False-flag attack? Syria to be invaded?

[Blademaster]

So I'm on 4chan before and I see a link on /x/ about an e-mail that was leaked by some sort of British contractor. Normally I don't believe anything on 4chan, let alone on the paranormal (read: looney) board, but this looked realistic enough to check out.

Apparently these British guys have a shitty server in some third-world country, because it got hacked and a TON of sensitive info was leaked. Military reports, Arabic paperwork, a bunch of passports... Anyway, the e-mail (http://imgur.com/Bz4ZKef) discusses a planned attack on Damascus. Ukrainian mercenaries are gonna gas the place, NATO is gonna show up, World War 3 is gonna happen, yadayadayada.

This could be Photoshopped. But I keep investigating a bit and find that the political board is going nuts over it. The hacker(s) not only leaked these documents, but also put them on multiple file-sharing sites. Here (http://pastebin.com/Whyvnnd6) is one compilation, but many are being removed. Here (http://www.sendspace.com/file/awfrpe) is another.


...That is a lot of evidence to fake.

I think we should make people aware of this. Those of you with Twitterbookjournalspace or whatever is the big thing now? Try spreading it around. This seems important. And, for once, legitimate.


If this IS fake, I apologize in advance. I was too much of a sissy to download anything myself, so all I've seen are a few scattered pictures. I'm just trying to help.

And if I go missing sometime in the near future, you'll know why.

[Mikachu Yukitatsu]

And if I go missing sometime in the near future, you'll know why.

Hold on Blade! Are you saying you would get into trouble because you provided this 'info' on a shrunken Pokemon message board?

[Blademaster]

I'm paranoid.

...Yeah, that's a weak excuse. But I did cave and download some of the stuff. No viruses or anything, but... I dunno. I guess I'm just apprehensive about keeping this stuff on my computer seeing how I don't have anybody to show it to besides you guys. Since I have few people to show, I have no need to keep it.

So, yeah. Deleted it already, but I'm sure a computer-literate person could find it on my computer again.

[RedStarWarrior]

If we attacked Syria, no one would be upset. However, what was probably leaked was one plan out of hundreds. Intelligence agencies are supposed to plan for all possibilities.

Also, it may likely be photoshopped. Your inability to tell if it was or not doesn't mean anything.

Also, you don't have to worry about anyone coming after you. It was on the Internet, therefore it has already disseminated to too many people to be contained. Either way, most governments would seek peaceful means to contain information such as having you sign a confidentiality agreement and possibly monitoring you for a time. I've become privy to information I shouldn't have and simply had to undergo a briefing. It wasn't a big deal.

[Heald]

http://www.smbc-comics.com/comics/20110509.gif

[/thread]

[Blademaster]

Come on now, Heald. You've known me for long enough that I'm not going to shit up Misc. with outlandish claims of alien secret governments, NWO, Illuminati mind-control flouride water, multidimensional god-rulers that suppress the public (somehow, for some reason), secret Bilderbergrothschild puppetmasters doing 9/11, etc etc etc.

This was a leaked e-mail. Big business and politicians can be hacked. Think back to Palin's e-mail account. Or the PS3 security shitstorm. And it pertained to basically taking a bribe in exchange for war crime. This is far less unreasonable than little green men building the pyramids or an 8-foot gorilla living in the forests of the U.S. Northwest or what-have-you.

If I'm wrong, I look stupid(er) on a Pokemon website for a few weeks.
If I'm right, I may have helped distribute life-saving information.

I'd say it's worth the risk to my 'reputation.'

[Dark Sage]

Blade, give me a break.

If there was really a secret plan to start a conflict on the scale of World War III, I'm sure it wouldn't be this easy for you to find.

Now, if Anonymous had shown up on YouTube telling us that they had found something like this, then I would be a little worried, but if you can find out this sort of thing by going on a website and pointing and clicking, then don't believe it.

[Blademaster]

I didn't find it.

>what is reading comprehension?

[RedStarWarrior]

Blade, give me a break.

If there was really a secret plan to start a conflict on the scale of World War III, I'm sure it wouldn't be this easy for you to find.

Now, if Anonymous had shown up on YouTube telling us that they had found something like this, then I would be a little worried, but if you can find out this sort of thing by going on a website and pointing and clicking, then don't believe it.

The only thing they are doing is threatening to release sensitive DoJ files right now, I believe.

[Zak]

Blade, give me a break.

If there was really a secret plan to start a conflict on the scale of World War III, I'm sure it wouldn't be this easy for you to find.

Now, if Anonymous had shown up on YouTube telling us that they had found something like this, then I would be a little worried, but if you can find out this sort of thing by going on a website and pointing and clicking, then don't believe it.

