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.

 

Evidence of NASA UFO Fraud Might Kill UK Hacker Case

page: 2
36
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 08:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Darthorious
 


You tend to forget it's government spending. A paperclip is like,what, a hundred bucks or something per clip. 10 cent for the clip and another $99.90 for the labor to put it on paper. No problem because we pay. Isn't this why us taxpayers and our economy is effed in the a?




posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 09:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by SaviorComplex

Originally posted by Phage
The article is nonsensical.


Beyond nonsensical, Phage. Whether or not McKinnon found certain files when he hacked into government computers is irrelevant to the case; he was prosecuted because he hacked into the computers. It would not matter if he found files on UFOs and NASA was lying about it, because that is not what the case is about.


Is there no clause or room for discretion pertaining to justification of the act? It seems to be a selfless act, considering it can't really be argued he would use the information only for himself. There is really no benefit in it for him, and he's also admitting to it. What is just cause in a judge's eyes?
I realize the whole ufo aspect would be a different case altogether, but under the circumstances, one has to see the government has investment in law and the strictness of it, but also in NASA, which is part of the machine. Would the gov't want to prosecute this guy or would it want to make a deal with him?
....pure speculation of course....



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 09:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by InfaRedMan

Gary was one of us, he was just searching for the truth....


He searched for the truth in a knowingly illegal way...


I agree, IRM...so what if he was searching for "the truth?" Should we justify and excuse every crime just because someone claims they were searching for "the truth?"



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 09:23 AM
link   
reply to post by redhead57
 
Obama brushed off the whole UFO thing during the debates I think...so I wouldn't get my hopes up.




posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 10:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by SaviorComplex

Originally posted by InfaRedMan

Gary was one of us, he was just searching for the truth....


He searched for the truth in a knowingly illegal way...


I agree, IRM...so what if he was searching for "the truth?" Should we justify and excuse every crime just because someone claims they were searching for "the truth?"


SO WHAT?! Nasa does illegal things also, however, they are done with TAX PAYERS MONEY! Your own current administration has committed much more severe crimes with far MORE impunity. You go ahead and "school" me about being within the law. I simply don't follow laws I feel are unjust, especially with world government setting the fine example. I am in control of my OWN life and that is my main philosophy!

Laws are made by politicians my friend, the same politicians that you will probably say in other posts aren't to be trusted and have OTHER agendas.

I don't think the crime fits the punishment AT ALL in this case and if I leave my car window open and someone steals my ipod off of the front seat, then I won't even bother reporting it, I left the god damn window open so it's MY FAULT!

I think Nasa should hold their staff who were responsible for security partly accountable for this. I find it remarkable that there is no mention of anyone losing their jobs over this.

I am not saying that I don't think there should be policing and a legal system, what I am saying is that someone shouldn't be extradited for trial in another country unless SUFFICIENT evidence is given. NO EVIDENCE has been produced by Nasa that he caused the damages he did, therefore this is a complete injustice. He admits he gained access to their computers, did Nasa think that no one would ever try it? If your bank had poor security on their computers and someone accessed it and stole your credit card details, would your first port of call be to condemn the actions of the thief or to condemn the poor security of the bank you trusted. Think about it.



[edit on 16-1-2009 by IceColdPro]



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by SaviorComplex
 


Actually you are wrong.
If you go to a hosue that is not yours and it is open, you can change the locks and demand squatters rights.

Which means that if there is no evidence of breaking in, then you can claim the house as yours, which can then take the real owners a long time to get the house back through the courts of law. So its not technicaly breaking in as it was open anyway.

Taking goods that are not yours is stealing though!



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by jeff.behnke
Q: Surely all the data was backed up anyway?
A: Well, it should be and it should be behind a firewall, and the local administrator should not have a blank password. Take one defence computer where they use image-based installation techniques where most of the machines have the same BIOS, the same hard drive, the same hardware specification and you just whack it out across the systems. Unfortunately for them, the local system administrator's password was blank. So you don't even need to become the domain administrator. That's 5,000 machines all with a blank system level administrator password. To be fair to them, as I got deeper into it they closed me down pretty quickly.



