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.

 

A quote from the DoD report published on the 15th that deserves particular emphasis:

page: 2
123
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 07:59 AM
link   
Thanks for posting OP. We need to everything in our power to get this message out to anybody and everybody so they can see how disgusting and twisted that government reallly is! It's time these murderers are held accountable for their actions but they will not go easily. We must be vigilant, aggresive, and never back down because our very country is at stake!




posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by ExPostFacto
 

That is a hilarious video
I wish I could flag just your post.
The best part is when the older female consoles the younger one about the car "Its ok, they have their driver bring it around"



[edit on 26-3-2010 by joey_hv]



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 08:30 AM
link   
Let's just hope that any intel leaked into this site does not result in the deaths of innocent American Civilians or our Troops abroad.

Any confidential information leaked to this site should be considered a criminal act by the person who shared it. Let's talk treason, traitor, and thief... We know what can happen to these treasonous folks.

Kind of reminds me of a network reporter embedded with troops who subsequently reveals the troops movements and location via live TV broadcast.



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 08:41 AM
link   
Hey you know what else would cut down on service member deaths? Not being involved in an illegal and immoral war as a VOLUNTEER. They don't want to be hurt I totally understand but they volunteered to be there and these wars have nothing to do with freedom or liberty for anyone. They are about money so don't try to guilt people into not sharing information about a government that regularly murders innocent people to hide all the other crimes they commit against humanity!



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 08:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Redwookieaz
Hey you know what else would cut down on service member deaths? Not being involved in an illegal and immoral war as a VOLUNTEER. They don't want to be hurt I totally understand but they volunteered to be there and these wars have nothing to do with freedom or liberty for anyone. They are about money so don't try to guilt people into not sharing information about a government that regularly murders innocent people to hide all the other crimes they commit against humanity!
Believe what you want but when you start endangering our soldiers you become the enemy. it is a clear line, easy to discern. thread lightly.



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by jibeho
Kind of reminds me of a network reporter embedded with troops who subsequently reveals the troops movements and location via live TV broadcast.
Yeah, I think her name was Geraldo...what a maroon!
He got in serious trouble for that if I remember correctly.



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 08:51 AM
link   
reply to post by joey_hv
 


Good times for Geraldo. I think he also paid some allied troops to fire some artillery on cue for the camera. It made him look tough.

I call for a cage match between Geraldo and Robert Pelton Youngwww.comebackalive.com...



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 08:57 AM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


IMO I would think that this would be a good standing for any possible court action:

en.wikipedia.org...

I am a Canadian but hope that this really still means something to many of my US neighbors

Great thread and yes Very Very important to get the word out.
S&F



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 08:59 AM
link   
[edit on 26-3-2010 by King Loki]



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 09:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by joey_hv

Originally posted by Redwookieaz
Hey you know what else would cut down on service member deaths? Not being involved in an illegal and immoral war as a VOLUNTEER. They don't want to be hurt I totally understand but they volunteered to be there and these wars have nothing to do with freedom or liberty for anyone. They are about money so don't try to guilt people into not sharing information about a government that regularly murders innocent people to hide all the other crimes they commit against humanity!
Believe what you want but when you start endangering our soldiers you become the enemy. it is a clear line, easy to discern. thread lightly.



Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

just remember that



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by devildogUSMC
 


Wow...I mean it doesn't surprise me that the government would do this, but I find it odd that they have it in a publicly accessible report.



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by devildogUSMC

Possible enhancements could increase the risk to US forces and could potentially provide potential attackers with sufficient information to plan conventional or terrorist attacks in locations such as Iraq or Afghanistan.



Originally posted by devildogUSMC
reply to post by MikeNice81
 


Wikileaks does not just obtain and release any classified or secret document it can get it's hands on just for the sake of doing so. Most whistleblowers or leakers are taking a tremendous personal risk and are almost always in a worse situation after they do it; they aren't giving away troop positions, or leaking anything about legal actions. These people are standing up to injustice and Wikileaks is a place for them to make their stand and have it actually reach people and achieve something.


I think a little of both is going on and the problem here is where do you draw the line? I honestly can see both sides of this. I do know Wikileaks’ stated mission:


We are of assistance to peoples of all countries who wish to reveal unethical behavior in their governments and institutions. We aim for maximum political impact.


and I applaud them for it. But, on the other hand, there HAVE been many leaks that could put troops in danger when combined with each other, they could give an enemy an advantage. Here are some that I found just with a quick view of their mirror site. I have seen many others like this through the years… operating manuals, reports, etc. that have nothing to do with unethical behavior. The reason I know this is that I have read many of them looking for that behavior.

US Space and Naval Warfare Pacific Missile Range Facility base security analysis and plans, 8 Aug 2008


The Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center conducted a site survey of the Pacific Missle Range Facility (located in Hawaii) in June 2008 to identify infrastructure changes for outfitting the base with a new sensor system. The report describes the existing system and gives detailed specifications for the new sensors to be placed along Majors Bay, Port Allen and other areas of Hawaii.


US Marines Aircraft Control TACSOP, 2002


US Marines Aircraft Control TACtical Standard Operating Procedure (TACSOP), 2002.
Notable for the authentication code methods detailed in Electronic Warfare and the frequency matrix in Communications.


Obama IAEA nuclear sites declaration for the United States, draft, 267 pages, 5 May 2009


States that are signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty are required to confidentially provide the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) with a description of the location and purpose of each of their nuclear sites.

The document presents a sensitive 5 May, 2009 draft of all US nuclear sites for Congressional review together with a covering note from President Barack Obama giving more detail on the restrictions.

It seems that by mistake, the entire document, including the sensitive portions, labled as such on every page, was printed by the US Government Printing Office



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by crazyinthemiddle
if I was a federal prosecutor, I would overlook breaking a contract if they could provide concrete evidence of serious wrong-doings.