Hacking does not equal pointing and clicking.

[Dark Sage]

That's kind of my point, Zak.

I find it hard to believe that someone could find out something like this by accident.

People seem to have no faith in our government, thinking that terrorist organizations can fool the FBI as easily they can in political thrillers. The truth is, they aren't as stupid as people think they are, and their security is a lot better.

I heard from somebody "in the know" that places like major universities and government agencies like the CIA keep their most confidential files on computers that have absolutely NO access to the web at all. Someone actually has to be IN the room with the computer to access them, making hacking those files impossible. It's very different than what you see in the movies, where it would take a hacker about five minutes at most to get into such a system.

[Blademaster]

That's kind of my point, Zak.

I find it hard to believe that someone could find out something like this by accident.

...You DO know that hackers look for shit, right? Not just blindly stumbling around hoping to get lucky...?


People seem to have no faith in our government

Not when it comes to technology, no. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin_email_hack)


...The truth is, they aren't as stupid as people think they are, and their security is a lot better.

I beg to differ. (http://wikileaks.org/)


I heard from somebody "in the know" that places like major universities and government agencies like the CIA keep their most confidential files on computers that have absolutely NO access to the web at all.

You say that with such bravado, like your colleague is affiliated with some kind of elite cyber security squad that maintains some sort of insurmountable digital fortress protecting a private network that no hacker could ever hope to reach no matter how skilled they are.

...Your friend is talking about a LAN. You know, the thing people have been using those to play Doom and Starcraft for almost 20 years? It's not a new or magical technology: Give a hacker a computer that can access that local network and he'll probably break into it just as easily as he could any standard surface site. The hard part is accessing the COMPUTER, not the stuff that's in it.

[Dark Sage]

It wasn't a "colleague", Blade, it was my brother, who learnd it when he worked for Al Gore.

You know, Al Gore? The former Vice President under Bill Clinton? My brother worked as intern under him while a student at George Washington University, and he knew many members of the VP's staff. During that time, he learned quite a few things.

You're probably going to accuse me of lying. Well, if I'm being untruthful about this, may both myself and the next three generations of my family die of malaria. I'm dead serious. My brother really interned for Al Gore.

[Roy Karrde]

You know honestly I wouldn't be surprised if these contractors were not prepared to do any number of underhanded things. The CIA has plans for everything and I do mean EVERYTHING, there are plans to invade Canada and Mexico somewhere deep inside the CIA. I haven't seen everything but I wouldn't be surprised if this wasn't another of the CIA plans just looking to see "What if we went this route".

Besides it wouldn't be the first time that emails from a private military contractor appeared on the net.

[Blademaster]

It wasn't a "colleague", Blade, it was my brother, who learnd it when he worked for Al Gore.

You know, Al Gore? The former Vice President under Bill Clinton? My brother worked as intern under him while a student at George Washington University, and he knew many members of the VP's staff. During that time, he learned quite a few things.

You're probably going to accuse me of lying. Well, if I'm being untruthful about this, may both myself and the next three generations of my family die of malaria. I'm dead serious. My brother really interned for Al Gore.

...OK, good for him...?

I don't see how that changes anything I said about how government secrets are guarded by the same technology I play Team Fortress 2 with.

[Dark Sage]

...OK, good for him...?

I don't see how that changes anything I said about how government secrets are guarded by the same technology I play Team Fortress 2 with.

I'd say that's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard, but I have heard a few things more ridiculous.

Such as...

The claim that Goldman Sachs runs the U.S. Treasury.

The claim that Baxter International has developed a bird-flu vaccine that kills people.

The claim that Representative Alcee Hastings and the House of Representatives are planning to build at least six labor camps for political prisoners.

The claim that Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez owns the software that runs American voting machines.

The claim that FactCheck is untrustworthy because of its links to the Annenberg Foundation.

All these are lesser-known conspiracy theories promoted by "birther queen" Orly Taitz, btw.

[Roy Karrde]

I'd say that's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard, but I have heard a few things more ridiculous.


You... do know Private Military Contractor's email have been hacked before right?

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/anonymous-hacks-defense-contractor-email-data-schematics-stolen/55494

[Dark Sage]

Roy, Blade was cliaming that the federal government was using the same technology to keep classified document secure that a freaking video game uses.

Frankly, I was being nice in my last post. I thought that the very idea - and the fact that he was serious about it - was the most absurd thing I have ever heard on this website.

[Roy Karrde]

Roy, Blade was cliaming that the federal government was using the same technology to keep classified document secure that a freaking video game uses.