I'm not sure if you can classify walking into a machine with a blank password "hacking" but whatever. And further down in the interview...


To be fair, if I go out my house and decide to not lock the door, it doesnt mean your welcome to come in.

[edit on 16-1-2009 by Lee_K]



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lee_K

Originally posted by jeff.behnke
Q: Surely all the data was backed up anyway?
A: Well, it should be and it should be behind a firewall, and the local administrator should not have a blank password. Take one defence computer where they use image-based installation techniques where most of the machines have the same BIOS, the same hard drive, the same hardware specification and you just whack it out across the systems. Unfortunately for them, the local system administrator's password was blank. So you don't even need to become the domain administrator. That's 5,000 machines all with a blank system level administrator password. To be fair to them, as I got deeper into it they closed me down pretty quickly.



I'm not sure if you can classify walking into a machine with a blank password "hacking" but whatever. And further down in the interview...


To be fair, if I go out my house and decide to not lock the door, it doesnt mean your welcome to come in.

[edit on 16-1-2009 by Lee_K]


No, but if all your stuff is stolen then your carelessness has something to do with it!

Let's be honest, I said it before and i'll say it again. We ALL know that computer hacking and burgalry are 2 different crimes with different ethical arguments behind them. Like someone mentioned above... "I'm not sure if you can classify walking into a machine with a blank password "hacking" but whatever" - ABSOLUTELY SPOT ON!

[edit on 16-1-2009 by IceColdPro]



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 10:27 AM
link   
Just for arguments sake.
I think he would be better off if he found something.
If he did and spread it all around the damage would have saved him.
Now he is just a criminal of the Illuminati secret society that uses the
law for protection.
Information on UFOs are top secret and locked up better than
the Atomic bomb.
Well that secret didn't last long so lets try Tesla secrets.
An inter net computer has left and right turns on UFOs and WWII
secrets and Tesla plus UFO deniers, and bashers of all shapes and sizes.



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by jeff.behnke
Here's a great video, speaking of NASA's airbrushing policies, with a mosaic of some interesting shots on the moon:



Hopefully the individuals speaking in this clip will be brought in as witnesses.

[edit on 15-1-2009 by jeff.behnke]



Whoa! Wait just a second... you can't post a video from a known fraud, Jose Escamilla (originator of the RODS theory) and call it fact!

I too think that there is a veil of silence between NASA and the Public, but I don't have to stoop so low as to post video from a known hoaxer.



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 11:19 AM
link   
EDIT:
I decided to create a separate thread for what I initially wrote here in order to not derail this one.

Gary McKinnon, Honeynets and Disinformation



[edit on 16-1-2009 by converge]



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 11:46 AM
link   
You can't really rely on these types of sites for trusted news. Also look at who penned the article. Jeff Peckman, come on ppl.



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by InfaRedMan

You're completely wrong. Hacking into another computer is a crime. Hacking a government computer is a federal crime.



How can I be wrong when I never claimed that hacking wasn't a crime? Can you show me where I said that? Please don't put words in my mouth and then patronise me. I am well aware that the above is indeed a crime.




Nope because your no one! Sorry but that's the truth. To suggest hacking you're computer is the same level of offense as hacking a government computer is misguided.


Wrong, I'm a tax payer. Furthermore, if said government computer was hacked so easily, I want someone from Nasa held accountable! I don't desire the full blame to be put on a stranger who literally entered an unlocked door that was literally in his own home.

Question to all: If you knew you could just remote connect to an I.P address that could have possible evidence to PROVE that EBE's and EBE craft were real and it had no password or security, would you risk trying it?





[edit on 16-1-2009 by IceColdPro]



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by SaviorComplex
 


The charges this case is based on is entiredly NONSENSICAL!

The 'sites' he broke into are supposed to be run by IT professionals. As such, any defacement he supposedly was involved in should have been able to BE RECOVERED in minutes, by restoring from a backup media.

It is a routine occurance that occurs ALMOST EVERY DAY in professionally run data centers.

What the government did was FORGE the damage caused by this hacker.

For starters all he did was LOOK at the data.

To be able to trigger the penalty clauses, it was necessary for the government to provide proof of damages.

