Snowden confirms NSA created Stuxnet with Israeli aid

Iran blew up that American ship in the Gulf, killed hundreds of marines in Lebanon through its foreign legions and killed hundreds over Lockerbie. People wonder why it's not a good idea Iranians have nukes? Come on, it's just demented!

Now this back stabber Snowden lets down his own team. I'm a Brit and from the outside it looks like he let his own side down.

reply to post by flice


Are you completely delusional?? I don't see the U.S. threatening to blow up anyone. Iran is and does.(Israel) I don't see the U.S. arresting opposition party members,(yet), Iran does. I don't see the U.S. sentencing Christians to death, (again yet), Iran does.

I don't see ANY support for Iran from ANY Muslim/Middle-east country whatsoever. The U.S. has backing from most Euro countries for it's stance on Iran.( even though the U.S. is stuck in the "bad-cop" role).

I don't see the U.S. supplying weapons to insurgents in Iran. Iran has sent munitions to Iraq and has cause multiple U.S. deaths, not to mention civilians and children, as a result and continues to do so.

Letting that bunch have nukes is not an option.

I'm not saying the U.S. is without flaw here, but if you think that somehow justifies an Iranian nuclear arsenal, then I repeat...delusional.

So you believe Iranian politicians but reject the words of our own??

Let me put the shoe on the other foot: why do you believe the words of Iranians when they say they will do bad things, but not believe them when they say they won't.?

What makes them more believable? Could it be your bias against US?

What makes American politicians more believable? Could it be that you work for the government?

Really? You mean oil? Why don't they sell their oil to all of the nations who are sick of the US & OPEC? Why don't they become rich as Saudis?

You think they’re not trying??

U.S. and European sanctions aimed at pressuring Tehran over its suspected pursuit of nuclear weapons have already more than halved Iran's shipments - costing Iran billions of dollars in revenue since the start of 2012. And Washington is now seeking to cut shipments to less than 500,000 bpd through tighter sanctions.

www.reuters.com...

Instead of using their plentiful natural resources for energy production they instead sell it to fund their nuclear ambitions…..well, not so much now that we’re sanctioning them.

So it looks like we're painting them into a corner so that they have no other option but to go on the attack. Hmm. That sounds familiar.

Said it before, and I'll say it again. The real Snowden is dead. Anyone purporting to be him is an NSA intern who will keep posing as him to further the idea he's alive and well. There will be a trickle of "leaks" of already known information, to further bolster this idea (like this one, which is actually from wikileaks, not Snowden). Once he's off the front and back pages of the paper, we'll never hear his name again.

Why?

Because it is EXACTLY what I would have done as Snowden's superiors, and if they DIDN'T do this, then they aren't doing their damn jobs. You've got a high level asset who has leaked info and sought assistance from TWO of the world's nations who have missiles pointed at us. It isn't rocket science. Regardless of villain or hero, these facts remain, and if they didn't have him killed, they are asleep at the wheel.

Why don't they become rich as Saudis?

Yes...why don't they? The Saudis got rich by playing ball with the international community, not by seeking to be a nuclear power. Excellent question, and the answer of course is simple....DO what Saudi does!

This is more than likely true, but this guy now can say anything people want to hear and they will take it as truth. If he said things about aliens, area 51, ghosts, CIA everyone would automatically believe him.

Originally posted by Rosinitiate

Originally posted by buster2010

Originally posted by victor7
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!

Oh yes let's have more. We will overlook the fact that there is no proof that Iran is trying to build nukes. We will also overlook that Iran has the right to develop nuclear energy. The only place Iran's nukes exist is in that idiot Netanyahu's brain the same place it has been for the last couple of decades.

edit on 9-7-2013 by buster2010 because: (no reason given)

All nations have secrets including Iran. It's possible they have an active weapons program. Think about it, if you were a nation receiving constant threats from the sole super power wouldn't you invest in some nukes?

It worked for North Korea after all and let's not forget this little gem:

edit on 9-7-2013 by Rosinitiate because: (no reason given)

Iran has had more inspections by the IAEA than any other nation on the planet not to mention every intelligence agency on the planet says Iran isn't building a bomb. There are no facts to back up the Iranian nuke fairy tale. So is your video of some idiot asking a question to a traitor supposed to mean something?

Originally posted by schadenfreude
How do we know Snowden said ANY of this?