Frankly, I was being nice in my last post. I thought that the very idea - and the fact that he was serious about it - was the most absurd thing I have ever heard on this website.

Okay... but these emails did not come from the Government so I do not see how that argument is relevant either way.

[Blademaster]

I'd say that's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard, but

BUT IT'S TIME FOR... THE FACTS OF LIFE, HOSTED BY BLADEMASTER! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_area_network)


A local area network (LAN) is a computer network that interconnects computers in a limited area such as a home, school, computer laboratory, or office building using network media.[1] The defining characteristics of LANs, in contrast to wide area networks (WANs), include their usually higher data-transfer rates, smaller geographic area, and lack of a need for leased telecommunication lines.

Now why does that sound familiar...?


computers that have absolutely NO access to the web at all. Someone actually has to be IN the room with the computer to access them

Oh, THAT'S why! Well, you were right about universities and corporations using them... I wonder what else such a network can be used for...

Oh, looky here. (http://wiki.teamfortress.com/wiki/Servers)


A Listen Server is a basic server running within a player's TF2 client. It can be easily created through selecting the Create Server button at the main menu. Other players can connect to the server, but the overhead of running a regular client on the same system will often strain the host player's hardware. These types of servers are best suited to LAN-based events.

Huh... I wonder if these kinds of servers are popular-Oh wait the biggest competitive TF2 players in the world use them. All the time. (http://news.esea.net/tf2/index.php?s=news&d=comments&id=12037)



I know I shouldn't begrudge an older person for not understanding computers - Lord knows I've struggled with them myself plenty of times to this day. But that doesn't change the facts. Government and corporate security systems use LAN's.

TF2 also uses LAN's.

Ergo, LAN's aren't some exotic new government supertech. They're common as rocks. This is not ridiculous, not is it up for debate. It is fact.

[Dark Sage]

Blade, you said you liked TV Tropes so much?

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/UsefulNotes/ConspiracyTheories

See that? It's interesting reading. They list a LOT of conspiracy theories, and with most of them, explain why they are complete bullshit.

Why don't you read it? If nothing else, it's good for laughs when you read a page like this and realize how gullible some people are.

[Blademaster]

Blade, you said you liked TV Tropes so much?

I do, but do you know what I like more than TVTropes?

I like when, after I prove a man wrong, that man admits that he was wrong and apologizes for his mockery, as opposed to trying (and failing) to divert my attention to something that is only vicariously related to the topic at best.

[RedStarWarrior]

I do, but do you know what I like more than TVTropes?

I like when, after I prove a man wrong, that man admits that he was wrong and apologizes for his mockery, as opposed to trying (and failing) to divert my attention to something that is only vicariously related to the topic at best.

Spoken like a woman.

[Blademaster]

It's that or the Roy Karrde method:

http://i.imgur.com/i8Kb2Qk.png

[Dark Sage]

I do, but do you know what I like more than TVTropes?

I like when, after I prove a man wrong, that man admits that he was wrong and apologizes for his mockery, as opposed to trying (and failing) to divert my attention to something that is only vicariously related to the topic at best.

I'm not wrong, Blade.

If the U.S. government really used the same security system that video games used, the Al-Qaida would have leveled all of New York City on 9-11, not just the Twin Towers.

And I'm gonna laugh in your face bad when this "big secret" that you've uncovered turns out to be false.

I mean, really, not even Fox News considers this worthy of reporting.

P.S. Btw, I know what LANs are and I know that video game networks use them, but none of your three sources say that the FBI or the CIA do so.

Here's the type of computer that organizations like that use: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_computer

It has its own server built in. Companies that use LANs don't even have mainframes, which is a type of computer one notch below a super computer. (You'll find mainframes in big corporations and banks.)

Companies like the type that run TF2... Just expensive versions of normal computers, really. Comparing them to the ones that the government has is like comparing the a comic book to Oliver Twist.

[ChobiChibi]

It's that or the Roy Karrde method:

http://i.imgur.com/i8Kb2Qk.png

I loved this image. Then I realised it was Roy's actual face under there and now I love it even more.

*used to play Unreal Tournament on the LAN at college. Like a boss*

[Blademaster]

I'm not wrong, Blade.

If the U.S. government really used the same security system that video games used, the Al-Qaida would have leveled all of New York City on 9-11, not just the Twin Towers.

How is hacking anything even related to 9/11? Did al-Qaeda send in spies that infiltrated ATC and executed some sort of program that caused the planes to redirect their trajectory into the Towers? No, they sent a few guys with knives to manually take control of the planes and smacked them into the World Trade Center. 'Leveling all of New York City' in such a way is impossible: There aren't enough commercial planes in all of AMERICA to do that much damage, let alone be randomly flying around New York air space waiting to be commandeered.


