Ex-CIA Employee Charged in [Vault 7] Leak Disputes Evidence

a reply to: BigDave-AR

Did I touch a funny bone.

originally posted by: Jake56
a reply to: BigDave-AR

Hah hah funny funny. You can always find an covert OP when they never answer the question. You have been made fool

SMH
You do realize you first said I was an agent for not responding in the way you wanted, you then accused me for responding and now you’re telling me I’m an agent for not responding again. You’re acting like a complete nutter I will no longer reply to any of your BS as to not divert this thread any farther than you already have. You have yourself a great weekend.

originally posted by: gernblan
So the article say that the document has been downloaded and people keep claiming to have read it yet I can't seem to find it available anywhere. Maybe it's me but I would really appreciate it if somebody would maybe post a link as to where we can download and read this ourselves. Thank you.

Me too! I would very much like to see it also, but I cannot find it posted anywhere, and I doubt it has been. It was only posted on the court dockets for a few minutes before being removed (for reasons not revealed), and so only those with a (paid) subscription to a court server would have had access to it for those few minutes. It would be those with a subscription who would have downloaded it during those few minutes it was available. And they are only quoting from the document, not publishing it. Since it was removed from the court dockets, it's possibly sealed or the media is otherwise gagged.

Very frustrating!

a reply to: gernblan

You can read the Wiki article concerning "Vault 7" on your own, its aimed at the same audience as popular movies such as "the Net" and "hackers" but doesn't delve into the earlier roots of the CIA.

He signed his name beneath the words: “Innocent Indefinitely Incarcerated Inmate #79471-054.”

The National Security Act of 1947 officially established the US CIA, however there were secret agencies such as the Army Signals Corps from the 1920's that used vaults to keep government and diplomatic communications secret.

There were "hand ciphers" used for the Kryptos sculpture at the old CIA building dedicated in the 1990's.
The plaintext revealed in the puzzle including the Howard Carter exploit of the Great Pyramid in 1921 is much older.

If you are searching for clues in the 1920-1930's you wouldn't find any pornography even with pizza gate as a key word.

originally posted by: Cauliflower
a reply to: gernblan

You can read the Wiki article concerning "Vault 7" on your own, its aimed at the same audience as popular movies such as "the Net" and "hackers" but doesn't delve into the earlier roots of the CIA.

He signed his name beneath the words: “Innocent Indefinitely Incarcerated Inmate #79471-054.”

The National Security Act of 1947 officially established the US CIA, however there were secret agencies such as the Army Signals Corps from the 1920's that used vaults to keep government and diplomatic communications secret.

There were "hand ciphers" used for the Kryptos sculpture at the old CIA building dedicated in the 1990's.
The plaintext revealed in the puzzle including the Howard Carter exploit of the Great Pyramid in 1921 is much older.

If your searching for clues in the 1920-1930's you wouldn't find any pornography even with pizza gate as a key word.

Well you have information that I don’t it was my understanding that all of Kryptos hadn’t been cracked parts yes the whole thing no, unless you’re privy to some info that I haven’t come across which is possible. Either way always thought the Kryptos was a great art installation and (had?) stood up to some very smart code breakers and brute force efforts.

a reply to: Cauliflower

Shame on me... I should have included information about "Vault 7" is in the OP.

Thank you for reminding me.

It's too late to edit the OP, but here's a little more about "Vault 7" from Wikipedia:

Vault 7 is a series of documents that WikiLeaks began to publish on 7 March 2017, that detail activities and capabilities of the United States Central Intelligence Agency to perform electronic surveillance and cyber warfare. The files, dated from 2013–2016, include details on the agency's software capabilities, such as the ability to compromise cars, smart TVs,[1] web browsers (including Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge, Mozilla Firefox, and Opera Software ASA),[2][3][4] and the operating systems of most smartphones (including Apple's iOS and Google's Android), as well as other operating systems such as Microsoft Windows, macOS, and Linux.

Interestingly enough, Wikipedia is not up to date, as there is no mention of Schulte's arrest:

In 2017, federal law enforcement identified CIA software engineer Joshua Adam Schulte as a suspected source of Vault 7, though no formal charges concerning this case have been brought against him.

Schulte was only charged with the child porn last month, and the leak charges this month:

Who Is Joshua Adam Schulte? Ex-CIA Programmer Facing Child Porn Charges Is Suspect in Vault 7 Leak

Joshua Adam Schulte Charged With The Unauthorized Disclosure Of Classified Information And Other Offenses Relating To The Theft Of Classified Material From The Central Intelligence Agency

a reply to: Boadicea

Wikipedia is family friendly (like ATS) so even prepubescent children that are not interested in pornography can learn about how covert shadow agencies work, what it means when president Trump talks about "choices", and how even people like "Q" that work for a covert agency can still maintain integrity while teaching independent thinking.

Sorry for the wall of run on text.

a reply to: Boadicea

And THIS crap, is why the internal process for blowing the whistle is dysfunctional and not fit for purpose.

Why should anyone with concerns about a unit, operation or event that they become aware of, report to their superiors, if all that is going to happen, is that they get blindsided by an unconstitutional attack on their liberty and an assassination of their character?