As others have pointed out what he said about the nsa & this are two very far extremes.

I believe this is act IS treason.

It doesn't fit, so why now?

What easier way to discredit someone by actually making them a traitor?

If Snowden didn't truly release this information, don't you think he'd be coming out publicly and saying it's a lie?

Some others have also questioned whether Snowden is real (yes, he is)...and whether the person who claims to be Snowden right now is really the original Snowden.

Any person skilled in OSINT should easily be able to pull up info on this man's history.

As for the 2nd question, I believe that Snowden is no idiot. He *says* he made concessions for the information he took should something happen to him. Logic would dictate that means someone should expect certain "signals" from him. Unless a double has that intel, I think it would come out before too much longer that this individual is suspect. And if his father or family suspect anything, the gig would be up as there would be many ways disprove him as a fake.

reply to post by Armadall


RT seems very credible. they dont delve into the hardest hitting # but they do far far more than the MSM prop.

Originally posted by Senduko
At this point the only nation that should need to be stripped from its nuclear arms is the US. They have proven over and over they are not capable of wielding such power.

Couldn't agree more! To date the US is the only country that has used nuclear weaponry in anger. And not just once, but twice! I know people generally like to think along the lines of 'Three strikes and you're out,' but when it comes to a weapon of such potential destructive power, I think after the first time they should have been disarmed

I just don't understand posts like this; you despise your government for all that it does, yet when it fits your personal feelings ( which are fed by western propaganda ) then all is well and we should thrust them blindly when saying they are evil terrorists plotting to rule the world.

Again, couldn't agree more. Amidst all the anti-government posts I see Americans throwing their weight behind, anything that has the word 'terrorist' in immediately becomes vitally important and something they MUST stand by. So they can stop the terrorist menace.

Truth is, though, this 'war on terror' America seems to be determined to win is absolute lunacy. How can you go to war on terrorism? It's an abstract, and as such it cannot be defeated. You may as well declare war on hate, or confused or blue or ennui or malais or mauve. None of them exist physically, and so cannot be fought.

So what exactly is it that the MASSIVE invasion of civil liberties and freedoms that your elected representatives are performing on you are protecting you from?

Regarding Iran and nuclear weapons... I find it ironic that the American government is trying to prevent Iran from keeping or manufacturing nuclear weapons. Especially when you consider their own Constitution defends a person's right to keep and bear arms to defend from threats both foreign and domestic.
America has around 7,700 nuclear weapons... which, in my humble opinion, is a pretty big goddamned threat! Couple that with aforementioned use of them in anger and it's not really an ideal picture.

And this comes after how many books which describe the intricacies of the stuxnet program?? Seriously, this is hardly a revelation.

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by Senduko

 

Would you rather US just militarily attack Iran or use peaceful means of twisting their arm like Stuxnet and sanctions? Make no mistake, Iran will be prevented from aquiring nukes, so I don't want to hear "US should leave Iran alone" because that isn't an option anymore. I think Stuxnet was a measured response to Iran's refusal to be forthright.

Stux was an act of war on a sovereign country. One of these days, a "measured response" from one of Washington's victims will be an NBC attack on Washington .... or perhaps Tel Aviv.

Thinking about it, I would fully expect for apartheid Israel will get hit first. After all, they seem to specialize in cowardly sneak attacks and threaten their victims with wider attacks and US involvement.

It's time for these schoolyard bullies to get a good swift kick in the #.

Originally posted by Astrocyte
And this comes after how many books which describe the intricacies of the stuxnet program?? Seriously, this is hardly a revelation.

It's not a revelation and that's not why people are up in arms. Many have stated from the beginning that the US and Isreal were behind the creation of this program. The crux was that they had no proof. Now you allegedly have a former NSA employee publicly and globally saying that this was done by the US and Isreal.


Some might consider that the missing "proof" and, subsequently, an act of war. This allegation...especially if supported with something more than just a "claim".....will have grave ramifications for the entire world, not just the US.

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by citizenx1

 

Not for much longer - in every sense the US is entering a period of massive decline whilst countries of the east are going to become the predominant economic and military force.

It is only hubris which prevents some from seeing this.

That's wishful thinking on your part.

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.

There is a picture of you in the dictionary under the word "hubris".

The OECD has estimated that within five to seven years, China will surpass the US as the worlds largest economy. It forecasts this is a long-term trend which will continue for many decades to come.