And I'm gonna laugh in your face bad when this "big secret" that you've uncovered turns out to be false.

I mean, really, not even Fox News considers this worthy of reporting.

'Big secret?' I said in the first post of this thread - in the first LINE of that post, no less - that I found it on 4chan. It's about as 'secret' as your average new meme.


Case in point,
many (http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/01/28/286016/uk-planning-wmd-false-flag-in-syria/)
people (http://www.therightperspective.org/2013/01/27/defense-hacking-reveals-syrian-false-flag-plot/)
are (http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2013/01/is-uk-defense-contractor-planning.html)
acknowledging (http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2013/01/revealed-secret-documents-hacked-syria-false-flag-we-have-the-whole-list-2546608.html)
this (http://www.politics.ie/forum/foreign-affairs/204963-leaked-documents-detail-false-flag-attack-syria.html)
.

Now, before you claim that none of these are reputable sources... don't. That was not the argument you claimed. The argument you claimed was essentially "Because Fox News isn't discussing this, it isn't worth discussing." That's a logical fallacy, just FYI.


P.S. Btw, I know what LANs are and I know that video game networks use them, but none of your three sources say that the FBI or the CIA do so.

The FBI and the CIA keep their information private. For obvious reasons. Most of their information is stored on 'classified' parts of the Internet like SIPRNet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIPRNet) and the JWICS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Worldwide_Intelligence_Communications_System ). And what do you know, LAN Administrators (http://www.simplyhired.com/a/jobs/list/q-siprnet%2Fniprnet+lan+administrator) are needed for both networks. (http://www.simplyhired.com/a/jobs/list/q-jwics+lan+administrator)


Here's the type of computer that organizations like that use: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_computer

I Ctrl+F'ed the following words in that article:


"government"
Two results. Neither was the American government.

"department"
One result, and it's a mathematics department in India.

"corporation"
One result, for a now-defunct corporation that mad early supercomputers.

"organization"
One result, for Wikipedia itself ("Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.").


Also in that article is a list of what active supercomputers are used for:


2010s: Molecular Dynamics Simulation (Tianhe-1A)[76]

Not for government operations, or for corporate use. For calculating and simulating things a normal computer CAN'T.

You just shot your own argument in the face. Well-done.


It has its own server built in.

...I'd need to ask someone smart like Telume if this is technically correct or not, because by definition, EVERY computer "has its own server built in." I think you meant to say some other term like OS or maybe API...


Companies like that use LANs don't even have mainframes,

Too many words, or too few?


which is a type of computer one notch below a super computer. (You'll find mainframes in big corporations and banks.)

First thing you've said so far that's factual... But mainframes use LAN's too.


Companies like the type that run TF2... Just expensive versions of normal computers, really.

You just described pretty much every computer ever.


Comparing them to the ones that the government has is like comparing the a comic book to Oliver Twist.

...They're both books. They can both be 'hacked' by opening them and looking at the words inside of them. They can both be 'broken' by burning them or pouring water on them.

Your analogy is utterly irrelevant because this isn't a debate about quality VS. quantity. You're insinuating that a much BETTER computer than yours or mine is, for some reason, UNABLE to perform a very vital and basic computer process: CONNECTING TO OTHER COMPUTERS.

Sidenote: I've never read anything from the a comic book series... is it any good?

[Dark Sage]

You just shot your own argument in the face. Well-done.

Really? Read this:

http://www.informationweek.com/government/enterprise-architecture/top-10-supercomputers-us-still-dominates/231903060

It says in black in white, in the first paragraph, that the federal government has five of the top ten most powerful supercomputers in the world under its management.

Not the MOST powerful one, mind you (that one's in Japan), but five of the top ten.

P.S. Can someone here tell Blade that the government's computer is hard to hack into? Frankly, I think he watches WAY too much television.

[Blademaster]

Really? Read this:

http://www.informationweek.com/government/enterprise-architecture/top-10-supercomputers-us-still-dominates/231903060

It says in black in white, in the first paragraph, that the federal government has five of the top ten most powerful supercomputers in the world under its management.

Not the MOST powerful one, mind you (that one's in Japan), but five of the top ten.

That's great... but again, it's not relevant. The argument, in case you have forgotten, is "Government computers use LAN, just like my computer does." Why is this simple fact so hard for you to accept?

I have REFUTED that argument. Quite soundly. That was the entire reason for this... argument. How is this eluding you?


P.S. Can someone here tell Blade that the government's computer is hard to hack into? Frankly, I think he watches WAY too much television.

