William Mcneilly

www.abovetopsecret.com...&mem=

William McNeilly has exposed the weaknesses in nuclear security that could result in a terrorist placing explosives next to the fuel in a Trident missile. Or send the nuclear armed submarine to the bottom with a few taps on a keyboard. Or just destroy the whole caboodle with a toilet paper fire.

Should we reward him?

Or is it unforgivable to point out the nuclear deterrent is no more than a jobs for the boys jolly with no real teeth and the capacity for nuking Glasgow on a bad night.

He's about to hand himself in, what will our reaction be?

a reply to: Kester

Rushed it and missed the capital N in the title. Sorry grammar police.

Edward Snowden wannabe.

Served for a total 18 months, 6 months training and 1 active tour.

Junior Sailor, AB -- he knew nothing -- His "report" reads like a 15 year old's diary.

I'm actually embarrassed for him, lol at "nukes could rain down on UK". And LOL at "If I'm killed and this report is made public, there will be a high chance of a violent revolution." Got a high opinion of himself and his "report".

Utter, utter rubbish.

Ironic that in trying to expose security threats, the biggest threat is actually himself.

a reply to: socketdude

Lol, I agree, I read all of his rambling 'report' and it causes me concern for his emotional/psychological wellbeing.
Everything he said could have been condensed into a handful of sentences at most. I wish him well though.

As I said in Solo's thread about this, if you Scots don't want Trident then Devonport is more than happy to take it from you. I know loads of people in Devonport and the thought of that potential economic boom for the area is very much supported, and Trafalgar Class nuclear subs are already there in any case.

a reply to: socketdude

He's done a good job of showing how someone like him can get on board. Next I guess we'll hear the phrenological assessments based on looming bad camera shots. His identity card and passport photos show a much more average looking guy.

Good point on the literacy. That is something that massively affects nuclear security. I found it appropriate that I made a silly title error.

It is certainly not going to win the Nobel for fiction or non-fiction but it deserves reading.

eurofree3.wordpress.com...

Are you saying they could get the hatches open and the levelling system did work? It seems to me he's a decent and very honourable young man who's shown where socks need to be pulled up.

a reply to: grainofsand

He spent a year undercover with the intention of learning as much as he could using the dumb but eager to learn act. An obvious lack of literary finesse and the need to explain himself and cover all bases has resulted in a long and sometimes surprising read.

A very similar young man tried to warn about the dangers of Fukushima.

There are many of us wondering if it's a clever ruse to provoke change. Perhaps the Devonport Chamber of Commerce should be investigated for links.

Doubts about the veracity of the story led me to investigate the man behind the story. What I found suggested he should be celebrated as a man who spoke truth to nuclear power. This thread is a chance to say what we think about him. He'll be in the clutches of the system soon and the story will be tainted by interference.

a reply to: Kester

Fair enough, but it is all speculation on the rambling account of one Junior Rating.
For all we know he has serious psychological issues and he's made out things are much worse than they are. He even states in his 'report' that other submariners dismissed his concerns. Who is to say he's not just a slightly unhinged Health n Safety Executive thinking type who the rest of the crew were tired of listening to?

Equally, what he states could be absolutely true, you don't know, I don't know, and the only people who do will be those still serving on the sub.
Interesting to speculate of course, but that is all it is, and if you think the ramblings of a single junior submariner is enough to form any solid assertions then go for your life, but I don't.

originally posted by: Kester
a reply to: socketdude

He's done a good job of showing how someone like him can get on board.

"Someone like him" being a security cleared (SC) Royal Navy Seaman, who was, incidentally, posted on the HMS Victorious? Yep, you're right! That would be easy to get on board! -- a bit like saying it would be easy for a McDonalds employee to gain access to a McDonalds kitchen.

Let's face it, the guy has just embarrassed himself, ruining his career at the same time. He didn't disclose any mind blowing secret nuclear threats at all.

The only thing he exposed was some minor health and safety issues. Lol. What a total pillock he is.

It seems to me he's a decent and very honourable young man who's shown where socks need to be pulled up.

Decent and honourable men do not desert their fellow sailors. He's a treacherous, deserter - and he's GINGER.

