It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gary Mckinnon's account of NASA images

page: 3
29
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 10:26 AM
link   
Still think it was a honypot to catch hackers.




posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 11:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
Still think it was a honypot to catch hackers.

I also think that it may have included fictional role-playing information tucked away by some tech geek. Because so much of it sounds like bad science fiction.



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 11:26 AM
link   
If the government has top secret photographic evidence stored as digital files, why would they store them on a computer that is on the network? That seems to be the first red flag for me on this story.



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 11:47 AM
link   
a reply to: jtrenthacker

Back in 2001-2 when he attempted this feat, I dont think they expected people to go to such lengths to undermine the security system. He mentioned how he did it, as most of the machines he managed to 'hack' were the ones with default passwords in windows xp. Here is an excerpt from wikipedia about the accusations levied on him.

"McKinnon was accused of hacking into 97 United States military and NASA computers over a 13-month period between February 2001 and March 2002, at his girlfriend's aunt's house in London,[3] using the name 'Solo'.[2]

The US authorities stated he deleted critical files from operating systems, which shut down the United States Army’s Military District of Washington network of 2,000 computers for 24 hours. McKinnon also posted a notice on the military's website: "Your security is crap". After the September 11 attacks in 2001, he deleted weapons logs at the Earle Naval Weapons Station, rendering its network of 300 computers inoperable and paralyzing munitions supply deliveries for the US Navy's Atlantic Fleet. McKinnon was also accused of copying data, account files and passwords onto his own computer.

While not admitting that it constituted evidence of destruction, McKinnon did admit leaving a threat on one computer:

"US foreign policy is akin to Government-sponsored terrorism these days … It was not a mistake that there was a huge security stand down on September 11 last year … I am SOLO. I will continue to disrupt at the highest levels … "



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 11:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: jtrenthacker
If the government has top secret photographic evidence stored as digital files, why would they store them on a computer that is on the network? That seems to be the first red flag for me on this story.


As I said, it was quite... convenient wouldn't you say?

The government did want McKinnon badly though -- they didn't go overboard and seem desperate, but they did perform a character assassination to destroy his credibility. If he didn't really find anything, why all the hoopla?

No...my thinking is that he unwittingly had some "help" -- he probably wasn't aware of that help either. Who it was, or what the motives were behind helping him...?

Who knows?

edit on 14-10-2015 by MystikMushroom because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 11:58 AM
link   
Some documents were procured through freedom of information act (FOIA), here is a link from slash dot, make of it what you will.

www.theblackvault.com...



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 12:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: crazyewok
Still think it was a honypot to catch hackers.

I also think that it may have included fictional role-playing information tucked away by some tech geek. Because so much of it sounds like bad science fiction.


Probably written by a NASA IT geek as part of the trap to catch whoever was hacking them.

If something looks to good to be true or is absurd it's likely going to be a honey pot.

Hacking and dark web basics

The fact the hack was apparently easy to do should have sounded alarm bells.
edit on 14-10-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 12:06 PM
link   
What if he found someone's science fiction role playing materials, and the government was more upset he did the hacking than finding some nerds sci-fi journal?

"He thought my role playing guide was real? Woah..."



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 12:09 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Maybe

Thing is he had hacked NASA previously on a few occasions before.

Likely they new and set up this trap to catch who it was.



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 12:19 PM
link   
"Remember those ships I rendered for EVE Online? Well some hacker got onto my computer and thought they were REAL! Yeah, they arrested him man..."

LMFAO.



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 12:42 PM
link   
I don't think ti's convincing. God knows what he saw, but it could be anything. And given he was on a 56k connection... Takes forever to download at that rate. Why should he think he'd know what he's seeing? Like someone else said, maybe it was a picture of a family but after converting to one-color monochrome it looked like an alien blob. And even if it was clear, I still doubt he'd know for sure WTF he's seeing.

I like the honey pot idea. Makes sense to catch them and to fool them too. It also gives credit to the people who run these networks and try to protect them. Hackers are often caught but usually don't get on the news.

Still it's possible, I'm just not swayed to believe his every word.
edit on 10/14/2015 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 02:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: jonnywhite
....


Still it's possible, I'm just not swayed to believe his every word.


Well, one approach to testing is to try to verify other things he said were true, and Donna's story is a good place to dig.

As I posted earlier, I think her tales are stories fed her by mocking fellow employees, or young security guards
looking for a date. She did seem to be friends with a lot of that type, and they told her all sorts of exciting stories.
Who knows what they received in return.

Bottom line -- her stories are physically impossible to be true. She described seeing a ground photo on which you could
see individual trees and their shadows. NASA didn't HAVE any such hi-res imagery in that period. I've challenged people who
believe her story to find ANY other NASA-released photos of that period -- the 1970s -- in which you can see ANY tree and
its shadow. There aren't any. It follows that this critical detail is false, and sinks her entire thesis she saw a UFO being airbrushed.



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 03:02 PM
link   
a reply to: JimOberg

To be utterly devilish...to play the what-if...

Who says WE took the photos?? What if our new "alien neighbors" gave us some high-res pics?



Ok, I'm not entirely serious here, and I appreciate your argument, so I'm not in any way trying to belittle it, merely pointing out how any story can be kept alive with creative effort and an active imagination.