I don't watch anything on TV except MLPFIM. Everything else is movies, Youtube, and the occasional random documentary/comedy.

That ad hominem aside, I believe that I already said MYSELF that "the government's computer is hard to hack into" right here:


Give a hacker a computer that can access that local network and he'll probably break into it just as easily as he could any standard surface site. The hard part is accessing the COMPUTER, not the stuff that's in it.

Notice the use of the word "probably." This is because the quote in question is conjecture. However, it's conjecture based on evidence:

Computers can be hacked.
The government uses computers.
These computers are protected by security (I'm referring to guards, cameras, and office buildings here, as opposed to firewalls and antiviruses and the like).
If the security can be bypassed, government computers can be hacked.

I never said it was easy to hack a government computer as is. I said you were wrong about government computer security not using the same computational rules as the rest of the world.

[Dark Sage]

Computers can be hacked.

True.


The government uses computers.

True, but with far more advanced programming than the public has access to.


These computers are protected by security (I'm referring to guards, cameras, and office buildings here, as opposed to firewalls and antiviruses and the like).

And the ones the government has are much better than the ones most people have.


If the security can be bypassed, government computers can be hacked.

Possibly. But very unlikely.

By the way, Blade, you posted links to PressTV, The Right Perspective, Land Destroyer Report, Before Its News, and Poitics.ie as "proof" that people were concerned about this.

Bull... shit. Why not the National Enquirer while you're at it? If there were something about this on CBS News' website, or the website for fot The New York Times then that would be proof. I'd even give this a second thought if it came up in BBC News. But not in websites like that.

[Roy Karrde]

By the way, Blade, you posted links to PressTV, The Right Perspective, Land Destroyer Report, Before Its News, and Poitics.ie as "proof" that people were concerned about this.

Bull... shit. Why not the National Enquirer while you're at it? If there were something about this on CBS News' website, or the website for fot The New York Times then that would be proof. I'd even give this a second thought if it came up in BBC News. But not in websites like that.

The Daily Mail did post a story about it but has since deleted it. If you Google "Britam Email Daily Mail" the page still shows up in the search engine. That being said I am curious as to why Britam has not disavowed the emails completely, or have said they are fake.

[Dark Sage]

Probably for the same reason no-one in the Republican party condemns Orly Taitz's actions. Doing so would be a complete waste of time, because it's beneath them.

[Roy Karrde]

Probably for the same reason no-one in the Republican party condemns Orly Taitz's actions. Doing so would be a complete waste of time, because it's beneath them.

Their computer systems were allegedly hacked and emails exposed showing they were preparing to engage in war crimes. You would think that kind of thing would deserve a response.

[Blademaster]

By the way, Blade, you posted links to PressTV, The Right Perspective, Land Destroyer Report, Before Its News, and Poitics.ie as "proof" that people were concerned about this.

Bull... shit. Why not the National Enquirer while you're at it? If there were something about this on CBS News' website, or the website for fot The New York Times then that would be proof. I'd even give this a second thought if it came up in BBC News. But not in websites like that.

see


Now, before you claim that none of these are reputable sources... don't. That was not the argument you claimed. The argument you claimed was essentially "Because Fox News isn't discussing this, it isn't worth discussing." That's a logical fallacy, just FYI.

I'm starting to think you just skim my responses without actually reading them in their entirety.

[Dark Sage]

Blade, when I said, quote, "not even Fox News considers this worthy of reporting", unquote, I meant that "a news outlet that pretty much makes its money off trying to pass off slander as real news realizes that no-one will believe this".

Fox would have run this story if they were dumb enough to think people were that gullible. But even they know that there are limits to what people will believe. You can convince a lot of folk who don't like Mr. Obama in the first place that Bengazi was worse than Watergate, but not this.

Those websites you linked to, on the other hand, they are run by people with much less common sense than even Fox.

[RedStarWarrior]

When I worked for the Federal Government, my experience was that the majority of computers with secret and top secret information were on isolated networks and not connected to the Internet.

[Dark Sage]

When I worked for the Federal Government, my experience was that the majority of computers with secret and top secret information were on isolated networks and not connected to the Internet.

Thank you, Red. That was my original claim, something which was very rudely ignored by someone who believed the stuff in political thriller movies, apparently.

Such people may even be Harrison Ford fans who think it is actually even remotely possible to manage what the terrorists in Air Force One did. Not a chance in Hell, as I'm sure even the director knew.

[Blademaster]

Thank you, Red. That was my original claim, something which was very rudely ignored by someone who believed the stuff in political thriller movies, apparently.

You're really starting to annoy me.