Edit to add: He didn’t really expose anything actually; because he provided no evidence - just some "Dear Diary" entries that read like total garbage.

originally posted by: socketdude
"Someone like him" being a security cleared (SC) Royal Navy Seaman, who was, incidentally, posted on the HMS Victorious? Yep, you're right! That would be easy to get on board! -- a bit like saying it would be easy for a McDonalds employee to gain access to a McDonalds kitchen.

True, there will always be the rogue nutter in any part of the armed forces:
Sailor who murdered officer on submarine HMS Astute jailed for life Thankfully they are rare, but in any organisation it is down to protocol, vetting, security clearance, and trust.

No 'terrorist' to date has signed up, gone through basic training then specialist training, and attempted to destroy a ship or sub. It could happen of course, but it has not so far, and is pretty unlikely.

a reply to: socketdude

As you say, "..reads like a 15 year old's diary." Are we saying he's silly, irresponsible, irrational, deluded or what? How exactly are we attacking his value and worth? Because that's the sort of person we have on nuclear subs.

Is it true about the lax security over electronic gadgets? Does this mean the only people available to man these things are gadget addicts who cannot go for a week without their video games or whatever, so security has to be compromised to alleviate their addictions.

And back to these mind blowing nuclear secrets, did they get the hatches to open or didn't they?

Sounds like he's an honest man when it comes to the essentials. That's why I feel he needs a thread devoted to what he is. Pillock you say? I guess they called that Fukushima whistleblower a pillock till unit three exploded. It's still puking plutonium into the Pacific.

Not getting the hatches open isn't minor health and safety it's the system being a very expensive ornament. His reaction to these problems is to make the public aware. Others have lived the lie for a slice of the private bankers cake.

originally posted by: Kester
Sounds like he's an honest man when it comes to the essentials.

You have no way of knowing that aside from his testimony.
Perhaps you wish to believe it because you, as Solo, do not want Trident, or it being based at Faslane?
Either way, you know as little as I do but you curiously form an opinion about his honesty when in reality you know nothing more or less than anyone else.

a reply to: socketdude

Is your angle on hair colour a deliberate hate crime or an accidental one?

a reply to: Kester

Hate crime??? Lol for #s sake, drama queen much!

a reply to: grainofsand

Except I've spent a few hours researching since reading solo's thread. Sporting family. Descended from the great poets. Honourable, brave and resourceful.

a reply to: grainofsand

Try being teased every day then speak again with knowledge.

a reply to: grainofsand

Actually I do want Trident. Weigh that bugger in and I'll be laughing.

a reply to: Kester

None of that means the guy isn't suffering some serious psychological issues though does it.
You know nothing except what his rambling 'report' says. Same as me and everyone else.

You have formed an opinion though, while I keep an open mind. That is where we differ.

a reply to: Kester

I'm regularly called sheep shagger, or itinerant migrant worker, or show us your work visa, or 'what did you say, I can't understand you, speak English' every day at work.
Don't see me crying about it, I laugh and give the same back.
I say drama queen, sorry fella.

a reply to: Kester

For what it's worth, I never said anything about the Fukushima whistle-blower. Mediocre attempt at a strawman - I'd give you 5/10 for that effort.

I'm just saying that his "report" is not a report. Official Royal Navy (as well as independent) sources agree, his report is actually just a bunch of personal anecdotes lazily strung together.

The guy just wanted out of the Navy, sea life wasn't for him, so he just thought he'd try the "hero" Edward Snowden route. Unfortunately he's just ended up looking rather silly - and GINGER.

originally posted by: socketdude
....just a bunch of personal anecdotes lazily strung together.

There are reports now that a second whistleblower is supporting his message and it's also said his points largely aren't new but haven't yet been acted on. Rumours that he was about to hand himself in have receded. The story is being deleted where it can be. He's done the right thing. Honourable behaviour is doing the right thing. He's an honourable man.

Does the "Official Royal Navy" tell the truth? The lads I met walking the Cotswold Way after the Iraq mess said their commanders were liars. How is it with the "Official Royal Navy"? Are they honest folk or jobsworths?

I don't believe a Royal Navy spokesperson would tell the truth. They'll just say whatever the image demands.

Snowden couldn't have read everything released and that's careless. William Mcneilly seems to be very different from Snowden. He made his observations first hand and wrote his own report.