He may well have seen something strange, but who knows what? Without any evidence other than his word, it is just that, his word. You are correct in that. Same with other witnesses. Though I think it rather cheap to imply Donna gave out "favors" for such speculative information - without proof, that is a rather bad character attack. Even if you have proof you cannot share, or if some people did make an effort to trick her for their amusement or other gain, unless you share that proof, it is a wee bit of an unsubstantiated 'character assassination.' Why go there?

peace,
AB
edit on 14-10-2015 by AboveBoard because: (no reason given)


ETA: I do find the arguments that the data was left as a trap very interesting, folks! And the role-play idea - HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! (wipes tears) That was a good one!
edit on 14-10-2015 by AboveBoard because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-10-2015 by AboveBoard because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 04:03 PM
link   
a reply to: krines




NASA had an air brush dept where all ufo were airburshed out.


Or was it a 'disinformation department?'



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 08:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Cosmic911

I am sure both 'airbrush dept' and disinfo dept exist for their respective functions. 'Airbrush' dept may be simply an extension of image altering/enhancing one, as surely all pics (regardless of 'ufo') have to be subjected to some alterations before they are released? But as I have never personally worked there, my opinion is just an opinion.



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 08:49 PM
link   
a reply to: krines

I tend to believe Gary, being from Scotland it was covered thoroughly in the news after the US put in the extradition request. He was interviewed on the local news here and appeared to have some kind of disability or disorder, from memory i think it was Aspergers.

There was also several protests and petitions on his behalf and there would have been outrage had he been convicted. Quite clearly he managed to hack several NASA and military servers and was able to access information on non-terrestrial officers.

Listening to him speak i very much doubt he has the social skills or need for attention to warrant making up these stories.

Real shame he had to be put through all the stress of the threat of life imprisonment and was happy when it was announced he wouldn't face extradition, sure it was on the grounds that it would be a breach of his human rights.

However, if anyone fancies following suit i strongly suggest you re-consider, different world now and you can be assured attempting to hack American government servers will result in the harshest possible sentences. No doubt be filed under terrorism and shipped out for some torture induced confessions.



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 08:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: krines
a reply to: Cosmic911

I am sure both 'airbrush dept' and disinfo dept exist for their respective functions. 'Airbrush' dept may be simply an extension of image altering/enhancing one, as surely all pics (regardless of 'ufo') have to be subjected to some alterations before they are released? But as I have never personally worked there, my opinion is just an opinion.


I'm curious to what alterations would be necessary for public viewing, though I'm not doubting it might be necessary. Project Clementine, joint venture between the U.S. Navy and DoD, for example. The conspiracy theorist in me wonders why so many pics would be designated TOP SECRET, if there was nothing of interest to view on the moon. The realist in me acknowledges that millions of pics would be classified TOP SECRET to keep the accuracy of sensors classified from other nations and our enemies.



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 09:59 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

yep, im with you on that one, Project Shamalot is absolute bs, when i first started on the hunt for truth when i was young a friend of mine steered me toward them,

We are no longer friends.



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 11:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Cosmic911

Usually color and brightness, compressing the original hi-res, aspect ratio etc. The files directly recieved are way too big. But in the light of recent release of 10000 images of the 1st moon landing by NASA, it shows how the image doctoring, and secrecy is a regular part of the situation. But then again how far can these be extended and if possible , these functions can be used for purposes other than strictly specified for the larger public?

There is much room for speculation, and its inevitable our speculations drift in the 'conspiracy' zone. I dont think 'realism' is actually about adhering to consensus-based explanations on what is 'widely known and believed', but a pursuit of the truth from all angles, even some that may seem absurd to our limited perspectives at first. Not one human alive today has all answers, and since we are collectively afraid of the unknown, we tread cautiously, and within the limits prescribed by the intellect of those we project as authority. A lot of our collective 'truths' change with time and new info. Discussing an issue, even if its outside the narrow limits of our consensus (which differs where you go btw, eastern countries have a more holistic approach to the same topics) , should be considered healthy. NSA mass surveillance was a conspiracy for most until Snowden provided solid proof. After that episode people began claiming they had known it all along and it was blindingly obvious. To me, its difficult to dimiss *all* the people who have come out as experiencers, or witnesses for ufo as simply attention-seeking ,lying, misinformed and deluded.

Why would someone like John Podesta, who has been in the position he was for so many years, keep persisting in the need for disclosure? One has to discount a whole lot to maintain the limit which says the idea of ufo and aliens is absurd. Ofcourse the best approach is to hold out on this subject until irrefutable evidence presents itself at a global level if it does at all.

This is not in defense of Gary's claims. I am simply stating a general perspective on how we tend to value info regarding these issues.



posted on Oct, 15 2015 @ 12:10 AM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

A***0 mentioned something about Garry McKinnon along those same lines:

www.abovetopsecret.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink">www.abovetopsecret.com...< br />


He found far more than he has ever said, and I do not blame him.

The Americans though wanted him not for what he found, but where and how he found it. Why? Because they didn't and still don't know who was on the other side talking him through the door ways.

I'll be honest, he was found by some thing that wanted finding.


but yeah, 80/20 and all that so who knows




top topics



 
29
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join