First off, you're still using ad hominem (i.e., "watches too much TV," "takes thrillers as fact," etc.). That in and of itself is more rude than my bluntness has been, without even adding your repeated mockery of my position/knowledge or how eager you are to laugh at me when the original topic is disproven into the equation.

Secondly, you're using blatantly incorrect ad hominem (Again, the only televised thing I watch nowadays is MLPFIM, and I don't watch many thrillers - typically because they tend to exaggerate technology so much.). Judging from the number of examples you've used - as well as you being almost 2 decades older than me - I'm pretty sure you've seen many more movies/shows pertaining to this topic than I have.

And thirdly, and perhaps most amusing AND frustrating, is that once again you are getting YOUR OWN ARGUMENT wrong:


places like major universities and government agencies like the CIA keep their most confidential files on computers that have absolutely NO access to the web at all. Someone actually has to be IN the room with the computer to access them, making hacking those files impossible.

THAT is the argument you proposed and that I have been debating. I have refuted it several times over. You refuse to acknowledge that and instead keep putting up new strawmen that I have to deal with. And now you're using RSW's conjecture (Note how his post starts with the words "In my experience.") to pat yourself on the back.

EDIT: I think I've found the problem here. Take a closer look at the quote:


computers that have absolutely NO access to the web at all.

I'm admittedly a bit embarrassed that it took my this long to connect the dots, but considering you never bothered to jump on that lapse in my attention, I'm led to assume you haven't noticed either:

You don't know the difference between 'the Web' and the Internet, do you?

Alright, let's set this straight once and for all.

The Internet is, in really lazy terms, a digital Earth. In other words, EVERYTHING is either on it or connected to it by default in some way.

The Web, on the other hand, is just one of many ways to access different parts of the Internet. A digital system of roads, basically. It's the most commonly used, but just as we have additional means of accessing other parts of Earth (air traffic routes, shipping lanes, trains, etc.), other methods of accessing Internet content exist, such as instant messaging, FTP, and Usenet.

The 'isolated networks' that RSW is speaking of are located on what is colloquially called the Deep Web. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Web) The Deep Web is where everything on the Internet that cannot be indexed in a search engine goes. This includes but isn't limited to:

-unlinked webpages
-members-only pages
-my e-mail inbox
-your credit card information
-blatantly illegal content (e.g. child porn, assassins for hire, and the black market)

Anything that people (be they bankers, politicians, corporate moguls, or human traffickers) want or need to be hidden, they put here, typically because they don't know how to index it or (much more likely) they simply don't WANT it to be accessible. Can it be accessed from the Web? Some of it can, if you protect your identity and jump through a few hoops. But ALL of it can be accessed from the Internet, because it is ON the Internet.

There is NO way around this. Going back to our laymen example, consider the kind of isolated network in question to be an island, or maybe a place like Alcatraz. It's secure. It's hard as Hell to get to, and it's even harder to get AWAY from due to heavy surveillance security.

But it is still ON EARTH.

Do you finally understand now? All of your hack-proof government and corporate technology DOES have Internet access. This means that you can connect shit to the computer in question in order to view, save, share, and transfer information on that computer. Because a computer that can't do those things is a useless (and in all likelihood broken) computer.

[Dark Sage]

Blade, let me put this as simply as I can.

A computer owned by the FBI or a similar agency that has confidential information cannot be hacked into by an outside source because it has no modem, and NO connection to the Internet at all. A hacker cannot find what he is looking for, because there is no connection to it, and nothing to find. With no modem and no internet connection, such a computer cannot be accessed via an outside source.

To actually get information from such a computer, one has be IN the room with that computer, AT the keyboard.

And if someone wants to do that, he usually has to pass by several armed checkpoints who won't let anyone by without authorization.

EVERY computer HAS to be on the internet? Preposterous. Computers were around before the internet was invented.

Your argument that such computers can be hacked is beyond aburd.

And if you think you're going to win this argument, forget it. My New Year's Resolution was to NEVER run away from another argument or let someone with a false or absurd view get the last word, no matter how long it took. It's worked so far.

[Blademaster]

Alright, since you refuse to address any of my points analytically, I'm just going to stop making them and try your method instead. Ahem...

Dark Sage, let ME put THIS as simply as I can:


A computer owned by the FBI or a similar agency that has confidential information cannot be hacked into by an outside source because it has no modem, and NO connection to the Internet at all. A hacker cannot find what he is looking for, because there is no connection to it, and nothing to find. With no modem and no internet connection, such a computer cannot be accessed via an outside source.

Ergo, there's no way to get data off of it except by looking at it.

...So how did the data get ON IT IN THE FIRST PLACE?

[Dark Sage]

Uhm, a flash drive?

