is fear. Letting people fear they are being watched.

Originally posted by Senduko
Good observations... then the milion dollar question remains... Why are they letting him spread lies... Why not deny it? People wouldn't believe it, but still why allow the masses to blindly follow what he says.

The only thing that pops in my mind is fear. Letting people fear they are being watched.

If you are in the secrecy business, the more false tales the better...especially if they aren't coming from you!

Snowden is doing a bang up job of muddying the water.

reply to post by crazyewok


If I recall correctly, the U.S. offered up their nukes to the U.N. somewhere after WWII.

I'm a bit surprised you'd offer them up these days to them. I for one feel much more comfortable with the U.S, having them than the U.N.....it's probably a tied with say...Pakistan.

I suppose there's an analogy with the gun issue in the U.S., as it's impossible to take em away from the criminals, insane and other gov't types, We feel better off equally or better armed than the "thems'.

Surely, SURELY, you can see a Nuclear Iran will force Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia and so on to "match or exceed".

Then a nuclear event becomes inevitable....maybe already is.

I have to wonder how close we came when India and Pakistan were eye-ball to eye-ball. It's fairly obvious a non-nuclear U.S. wouldn't have been able to intervene anywhere effectively without the threat of retaliation against the aggressing nation who started something.( I'm guessing that's what happened).

You can't talk reducing nuclear weapons and have anyone listen when more and more countries say "I have the right" to nuclear arms and builds them.

"right" seems to be redefined as what one can get away with....

Not a single Muslim/middle-east nation supports Iran in this. Nor do I.

reply to post by nwtrucker


Why would pakistand be a risk if the UN held the nukes?

To use them under what I propose one country would not have the power to launch them it would be done by a seprate international body.


Thing is a country with nukes cant tell another not to have them and not be a hypocrite.

Not when Israil has nukes! If they got rid of them I would be more comfortable.

Originally posted by Armadall
I'm not very familiar with rt.com, how credible have they been in the past?

RT Actually surprises me. Given how insane the Russians are in their homeland, how forceful and manipulative they are, RT is actually pretty good with sourcing and walking the line.

That being said, anything that makes the US look bad and everyone else look good, they are all over it. Stories detrimental to the BRIC, you probably won't find them.

It's kind of like a Yin for the Yang of Western media. Not all Western media is telling flat out lies, but they omit anything that might hurt their corporate sponsors.

reply to post by crazyewok


I understand you'd feel more comfortable if Israel didn't have nukes. They're not giving them up is the bottom line and I sure wouldn't want to be the country that tried taking them away.

Personally, I'm sympathetic, to a degree, with Israel even though I don't trust them as far as I could drop-kick them. LOL.

The world is full of hypocrisy and the U.S. certainly didn't invent it.

Comfort aside, drawing a line in the sand and being willing to enforce that line is the least worst option available , IMO.

When a theocratic group holds major sway over a nation, especially when that group promises a "presidential pardon" in heaven for mass murder, then they lose that so-called "right" as consequence of action has been trumped by promises of reward, no less, for those same acts that would be sins for anyone else.

Is it clear cut? No. Is there hypocrisy? I cede the point.

If we back down now to a nation developing long range ballistic missiles that could hit most Euro capitals as well as Israel, who would most likely retaliate against all the Muslim nations in the region, it is over.

We have no other viable option. Period.

I'm still waiting for this guy to say a single thing that hasn't already basically been known by people with critical minds, who bothered to look up the tidbits of available information their selves over the years.

This truly does seem like a distraction.

What bills are being passed as we choose to focus on this, mostly non-news

When one fears a gun fight, one does not throw away all their guns and buy knives.

When America fears their Government, America doesn't throw away their guns which we have the right to own just for that reason.

If a child wants a gun, we do not allow them to have one, because it is dangerous.

PS:
Any other analogy that applies to that whole argument.

reply to post by Senduko


Do you not understand what the word administrator means?

Snowden was a computer administrator for the N.S.A. he had access to every thing! I'm sure he has some very damning information. If he ever releases it. The longer he keeps it to himself the more danger he is in. If I were him I would release every thing. Before it is too late.

reply to post by Senduko


From what I understand, he was a systems admin for the NSA. That is a powerful position for a cyber geek to be in. In the right hands, that sort of access could allow a person to access all kinds of information beyond their security clearance. Snowden seems to be quite bright, and if he had the skills he claims to possess, he could very easily have been snooping where he wasn't supposed to be. His position would have given him a unique access point to all sorts of information he should not have been privy to as a contractor.

My guess is that the pentagon is already in full lock down with plans to restructure the entire relationship between national security agencies and private contractors. I'd imagine they are already looking at introducing new divisions within both the military and alphabet agencies with the goal of training and educating bright people from within for these positions in order to limit or reduce any reliance on outside help.

In regards to the article itself, I'm not sure anyone will really be surprised by the stuxnet claims. It was sort of obvious who was behind it. What is more telling to me, is Snowdens claims of the "five eye" nations. He seems to be dropping little hints here and there that there is much more that he knows. He's clearly in possession of a few more aces up his sleeve. I know I would have done the same were I in his position.

This begs the real question: What's the bombshell that he is keeping as his wild card? Surely if he were to make the decision to go public with these sorts of leaks, he knows something he is keeping quiet about to ensure he stays alive.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by opethPA

 

I know right, it really is hard to understand when you see all the people blindly following and believing everything Snowden says.

Agreed here... I think actually laughed out loud at the thread suggesting Snowden blew the lid off the UFO issue.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
As far as UFO leaks, which I also mentioned in my last post as some attributing to him? I think he was mountains of distance below and away from that area of Government and most other "good stuff"......assuming such an area does actually exist.

Actually that was fake. Did you even look into that? Someone hoax'ed him saying that aliens lived in the Earth's crust and sometimes flew out of the ocean....it was a huge joke. He never actually said any of that.


I don't understand where you guys are getting that this guy is some kind of puppet. He is strategically releasing key information. Unless Russia and China are in bed with US, why would their leaders lie about Snowden's presence? Is Putin a US puppet?

I think it would be wise to reserve your judgement of him, also research material. Just because it has Snowden's name doesn't mean it's his words. He has said very little yet.