Then you wouldn't be a prosecutor for very long. Their job is not to justify breaking laws, their job is to find the technicals and prosecute them, no matter how justified it is.

Like prosecuting a murderer...you wont hear the prosecution saying "well, the victim deserved it..he was a scumbag..good riddance, lets just forget it and all go home"...nope, they are required to persue law...even when the law is silly.

Its up to the judge to decide the extent of the punishment once the jury finds the defendant guilty...its a very cold process that allows for almost no context.

We have a legal system..dont be fooled when they say its a justice system..there is no justice in a nation fixated on law.



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by devildogUSMC
 


I am guessing the NO FEAR ACT doesn't apply in this scenario, or does it? And I quote, "The No Fear Act reaffirms the strong public policy commitment to ensure that all Federal employees feel free to come forward with allegations of discrimination, wrongdoing, or misconduct, by making sure that Federal employees are aware of their rights. This law, signed on May 15, 2002, by President Bush, aims to increase the accountability of federal agencies for acts of discrimination and reprisal. The Act is commonly referred to as the "No Fear" Act. The law took effect in Fiscal Year 2004, on October 1, 2003. "

You can read more here: www.ftc.gov...



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by mikelee
Most prosecutors do look the other way if the operson can prove their story/case/issue/complaint, however its those employers like the DoD, and others both civilian & military that will do whatever to keep this from these folks from ever going public. I remember many years ago a man who worked at Groom Lake filed a lawsuit due to hazardous conditions. He was sick a lot and someone got injured or killed or something like that. Anyway, he had to become a whistleblower to get his lawsuit heard in a courtroom because a Judge in Vegas kept throwing it out per the request of the Fed citing "top secret" concerns. He did win too.


Do you have the name/case on that? Many rumors about Groom Lake having to be abandoned because 'something' happened.



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by joey_hv

Originally posted by Redwookieaz
Hey you know what else would cut down on service member deaths? Not being involved in an illegal and immoral war as a VOLUNTEER. They don't want to be hurt I totally understand but they volunteered to be there and these wars have nothing to do with freedom or liberty for anyone. They are about money so don't try to guilt people into not sharing information about a government that regularly murders innocent people to hide all the other crimes they commit against humanity!
Believe what you want but when you start endangering our soldiers you become the enemy. it is a clear line, easy to discern. thread lightly.


Using secrecy to hide mistakes and wrong doing puts our troops at far more risk and gives greater opportunity for false propaganda from both sides.

Every lie covered over by using secrecy as a tool our governments make gives the terrorists victory every time.

[edit on 26-3-2010 by colin42]



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 10:00 AM
link   
so tell me if i have this straight

wikileaks says they have video evidenc of the us government commiting haneous acts, things they want to hide from the people

and wikileaks wants to show the people this*these* video

and now the government, in retaliation, has made a statement that these videos are kept secret to ensure the security of not allowing our enemies to know US strengths and weakness

well, until i see this video i probably won't know who's telling the truth, anyone have any history or credibility wise info on wikileaks? this whole thing is confusing me

[edit on 3/26/2010 by indigothefish]



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by devildogUSMC
 


Honestly, I don't see what the big deal is here, the DOD of course would be concerned about leaked documents and the like.

I think the conclusion sums it up much better than what I can write:


It must be presumed that Wikileaks.org has or will receive sensitive or classified DoD documents in the future. This information will be published and analyzed over time by a variety of personnel and organizations with the goal of influencing US policy. In addition, it must also be presumed that foreign adversaries will review and assess any DoD sensitive or classified information posted to the Wikileaks.org Web site. Web sites similar to Wikileaks.org will continue to proliferate and will continue to represent a potential force protection, counterintelligence, OPSEC, and INFOSEC threat to the US Army for the foreseeable future.

Sensitive or classified information posted to Wikileaks.org could potentially reveal the capabilities and vulnerabilities of US forces, whether stationed in CONUS or deployed overseas.

The proliferation of access to Internet, computer, and information technology technical skills, software, tools, and databases will allow the rapid development, merging, integration, and manipulation of diverse documents, spreadsheets, multiple databases, and other publicly available or leaked information. Possible enhancements could increase the risk to US forces and could potentially provide potential attackers with sufficient information to plan conventional or terrorist attacks in locations such as Iraq or Afghanistan.


Emphasis by me.

file....__._/file/us-intel-wikileaks.pdf


Oh please


"National Security" is one of the most beaten dead-horses the Federal Government uses as an excuse for secrecy. The Compartmentalization of Intelligence was not created to protect the American people, and I do believe that JFK said it better than myself:




posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by joey_hv

Originally posted by Redwookieaz
Hey you know what else would cut down on service member deaths? Not being involved in an illegal and immoral war as a VOLUNTEER. They don't want to be hurt I totally understand but they volunteered to be there and these wars have nothing to do with freedom or liberty for anyone. They are about money so don't try to guilt people into not sharing information about a government that regularly murders innocent people to hide all the other crimes they commit against humanity!
Believe what you want but when you start endangering our soldiers you become the enemy. it is a clear line, easy to discern. thread lightly.


Are you serious?

People with information are actually trying to liberate the soldiers that are being used as cannon fodder by a Government De Facto that only wants more money and resources...and you tell someone else to "tread lightly?"

You into protecting criminals much?



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by dalan.
 
no I said "thread" lightly as in be careful what you post online. it is not a typo.


anyways, it is my country these a-holes are cyber attacking by posting sensitive materials on the internet. whatever my country does to ensure we win so be it.

and it is not criminals i want to protect i am into protecting my friends and their friends that are serving overseas.

[edit on 26-3-2010 by joey_hv]



new topics

top topics



 
123
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join