So the very same techs that are supposed to manage and protect the systems, then deliberately FORGED damages to generate dollar totals that would then enable the prosecution of this idiot hacker.

The governments case against this guy is ENTIRELY FABRICATED.

It was only done to promote some kind of deterence.

It's just been amazing over the time period this farce has been going on EXACTLY HOW LITTLE UNDERSTANDING that has been demonstrated by some folks regarding the professional running of a data center.

I've got some really bad news for some of you patriotic types...

ALL of the government agencies are TOTALLY CORRUPT.

They only care about one thing... keep the BIG dollars coming.

Get a clue people... NASA is, has always be and will always be total window dressing.



[edit on 16-1-2009 by golemina]



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 12:07 PM
link   
If he is tried it will be in secret because it is a National Security matter. He will disappear into a Federal prison never to be seen again. NASA will not be embarrassed and the truth will not come out.



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 12:21 PM
link   
This is great kind of reminds me of the inside man. How are they going to press charges AND call him a hoaxster. NASA will have to spill the beans or drop the case



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 12:24 PM
link   
Once again....

Gary did not claim to find ANYTHING related to UFO's

What he claimed to find was this... in his own words...



"What was the most exciting thing you saw?" I ask.

"I found a list of officers' names," he claims, "under the heading 'Non-Terrestrial Officers'."

"Non-Terrestrial Officers?" I say.

"Yeah, I looked it up," says Gary, "and it's nowhere. It doesn't mean little green men. What I think it means is not earth-based. I found a list of 'fleet-to-fleet transfers', and a list of ship names. I looked them up. They weren't US navy ships. What I saw made me believe they have some kind of spaceship, off-planet."

"The Americans have a secret spaceship?" I ask.

"That's what this trickle of evidence has led me to believe."

"Some kind of other Mir that nobody knows about?"

"I guess so," says Gary.

"What were the ship names?"

"I can't remember," says Gary. "I was smoking a lot of dope at the time. Not good for the intellect."


www.thelivingmoon.com...


This has NOTHING to do with UFO's... it has to do with getting a glimpse of the Secret space 'fleet' we 'may' have up there (Which I firmly believe is run by the NAVY)

Now apply critical thinking as to WHY IS THIS STILL NEWS?

It happened over 7 years ago... he has still not been brought to trial nor has he been extradited to the USA..

In fact there is still one more new story in the news now...

He has signed a confession and is asking to be tried in the UK

McKinnons lawyers hope UK prosecution will derail extradition



Will change of administration mean change of venue?
By John Leyden
Posted in Security, 16th January 2009 11:59 GMT

Pentagon hacker Gary McKinnon has secured a potential lifeline in his long-running fight against extradition to the US on hacking charges.

McKinnon's legal team recently wrote to the Crown Prosecution Service requesting a UK trial, and offering a guilty plea to computer hacking offences while denying allegations he caused any damage. In response, the director of public prosecutions (DPP) has said it will take over four weeks to consider how to proceed with McKinnon's signed confession.



www.theregister.co.uk...


In my opinion the UFO community is giving this attention for all the wrong reasons...






[edit on 16-1-2009 by zorgon]



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


Unless you can establish a good reason why Joe Escamilla's reputation somehow invalidates the testimony or credentials of the two people interviewed in this video, I don't really see the relevance of your post nor your motives behind it.

-rrr



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 01:18 PM
link   
The guy knew what he was doing was wrong.

Police use bait cars all the time.

This hacker is not gonna get off on "entrapment" or something. Plus he's going up against the US gov., mil. NASA ect. He's screwed, it's out of his lawyers hands.

Whether they're useing him as a patsy to ditch a bunch of ET,UFO,9/11 files or whatever..., has yet to be seen, and will likely never be seen.

Unfortunately, I believe either way to cover thier own back or not, theyre gonna have to nail this guy with a nice clip of jail time.

But, at least for him, it'll be in Club Fed, not some regular prison. He'll probably have a good old time. Maybe he can work off half his sentence as a "white hat" while he's in there.



