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.

 

The Launching of U.S. Cyber Command (CYBERCOM).

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 08:22 PM
link   

The Launching of U.S. Cyber Command (CYBERCOM).


www.globalresearch.ca

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates signed a memorandum on June 23 that announced the launch of U.S. Cyber Command (CYBERCOM). A scheme by securocrats in the works for several years, the order specifies that the new office will be a "subordinate unified command" under U.S. Strategic Command (STRATCOM).
According to the memorandum, CYBERCOM "will reach initial operating capability (IOC) not later than October 2009 and full operating capability (FOC) not later than October 2010."
The New York Times revealed June 17, that the "National Security Agency is facing renewed scrutiny over the ex
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.globalresearch.ca
www.wired.com
www.nytimes.com
online.wsj.com




posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 08:22 PM
link   
We’ve probably all wondered at one time or another if our web searches are being monitored, are keywords being used as terrorists lists. We have all wondered has surveillance gone too far? I think we now have proof that things are getting worse in a hurry. Do we have privacy on in our homes? It doesn’t seem that way anymore. We have NSA, DHS, DOD and others now on the bandwagon. It seems that nothing is private anymore, from google searches to what we bought on ebay last week. As our dossier’s grows, so do the threats, government snoops, to companies who want to sell us something. There is also a US security risk, that could threaten our troops. CYBERCOM is something to be concerned about!



The clandestine agency — renown in the military for its geeky skills, and infamous among civil libertarians for its widespread monitoring of Americans’ communications — may also come to dominate the wider government cyber defense effort, as well. Under the president’s recently-announced (and also pretty vague) network protection plan, the Department of Homeland Security is theoretically responsible for coordinating the network defense of the civilian government, and of the country’s critical infrastructure.


www.wired.com...


The National Security Agency is facing renewed scrutiny over the extent of its domestic surveillance program, with critics in Congress saying its recent intercepts of the private telephone calls and e-mail messages of Americans are broader than previously acknowledged, current and former officials said.



Some actions are so flagrant that they can’t be accidental,” Mr. Holt said.



Other Congressional officials raised similar concerns but would not agree to be quoted for the record.



Mr. Holt added that few lawmakers could challenge the agency’s statements because so few understood the technical complexities of its surveillance operations. “The people making the policy,” he said, “don’t understand the technicalities.”



The N.S.A. is believed to have gone beyond legal boundaries designed to protect Americans in about 8 to 10 separate court orders issued by the

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, according to three intelligence officials who spoke anonymously because disclosing such information is illegal. Because each court order could single out hundreds or even thousands of phone numbers or e-mail addresses, the number of individual communications that were improperly collected could number in the millions, officials said.


www.nytimes.com...



Ms. Leed, a Pentagon special assistant on cyber operations from 2005 to 2008, said the narrow focus could leave vital national networks still vulnerable to outside attacks and intrusions.



"The question is whether the DoD protecting its own networks is sufficient to protect our national-security imperatives, and I would say no," she said. "The overwhelming majority of cyber traffic isn't on government networks."


online.wsj.com...


The legal and operational problems surrounding the N.S.A.’s surveillance activities have come under scrutiny from the Obama administration, Congressional intelligence committees and a secret national security court, said the intelligence officials, who spoke only on the condition of anonymity because N.S.A. activities are classified. Classified government briefings have been held in recent weeks in response to a brewing controversy that some officials worry could damage the credibility of legitimate intelligence-gathering efforts.


www.nytimes.com...




www.globalresearch.ca
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 08:25 PM
link   
yes they're tracking us, gathering our suspicious searches, etc. on the bright side there is a REALLY LOT OF PEOPLE out there to track, and we're all pretty flaky so they really have their work cut out. I think you have to pose some kind of real threat to be in any real danger.



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by earlywatcher
 


You have a point, Perhaps our names on accidentally on a list.

Say we downloaded music or typed in something like "wire the money from Afghanistan to Florida". Or mention a certain Air flight number. I’d bet they’d be right on us.



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by earlywatcher
yes they're tracking us, gathering our suspicious searches, etc. on the bright side there is a REALLY LOT OF PEOPLE out there to track, and we're all pretty flaky so they really have their work cut out. I think you have to pose some kind of real threat to be in any real danger.


ya i agree

they just simply do not have the manpower to arrest everyone for saying stupid things, but, they probably laugh at us a lot

anyone that just freaks them out im sure they go bust though, heck for all of the $$$ they burn they better have some sort of security apparatus worth showing for

otherwise id have to think they blew all the $ on exotic vacations and toys



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 08:48 PM
link   
My being in the Army and an internet nut, I would be so happy if I got assigned to CYBERCOM.
And I really doubt that we the military are going to waste our time going through everyone's information.
Most of it's going to be from enemy servers overseas, information we've gathered on potential threats that could actually attack cyber targets in the US, probably use it in the counter-war against the infamous Chinese hackers and technology thievery networks, etc.

As in the military rest assured is going to use it for real threats, we don't need to do a job that's already being done by the NSA, CIA, FBI, etc.



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 09:01 PM
link   
Slowly, but surely...

Big Brother is coming under the cover of the many, many distractions out there.

The All-Seeing Eye opens wider every time people cast their eyes away from it.

It probably won't be long before mechanized Big Dogs start yanking targeted people out of their homes... It could be reality in as little as 30 or 40 years.