We do not know what happened in this instance, we have only the arguments put forth by this individual, and by the state against him. However, the problem I have always had with the whistle blowing systems, is that they report internal to the organisation to which, or within which, the reporting individual works. Why anyone ought to expect the upper management of an organisation, whether governmental or private, to be honest, or rigorous in investigating wrong doing within it, or wrong doing by that organisation, is utterly beyond me. Human nature does not work that way, especially when you consider the history and the intent of the agency in question here.

We are talking about an agency which has, for decades, been a greater enemy to truth and justice, to the constitution of the nation it alleges to protect, to the people of the nation it alleges to protect, than ANY of the nations and groups that the United States has made war on since the end of WWII. It has funded narco-terror outfits, religious extremists, and organised criminal groups all over the world, been responsible for the economic obliteration of nations, and the assassinations of many nations leaders, broken the politics of the entire Latin American and South American region, devastated the Middle East with the aid of British military intelligence assets (a work of decades in and of itself). And they want the public of the United States of America, to believe their version of events, when all the things that have posed a SERIOUS risk to members of the public in America, are things that the CIA and its agents, have deliberately fostered for decades, as part of a systemic and institutional inability to understand the difference between right and wrong?

Pushing a concern up the chain in light of that reality, seems to me to be a good way of getting yourself into trouble, not a good way of correcting a problem within a clandestine organisation. You can see how this works. Someone high up makes a decision which they know will have negative results. Someone lower down becomes aware of the consequences of a mission, operation or order otherwise, and puts up a red flag. The person responsible for the problem in the first place, is the person whose job it is to make sure that all concerns are dealt with and problems arising from operations corrected. If the red flag brings up an action sanctioned by the upper echelon, then the person reporting it might as well deep throat a 12 gauge like they were being paid to do it, because the person or people responsible for the problem are the ones investigating it, and will seek to commence the complete embuggerment of anyone who knows what they did.

So what do they do? They deflect attention from themselves and their flaws, by making the story that the media hear, about some sicko they have manfully and successfully culled from their ranks, by catching him leaking data, and with everyone's favourite bogeyman, the child abuser, waiting in the wings, the person who made the report may as well have topped themselves, for all they have a life anymore. The government do not have to prove without doubt that the man is what they say he is, because they know that for enough of the population to make it work, they only have to suggest that he is, and the people in question will ignore the leaks, and make so much noise about the character of the reporting individual, that the content of the leaks are barely ever discussed.

Its a smokescreen, a bluff, an exercise in obfuscation.

But boiled down, its a matter of the CIA saying "We did something so dirty, so heinous, so utterly outside our remit and amoral to boot, that if anyone were paying attention, we would all be strung up by our testes and left for fire ants to pick over, BUT PAY ATTENTION TO THE NASTY MAN, HE HAS PICTURES THAT ONLY SICKOS HAVE, AND HE SHOULDN'T OF TOLD ON US, BECAUSE BEING A TATTLE TALE IS WORSE THAN ANYTHING EVER!"

Its worded more smartly than that when they bring charges, but the above is the literal translation of any effort to prevent EFFECTIVE whistle blowing. Internal corrective measures do not work, expecting people to SECRETLY fix a secret problem is foolish, and ignores the reality of dealing with institutions. The ONLY way to effect change, is to make people outside the agency aware of the problem, so that the agency can be FORCED to admit guilt, so that people responsible can be fired and shamed, and so that operations can be more perfectly crafted next time, to avoid whatever infractions of proper conduct occurred to draw concern from the reporting employee. It is NOT appropriate for the agency to have the power to police itself, or rather, for the government to police itself.

It IS appropriate for those tasked with protecting nations, to be accountable, immediately and without the slightest ability to prevent it, for ANY remote violation of the standards that the people expect from them. That can only be made possible, if the route by which a person within the intelligence community is to get redress for grievances and concerns about the intelligence agencies, reports to someone OUTSIDE those agencies. Its as simple as that.

a reply to: TrueBrit

And THIS crap, is why the internal process for blowing the whistle is dysfunctional and not fit for purpose.

It IS appropriate for those tasked with protecting nations, to be accountable, immediately and without the slightest ability to prevent it, for ANY remote violation of the standards that the people expect from them. That can only be made possible, if the route by which a person within the intelligence community is to get redress for grievances and concerns about the intelligence agencies, reports to someone OUTSIDE those agencies. Its as simple as that.

I agree. Like "regulatory capture," the whistle blowing process and laws have become a protection racket for the guilty. And finding child porn on their computer seems to be their favorite boogeyman...

That's why I love what this guy did. He went straight to the judge. He's not going to do that if he's not feeling pretty confident about his innocence... and their guilt. We need these whistle blowers. And we need whistle blowers that can think outside the box and have the strength and courage of their convictions to do it.

originally posted by: Cauliflower
a reply to: Boadicea

Wikipedia is family friendly (like ATS) so even prepubescent children that are not interested in pornography can learn about how covert shadow agencies work, what it means when president Trump talks about "choices", and how even people like "Q" that work for a covert agency can still maintain integrity while teaching independent thinking.

It's a good place to start for the basics about pretty much anything.

Sorry for the wall of run on text.

No worries! We're here to talk and discuss, and that's what you did