With that comes a shift in the significance of the US on the global stage, no longer will it be the global superpower that can dictate freely to the rest of the world.

Accept that fact now or don't, it is up to you.

Wonder if that will be the prevailing view if countries like Iran take up arms against their aggressors.

Would we even notice? Iran is a joke economically and militarily. A country with such a horrible record of human rights violations and exporting and funding of terrorism certainly should not be permitted to have nukes...and they won't.


If Iran is such a joke, I find it odd why you seem so worried about them developing their weapons programmes.

reply to post by CIAGypsy

The crux was that they had no proof.

Plenty of insiders spoke about it. Unit 8200 and the NSA have been working on this since the Bush administration. Obama Ok'd it and actually sped it up.

Some might consider that the missing "proof" and, subsequently, an act of war. This allegation...especially if supported with something more than just a "claim".....will have grave ramifications for the entire world, not just the US.

You're off your rocker.

This was the only viable alternative to a strike on Iran's nuclear facilities. These are the choices: do something, or do nothing. The do nothing option is modified by the fact that: Iran is led by an INHERENTLY IRRATIONAL fundamental dogmatic ideology which makes the prospect of weaponization very likely; and if they ever had the bomb, it would complicate and heighten the dangers of an already intractable middle eastern situation.

This is something most people agree with. Only radicals, people who frankly do not think clearly and do not mind the prospect of a nuclear war would have trouble understanding the need to screw up Irans nuclear program.

Fortunately, despite all the rhetoric, the Bushes and Obamas have intelligent people advising them in intelligent ways.

Even better news, the fundamentalist project in Egypt failed. Egyptians have shown an ability to think clearly. They don't want a government that puts religion atop the agenda. Will this be a harbinger of whats to come in Iran? Let's hope so. If Iranians can depose the fundamentalist government in that backward thinking country, something that can only happen after a popular uprising (Irans system is rigged to support the fundamentalist agenda), then no doubt, Iran would then be trusted with the right to produce their own nuclear energy. But till then, they are dangerous, and anyone who doesn't pay attention to or even notice the danger Iran poses is also dangerous.

Originally posted by Astrocyte
reply to post by CIAGypsy

 

The crux was that they had no proof.

Plenty of insiders spoke about it. Unit 8200 and the NSA have been working on this since the Bush administration. Obama Ok'd it and actually sped it up.

Well....here's a little tidbit to chew on....you can't use "insider speak" as justification to start WW3 (unless you are George Bush... ). They...meaning Iran, Russia, China....had NO PHYSICAL PROOF to give them justification to definitively show it was the US and Isreal. They only had circumstantial evidence. Depending on what Snowden's has...this may be a non-issue. But if he has any kind of physical documentation to back up his claim, that is bad bad news because it may give Iran (and its allies) what it needs to strike back.

Originally posted by Astrocyte
reply to post by CIAGypsy

 

You're off your rocker.

This was the only viable alternative to a strike on Iran's nuclear facilities. These are the choices: do something, or do nothing. The do nothing option is modified by the fact that: Iran is led by an INHERENTLY IRRATIONAL fundamental dogmatic ideology which makes the prospect of weaponization very likely; and if they ever had the bomb, it would complicate and heighten the dangers of an already intractable middle eastern situation.

This is something most people agree with. Only radicals, people who frankly do not think clearly and do not mind the prospect of a nuclear war would have trouble understanding the need to screw up Irans nuclear program.

You clearly do not work in national security. You clearly do not understand the sensitive "politics" of making decisions that could bring war down on your doorstep.

Yes, I agree that something had to be done about Iran...but there is a very serious reason why these types of activities are done covertly. Every country does them...but the they all know the risks that if their covert activities are brought into the spotlight, it enters a whole new realm of risk and response. If the creation of the Stuxnet program was "no big deal," then it's author and agenda would have been made public long ago. There are very valid reasons why that has NOT taken place...and you are "off your rocker" if you fail to appreciate that truth.

Obama administration urges federal employees to spy on each other to avoid leaks

President Barack Obama has asked that federal agencies launch an unprecedented campaign requiring government workers to monitor the behavior of their colleagues and report potential leakers under the threat of prosecution.
rt.com...

LOL, funny, i'm glad to see this thread getting its deserved attention. I kinda sad to see how little people truly care.

Thanks for all the replies btw.

reply to post by CIAGypsy

NO PHYSICAL PROOF to give them justification to definitively show it was the US and Isreal.

