Cyberattacks on Iranian nuclear program were a US-Israel effort started under the Bush administration and continued by President Obama, The New York Times reports. The confirmation from Obama-administration officials that Stuxnet was a joint US-operation comes from extracts from a forthcoming book, Confront and Conceal: Obama's …
Re: ...someplace to send Republicans with treasonous ambitions
I would bet if that were true, thge C-130's would be stuffed to the limits with Republicans.
On the inaugural flight, the Captain is heard to say over the intercom: "Ladies, and Gentlemen, you all expense paid vacation trip tot Club Gitmo is preparing for takeoff. Please stow all loose luggage and strap yourself in. Some lucky vacationers will get the 'full experience' by parachuting in from 12,000 feet."
Why do I keep getting this scene from "Con Air" in my head.
So can LOCOG sue the Merkins for illegally using the phrase "Olympic Games" during 2012 without written permission or an offer of sponsorship?
"Obama wanted to get credit for Stuxnet, as that makes him look tough against Iran," said Mikko Hypponen, chief research officer at F-Secure. "And he needs that as Presidential elections are coming."
Well good. Because national security and international law are NEVER more important than a politician's image during an election ...
Personally I blame Nixon ... but then I've been spending a lot of time with my old hippy in-laws lately ...
"Armchair Generals second guess the President"
The Pentagon and its Generals are wagging Obama's dog.
Just like they did with Clinton and baby Bush. Nobody here believes it, but the Pentagon got worried about the crude oil situation in the 1990's and they have been running the show ever since. They got the CIA and the State department to get excited about Iraq, Venezuela, and Iran. They got Obama to commit to the Philippines.
How does the army move its tanks, fly its planes and fire it's rockets with out oil?
The Pentagon is telling the President what to do and they're doing it on the Q.T.
Conversation as follows?
Reporter : Was US involved with Stuxnet?
US Gov : Yes, in cahoots with Mossad.
Reporter : Was US involved in Flame?
US Gov : I can neither confirm nor deny...
Reporter : So that's another 'Yes' then.
The disclosure was...
...pure politics, no more , no less.
I guess the current people in the White House don't know what the word "secret" actually means. Then there is the propaganda ministry (aka New York Times) that prints whatever they are told to do by the higher ups.
In any other administration, there would be ALL sorts of congressional inquiries with calls for prosecution (see Scooter Libby case!).
Than again, maybe the worm invaded the New York Times and the story "just appeared".
we've been at this for thirty years
we caused one of the largest non-nuclear explosions in history on a Siberian gas pipeline with deliberately sabotaged control software .. 1982 ..
these are acts of war ..
and ... today's wars are economic and China is winning
Re: we've been at this for thirty years
Can we sue them?
So... People who's boxes got infected can sue them? The DoJ should also file.
Re: Can we sue them?
Isn't it illegal for software to be exported to Iran from the US? Iranian companies sue for damages, from stuxnet. Now that would be a fun exercise.
"we just have to hope that the VERY SIMPLE IDEA of a state being able to CREATE MONEY and not BORROW IT AT INTEREST off the banking mafia, will finally sink in"
Yeah, coz treating economics as a zero-sum game worked sooo well in medieval Europe and state-sponsored inflation worked sooo well in 20th century Russia, so trying out both ideas at the same time (and damn the internal contradiction) couldn't *possibly* have any downside.
In a crazy world, stranger things have happened and even been filmed and screened as entertainment
Or even better, the quake was somehow organized by the United States? I can see where you're going… …… TheRealRoland Posted Friday 1st June 2012 17:14 GMT
What would happen if a nuclear weapon were detonated under the deep sea? Would it be obvious or would the aftermath be thought to be a natural catastrophe?
And is this necessary ……… http://www.rt.com/news/germany-israel-submarine-nuclear-missiles-884/ …… or a blatant possible nuclear proliferation mis-step with a technology capable of dual use on a par with uranium enrichment for peaceful energy purposes?
Re: would it be obvious
"What would happen if a nuclear weapon were detonated under the deep sea? Would it be obvious or would the aftermath be thought to be a natural catastrophe?"
Since seismologists are generally willing to offer a figure for how deep an earthquake was, and since that figure is generally measured in kilometres, my guess is that they'd have no trouble at all in detecting an earthquake whose centre was basically at surface level. (That's ocean-bed surface rather than sea-level, but since transverse waves don't travel *at all* through liquids, it is the ocean-bed that counts as surface in this context.
Even if you took a sub down, drilled a big (wide) well and dropped a nuke down the hole, I think you'd get found out. BP did.
Re: would it be obvious
Of course, if the major (geological) powers were working in concert to hush things up...
Didn't Stuxnet Backfire?
I'm still looking for the reference, but I recall reading a few months ago that once the Iranians understood the nature and intent of Stuxnet, they redoubled their efforts, spent even more money on even more centrifuges, and achieved their uranium enrichment goals well ahead of time.
So Stuxnet actually expedited matters rather than slowing them down. Oops.
Obama action figure
Obama wants so bad to star in his own fictional action movie that he'll harm US national security to thump his chest about his 'exploits'. I can see the packaging for the Obama action figure trumpeting his Stuxnet and Bin Laden cred.
"Iran also used the same P-1 centrifuges, sourced from a Pakistani black market dealer."
All I can get are stolen TVs and rip-off DVDs. Some people have all the luck.