Maybe you've heard of these things? You can buy them at a Radio Shack for fifteen bucks. And they're small enough to clip onto a keychain.

That's how Osama Bin Laden kept in contact with Al Qaida while he was holed up in that place where the SEALS found him. His computer had no access to the internet so that no-one could trace him and find out where he was.. So he downloaded everything onto a flash drive, then gave it to someone who worked for him, who took it to an internet cafe, and and sent whatever message he wanted to send.

[Blademaster]

Finally, we're making some progress.

Now, as you might be aware, a flash drive typically plugs into a USB port.

Now - and this is a tough one, so take a minute to think it over - what ELSE can be plugged into a USB port...?

[Dark Sage]

Don't insult my intelligence Blade, I know that you're talking about a modem.

But not if the owner doesn't want to.

And they don't. So they do not. Their main computers have no modems. Thus they have no connection to the internet.

You think I'm stupid, but I'm not.

[Blademaster]

No, Dark Sage, I'm not referring to your obsolete dial-up machine.

My point was simply that flash drives aren't the only things that can connect to USB ports. Remember, 'USB' is short for 'Universal Serial Bus.' The keyword here is Universal. Flash drives, modems, USB cables, phone lines, Ethernet, Bluetooth, printers, scanners, readers... The point that I was trying to make is that there are many ways to connect things to a computer.

And in terms of Internet/internet access, the USB port needn't be involved at all. Ever heard of a router? A network adapter? Wi-Fi?

Unlike you, I'm not TRYING to be insulting. However, I honestly do not know how to make this clearer:

Everything you have claimed so far that I've responded to, I've disproven.

You claimed that corporate and government computers don't utilize LAN's, as many PC games do. I debunked that claim by showing you that networks such as SIPRNet and JWICS (used by the Departments of Justice and Defense, by the by) use LAN.
You claimed that nobody (later edited into 'nobody of merit') would bother to discuss what this thread was initially about, despite Britam itself making a statement yesterday to the VOR about the issue. Another claim debunked.
And now you're claiming that a "computer owned by the FBI or a similar agency that has confidential information cannot be hacked into by an outside source because it has no modem, and NO connection to the Internet at all."

That is absolute rubbish. That exact scenario has happened before. (http://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyolson/2012/09/04/fbi-agents-laptop-hacked-to-grab-12-million-apple-ids-anonymous-claims/)

The computer in question was "owned by the FBI," and it contained "confidential information." And yet it was hacked.

Now, I personally do not know if this laptop had a modem built in, or if it was connected to the Internet at the time.

But what I do know is this:

If the answer is "No.," then your claim that such computers cannot be hacked has been contradicted.
If the answer is "Yes.," then your claim that such computers have no Internet connectivity has been contradicted.

And if you don't feel that the identities of millions of people are confidential enough to put on secure databases supercomputers, then perhaps you should provide a more specific example in your counterargument. Just be forewarned: I'm already aware that hackers have, in the past, successfully infiltrated government affairs up to and including the Pentagon. (http://www.fastcompany.com/1767327/how-hackers-stole-24000-files-pentagon)

Twice. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_McKinnon)

[Roy Karrde]

May I ask, what the hell does this have to do with the original topic? Now I know how a outsider felt looking at the Presidential thread

[Dark Sage]

Blade is trying to tell me that the FBI and CIA have computers that could be hacked, and that the conspiracy theory he dug up could be true because that's where someone got it from.

My arguement is that the theory is BS, seeing as no attention is being paid to it, no-one in any government seems concerned, and no media outlet with any revelence is reporting it. (Except The Daily Mail which, as you said, retracted it. Why to media outlets do that? Usually because a story is fake and they don't want to be sued for slander.)

I'm trying to tell him, in simple terms, that the reason they can't is because they simply aren't connected to the internet, but it doesn't sink in. This trick worked for Osama Bin Laden for years. His computer in that place he was hiding out at was un-hackable and untouchable, and the information on it was completely safe. Why? No internet connection, that's why. It's one of the reasons it took so long to find him.

But we eventually did find him, so I would say that our government is smarter than he is. So I think it's safe to say that our government agencies (who are headquartered in buildings with much better facilities than THAT place) use an even better variant of the same trick in order to keep their databases safe.

[Heald]

I have a feeling I might need to lock this thread due to the sheer amount of stupidity and ignorance that it is revealing. If either of you need a crash course in how computers actually work, take it to the Binary Forum. Wasn't this originally about Syria?

[Dark Sage]

Yes, Heald, he claimed he had "uncovered" a rumor about Great Britain invading Syria and starting World War III, and believed that his life may be in danger because he was posting it on this website, of all places.