Slowly, but surely...

People are losing their rights, their treasures, and their ability to fight.

Slowly, but surely...

We are losing our freedom.

Planet X, The economic crisis, The war on 'Terror', Thieves, Genocide, every tragedy you can think of, it's all connected to the eventual loss of our freedom.

One day, everything will be in place, all the technology to take out all resistance quickly and effectively while at the same time completely protecting the power Elite base from any reprisals.

The day the Earth is conquered, we will have lost all our abilities to fight the power Elite and we will be essentially enslaved, ultimately with the Elite in space using robots to control their defenseless human lifestock on Earth.


Don't think it may happen?


Did people 100 years ago think man would go to the moon?



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 09:05 PM
link   
reply to post by earlywatcher
 


There will be more than plenty of people to do the searching.
H.R. 675: Building Obama's Civilian National Security Force



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 09:14 PM
link   
reply to post by star in a jar
 


I'm guessing those big dogs will be out by 2010. Everything is nicely in it's place.



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 09:14 PM
link   
Yet another system that can be abused...

I'm not to keen on the tracking the entire web as a huge net to catch bad guys..But I am all for spying on known bad guys without having to get warrants and whatnot..

I just dont like all the laws and sytems in use now that if abused are very,very anti-american..

[edit on 1-7-2009 by Redpillblues]



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 09:22 PM
link   
reply to post by wonderworld
 


So what makes you think that the DoD will be the one in charge of the possible civilian national police force? Obama never said it would be a part of the DoD, only that it would be as well funded as it.
If he meant to say military, then he would have said a military police force but of course we already have those in the form of Military Police personnel. And he isn't exactly the most pro-military individual out there, you give him too much credit.

Really all that bill does is give the same ability of FBI agents to DoD personnel. You aren't anymore likely to have the FBI at your door than you would the DoD if this gets passed.



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 09:28 PM
link   
This is my favorite:
The Spy Factory | Nova | PBS


One hour online video. Very informative.



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by wonderworld
 


I think that it is over. We are being snagged, tagged and wagged.

You can't be a little bit pregnant and you can't be a little bit free.

It is either all or nothing.

It looks like we are stuck with nothing.



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Redpillblues
 


I wonder why they need a robot network (botnet) that can direct such massive amounts of traffic to target computers?



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 11:37 AM
link   
reply to post by spec_ops_wannabe
 


HR 675

“Sec. 1585b. Law enforcement officers of the Department of Defense: authority to execute warrants, make arrests, and carry firearms… for any offense against the United States.”

www.globalresearch.ca...

This is my conclusion on DOD, DHS and NSA



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 11:55 AM
link   
reply to post by spec_ops_wannabe
 


Thanks the Nova thing is really odd. NSA has lots of affiliates it seems.



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash

otherwise id have to think they blew all the $ on exotic vacations and toys


you mean like this?

Paris Air Show In mid-June, Sen. Daniel Inouye (D., Hawaii) led a group of a half-dozen senators and their spouses on a four-day trip to France for the biennial Paris Air Show. An itinerary for the event shows that lawmakers flew on the Air Force's version of the Boeing 737, which costs $5,700 an hour to operate. They stayed at the Intercontinental Paris Le Grand Hotel, which advertises rooms from $460 a night. The lawmakers were invited to a dinner party at the U.S. Embassy and had cocktails at a private party at the Eiffel Tower. Mr. Inouye attended a dinner sponsored by the Aerospace Industries Association, a U.S. trade group. Another senator on the trip, Alabama Republican Sen. Richard Shelby, took a cruise on the River Seine with defense-industry executives and elected officials from Alabama, Mississippi and Florida. Mr. Inouye and Mr. Shelby declined to comment.

Often, lawmakers combine trips to war zones with visits to more tranquil spots. In February, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi led a delegation of Democratic lawmakers to visit U.S. troops in Afghanistan for a day. Before landing in Kabul, the eight lawmakers and their entourage of spouses and aides spent eight days in Italy, spending $57,697 on hotels and meals. A spokesman for Ms. Pelosi says that she was working in Italy, meeting with U.S. troops at Aviano Air Base, laying a wreath at the Florence American Cemetery, giving a speech to Italian lawmakers and visiting the Pope, among other things.


wall street journal

couldn't resist
lots more details on the increase in travel expenses picked up by taxpayers in the article
our lawmakers don't need to hide anything. they rub our noses in it.



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by earlywatcher
 


It says “as with other Pentagon schemes, the technological quick fix may prove as deadly as the alleged threat, particularly where botnets are concerned”.

Will tax payers pay for that?



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by wonderworld
reply to post by earlywatcher
 


It says “as with other Pentagon schemes, the technological quick fix may prove as deadly as the alleged threat, particularly where botnets are concerned”.

Will tax payers pay for that?


tax payers pay for everything, one way or another, and probably several times over when more than one agency gets involved and private companies have to cope.



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 02:21 PM
link   
They are going to be pretty bored if they spy on my internet use. I think it is more of a scare tactic. Too much data to go through. Not saying they can't do it, just that it would cost too much in time and people.

I told my 12 yr old son, who has a cell phone for emergency use, that I can get a copy of every text message he sends out. I can't, but he thinks I can, so I don't worry too much about who he is texting. Maybe that is what the government is trying to do to us. Scare us into behaving ourselves like good little sheep.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join