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by jeff.behnke
Another high profile NASA 'edit' that I remember quite distinctly was the weird slinky thing the SOHO observatory recorded shooting out of the sun in 09/22/1999:




It was an image found on NASA's sungrazer server, only to be taken down minutes later. In addition, at the time, the images taken from the Lasco instrument used to be pieced together and placed on a separate military website (can't remember which one, maybe someone can help) as a video clip.

There's nothing wrong in what you say, and your account is mostly correct: but basically, there is not conspiracy as well: the same stuff works the same way, presently, regarding soho: the point is to know WHAT soho is, how it does work, who runs it, why, how, its targets, its instruments, its general purpose, the origin, meaning, purpose of the filters applied to soho imageering and a lot of stuff more, but on top of that is to realize that soho is NOT a camera, soho is an observatory using scientific instruments and producing scientific data. To take an image from soho and claim it to be anomalous withouth having even the least knowledge of how that stuff works, is like I, (I am completely ignorant in biology), would take some microscopic image and claim that i see aliens creatures all over because what i see "looks strange".
Now the point is: WHO claims WHAT? The image by itselfs looks to be some coronal mass ejection if you ask me, but of course if there's someone who has a different theory, then i would be happy to hear that.
Do you think that the image in question is odd?

Thake a look at this compilation, then



Coronal mass ejection


Cometa McNaught / 2006 P1

Coronal mass ejection cloud emerging from the Sun and an ensuing proton blast that struck the SOHO instrument


Two coronal-mass-ejections

Coronal Mass Ejection


Here you can find a gallery of movies: after watching at them, please let me know if they are less strange than what we see in that image

www.suntrek.org...

If you ask me, despite i'm totally for the disclosure, i would like to see this type of stuff OUT of the reach of people who want to make sensationalism at every cost: this stuff is not for all, and you can clearly see the why.














"Spider web"


"Classic flying source emitting a beam"


"Yet another beam"


"Wormhole"



SOHO Instruments



CDS (Coronal Diagnostic Spectrometer)
CDS from Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, United Kingdom
solar.bnsc.rl.ac.uk...

CELIAS (Charge, Element, and Isotope Analysis System)
CELIAS from the Universitat Bern, in Switzerland
www.space.unibe.ch...

COSTEP (Comprehensive Suprathermal and Energetic Particle Analyzer)
COSTEP from the University of Kiel, Germany (in German)
www.ieap.uni-kiel.de...

EIT (Extreme ultraviolet Imaging Telescope)
EIT from the NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, USA
umbra.nascom.nasa.gov...

ERNE (Energetic and Relativistic Nuclei and Electron experiment)
ERNE from the University of Turku, Finland
www.srl.utu.fi...

GOLF (Global Oscillations at Low Frequencies)
GOLF from the Institut d'Astrophysique Spatiale, France
golfwww.medoc-ias.u-psud.fr...

LASCO (Large Angle and Spectrometric Coronagraph)
LASCO from the Naval Research Laboratory, USA
lasco-www.nrl.navy.mil...
LASCO from the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research, Germany
star.mpae.gwdg.de...

MDI/SOI(Michelson Doppler Imager/Solar Oscillations Investigation)
MDI/SOI from the Stanford University, USA
soi.stanford.edu...

SUMER (Solar Ultraviolet Measurements of Emitted Radiation)
SUMER from the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research, Germany
www.mps.mpg.de...

SWAN (Solar Wind Anisotropies)
SWAN from the FMI, Finland.
www.fmi.fi...
SWAN from the Service d'Aeronomie, France
www.aero.jussieu.fr...

UVCS (Ultraviolet Coronagraph Spectrometer)
UVCS from the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, USA
www.cfa.harvard.edu...

VIRGO (Variability of Solar Irradiance and Gravity Oscillations)
VIRGO from the Institut d'Astrophysique Spatiale, France
www.ias.u-psud.fr...

sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov...

LASCO HANDBOOK FOR SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATORS
/yrjqrh

and it would be useful to read the handbook before making any guess.

See also:

LASCO Processing Levels
/26348u

and

LASCO documentation
/yqnkvg

and

What's a CCD bakeout
umbra.nascom.nasa.gov...

and

Fact sheet [.pdf file]
sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov...



[edit on 16/1/2009 by internos]




top topics



 
36
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join