Now, honestly, seeing as you live in Great Britain, and likely know about their government better than he or I do, can you tell me what your take on this is and what the chances are of it being true?

[Roy Karrde]

Alright I did a check and I believe I can bring this to a end.

The Voice of Russia did some check into these emails, first the Voice of Russia is a Russian Government sponsored newspaper as such they have a interest in protecting Syria.

Now, BritAM WAS hacked, this has been confirmed by BritAM itself, many emails in the release ARE genuine.

The hacker however ALSO placed some fake emails in there about chemical weapons and a false flag. Now, the hacker went to great length to make them appear genuine, including getting to the point that the only way to prove the email IDs are false, is for BritAM to release their complete server records.

http://english.ruvr.ru/2013_01_31/Syrian-e-mails-hacked-on-Britam-Defense/

THAT being said, Dark Sage you should be ashamed of yourself, just looking at your last post I can tell you that Blademaster never said his life was indanger, nor did he say that he uncovered the emails. He said found them posted on 4chan, something which many people saw them and it spread like wildfire across the net. Your previous post shows how you can wildly make up things people say in a attempt to discredit them.

At the end of the day, that seems more embarrassing than ANYTHING Blademaster has posted.

[Blademaster]

My arguement is that the theory is BS

Again, this is a possibility I've acknowledged since my earliest posts.


seeing as no attention is being paid to it

If no attention was being paid to it, this thread and multiple articles wouldn't exist. Question their reputability until you're blue in the face; what exists, exists. What doesn't, doesn't. You shaking your head at fact doesn't make it untrue.


I'm trying to tell him, in simple terms, that the reason they can't is because they simply aren't connected to the internet, but it doesn't sink in.

And I'm trying to tell you, in simple terms, that our government uses a slightly more modern and intuitive information database than some sand jockey with a camera and a reputation of being unmatched at hide-and-seek.

Again, I don't claim to know how to hack. Yes, a computer that's totally isolated from any other computer or any connectible device obviously doesn't have an Internet connection. You can't connect without a connection. It baffles me that this needs to be explained to you.

However, if you honestly think every computer with a classified file on it in the U.S. government is hidden in a separate cave off the grid and secrecy is maintained by having a pony express of IT guys running flash drives and CD's (which, again, can be and have been stolen regardless) around the country/world to everyone who needs them, then I don't know how to respond to that.

As for you, Heald, you let the election thread live. I demand this thread be allowed to stay on the grounds that it's been far less derailed and in a far less aggressive manner than that thread was. Hell it even got awards for that.

[Dark Sage]

Why would the U.S. Government take risks when they don't have to?

I know they take them all the time in the movies, but in real life, they don't.

[Blademaster]

...What does risk-taking have to do with this? What are you even arguing right now?

That bin Laden's computer security is better than the entire U.S. government's because he kept it hidden in a hole on the other side of the planet for ten years?
That bin Laden inspired the government to disband their entire network and implement an identical 'security system' to his own because of said evasion?

You've lost me. I don't even know what argument I'm responding to right now.


Also in case you skipped Roy's post, the e-mail I linked in the OP was false. Feel free to "laugh at my face bad(ly)." I can't help but feel that my precautionary claim is/was one of the less embarrassing things posted in this thread so far, even by me.

Just a hunch.

[Dark Sage]

Don't worry, Blade, I've seen LOTS of conspiracy theories in the past year alone that were more pathetic than that one.

The one that Orly Taitz suggested about the Sandy Hook shooter being drugged and brainwashed by the Obama Administration didn't even get as much attention as yours did.

[Blademaster]

OH SHIT! (http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/13/politics/syria-us-chemical-weapons/index.html?hpt=hp_t1)

[Heald]

I like how killing 93000 people with conventional weapons is not an atrocity but killing 200 people with gas is.

[RedStarWarrior]

I like how killing 93000 people with conventional weapons is not an atrocity but killing 200 people with gas is.

Chemical and biological weapons are frowned upon globally, meaning less backlash from helping. We are looking at buying then weapons now anyway, since the government forces are fighting alongside radical Islamic terrorists.

I think our largest reason for holding back was that we didn't want it to end up like Afghanistan did. We help them free themselves and then the people we helped turn against us.

[Heald]

Chemical and biological weapons are frowned upon globally, meaning less backlash from helping. We are looking at buying then weapons now anyway, since the government forces are fighting alongside radical Islamic terrorists.
No shit, but if someone asked me if I'd rather have 1 family member gassed or 10 shot to death, I know which one I'd prefer over the other.

In what sense isn't the reaction that leads to a metal slug being explosively projected from a tube not chemical anyway?