Here's something for you to chew on. Russia and China are the LAST countries on earth to criticize either America or Israel for attacking another countries critical infrastructure. China has been doing it for YEARS, and continue to do it. And Russia continues to allow hackers go free willy in causing a raucous in the world wide web.

what it needs to strike back.

Iran has been trying to strike back. But since their capabilities are generations behind Israel and Americas, Israel and America are quite able to stay well ahead of them.

You clearly do not work in national security. You clearly do not understand the sensitive "politics" of making decisions that could bring war down on your doorstep.

I do. I quite enjoy staying on top of current political events. I may not be in the CIA, but I know enough about political theory and science to understand the concept of game theory. In this situation, it is a safer bet to attack Iran's nuclear facility than not to. I already made that point in my earlier post. I never said it was without it's risks. But compared to doing nothing, I think the risks are far less.

Yes, I agree that something had to be done about Iran...but there is a very serious reason why these types of activities are done covertly. Every country does them...but the they all know the risks that if their covert activities are brought into the spotlight, it enters a whole new realm of risk and response.

Possibly. Do you think China will jump on board in vilifying America because of this? I don't think so. China is more cooperative than people give them credit for. America all the time backs down and says little about Chinas exploits in Tibet and it's northwest provinces. China and America have a very intertwined relationship - albeit, one ribbed with heavy competition and a desire to get the upper hand on the other.

What's the worse that can come of this? That what we already know happens in private is happening in the open? Who will handle this case? The world court? International politics is too muddled already to make a big deal of this, especially for the likes of a backslider like Iran.

I think we should let this slide by, let Iranians depose the mullahs in that country, and let a more successful Iran form around a young liberal generation. This is what I suspect is the game plan. Hold the crazies off in Iran until grassroot events in that country force real and sustainable change.

And I am positive that events in Egypt will have a cascading effect elsewhere. I am actually quite pleased about it. I was skeptical before, but now I'm feeling positive about Egyptians. They have proven me wrong. They really are capable of the same reason we've come to embrace in the non-Muslim world (and I don't mean this in any condescending way). Hopefully, the Syrians will follow suit. Even better - let the Palestinians follow suit. But best of all would be seeing the Islamist's in Iran fall. For an enormous popular uprising in that country to do what Egyptians did to Mubarak in 2011. It might be harder, since the Islamists are incredibly entrenched in that country, in government and military, but, *cross your fingers* , it'll eventually reach a breaking point and they wont have the power to keep it from happening without killing an egregious amount of people in the process.

Of course, as usual, they'll lay blame to Israel and America, pretending that there aren't actual liberals in that country who want a real democratic system.

reply to post by Senduko


I understand the frustration involved with the U.S. government and their actions around the globe. I am right there with most on many counts. Problem I have with this "leak" is that it isn't verified. And if it is then it appears that the government is correct in their accusations against Mr. Snowden. He is leaking classified secrets which will get field agents, soldiers and innocents killed. This moves him from whistleblower to traitor status as accused which means he has crossed the line for sure.

I backed him leaking the information about spying on U.S. citizens. Turns out that it was indeed much more than the government officials were saying at first. But this crosses that very fuzzy line.

reply to post by seabag


Iran should be forthright?

To who should they be forthright with? The nations and leaders who are not forthright with them? The country who removed their leadership and installed a puppet to change the path of that nation forever? The leaders who tried to cause a nuclear accident with a computer virus? The nations who consistently lie, exaggerate and use hyperbole to get their own people to hate Iran?

Iran is it's own sovereign nation and should not have to answer to anyone for anything anymore than the US should. I am pretty sure it is the US who has started wars of choice (Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan) killing millions of civilians over decades, not Iran. We have actually used Atomic weapons on another nation and just the thought of Iran seeking the technology sends people into a blind rage of panic and war-drum pounding.

With the latest revelation about the US spying on their own citizens and their allies I noticed they are being less than forthright about the whole thing to us, the American people. Eric Holder even lied to congress about it and shrugged it off, nothing wrong with spying, lying, and law breaking as long as you are a US politician.


I guess it is okay for the US to lie, spy, and start wars as long as nobody else does.


And did people really not think Stuxnet was created by the US? I thought that was old news. I wonder how many times Iran has released a computer virus meant to bring down US nuclear power plants? My guess is it has been zero times.