Massive pentagon leak re Ukraine conflict

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone seen a description of what this kids job was?

IT support, basically. I don’t know enough about the field to weigh in but the comments on the Wapo article said it was very possibly he didn’t have actual access, but that he hacked in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone seen a description of what this kids job was?

IT support, basically. I don’t know enough about the field to weigh in but the comments on the Wapo article said it was very possibly he didn’t have actual access, but that he hacked in.

Interesting and makes sense. Pretty rare a junior enlisted would have any clearance much less a high level one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the times

Later, someone who appeared to be Airman Teixeira drove onto the property in a red pickup truck.

When Times reporters approached the house again, the truck was parked in the driveway. Airman Teixeira’s mother and a man were standing outside in the driveway.

When asked if Airman Teixeira was there and willing to speak, the man said: “He needs to get an attorney if things are flowing the way they are going right now. The Feds will be around soon, I’m sure.”

The NYT found this guy before the feds did? Wonder if FBI agents refused to investigate the case?

And what does that tell you instinctively?

I'm hoping that the FBI hadn't moved on the guy yet because they'd had him under surveillance???? They aren't really as incompetent as this NYT story make them appear, right??? Right???

I just watched the Boston Bombing doc on Netflix. The FBI had images of the suspects fairly quickly and were determining the identity when someone leaked the images. I got the sense it was BPD, but idk. Anyways, the reason the FBI and DOJ didn't want to release them was b/c they didn't want to alert the bombers that they were on to them. Ultimately, FBI had to get out ahead of the leak, and then there was a lot of death and destruction that followed when they tried to escape. Not to mention the bombers' friends trying to destroy evidence once they recognized who it was.

Revealing that the government has been lying about its involvement in Ukraine? Sounds like whistleblowing.

Where's the big lie?

We've been transparent on equipment being transferred. As for other "involvement" the leak said there were 50 US soldiers in Ukraine. 50. Whoopie doo. Four dozen. Like we're supposed to believe that 50 American soldiers are going to take on 200,000 Russian soldiers? The role of those Americans is no doubt to observe, advise and provide training where needed, pretty standard kind of stuff.

That's a FAR cry from the stupid and ridiculous lies your Russian friends have been telling, that they are "fighting NATO troops" and claims that there were no Ukrainian troops at the front, all black GIs from America and other horsecrap.

You say lie? That's pretty ridiculous.

Their role is most likely Embassy security.

+1. It's never been a secret that there are 50 marines protecting the embassy. It was announced when we reopened it after the invasion.

We have special forces in Ukraine training troops

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the times

Later, someone who appeared to be Airman Teixeira drove onto the property in a red pickup truck.

When Times reporters approached the house again, the truck was parked in the driveway. Airman Teixeira’s mother and a man were standing outside in the driveway.

When asked if Airman Teixeira was there and willing to speak, the man said: “He needs to get an attorney if things are flowing the way they are going right now. The Feds will be around soon, I’m sure.”

The NYT found this guy before the feds did? Wonder if FBI agents refused to investigate the case?

And what does that tell you instinctively?

I'm hoping that the FBI hadn't moved on the guy yet because they'd had him under surveillance???? They aren't really as incompetent as this NYT story make them appear, right??? Right???

I just watched the Boston Bombing doc on Netflix. The FBI had images of the suspects fairly quickly and were determining the identity when someone leaked the images. I got the sense it was BPD, but idk. Anyways, the reason the FBI and DOJ didn't want to release them was b/c they didn't want to alert the bombers that they were on to them. Ultimately, FBI had to get out ahead of the leak, and then there was a lot of death and destruction that followed when they tried to escape. Not to mention the bombers' friends trying to destroy evidence once they recognized who it was.

Revealing that the government has been lying about its involvement in Ukraine? Sounds like whistleblowing.

Where's the big lie?

We've been transparent on equipment being transferred. As for other "involvement" the leak said there were 50 US soldiers in Ukraine. 50. Whoopie doo. Four dozen. Like we're supposed to believe that 50 American soldiers are going to take on 200,000 Russian soldiers? The role of those Americans is no doubt to observe, advise and provide training where needed, pretty standard kind of stuff.

That's a FAR cry from the stupid and ridiculous lies your Russian friends have been telling, that they are "fighting NATO troops" and claims that there were no Ukrainian troops at the front, all black GIs from America and other horsecrap.

You say lie? That's pretty ridiculous.

Their role is most likely Embassy security.

+1. It's never been a secret that there are 50 marines protecting the embassy. It was announced when we reopened it after the invasion.

We have special forces in Ukraine training troops

Every US embassy has Marines. It's part of their job. But we do not have special forces in Ukraine training soldiers. That is right wing pro-Russia nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the times

Later, someone who appeared to be Airman Teixeira drove onto the property in a red pickup truck.

When Times reporters approached the house again, the truck was parked in the driveway. Airman Teixeira’s mother and a man were standing outside in the driveway.

When asked if Airman Teixeira was there and willing to speak, the man said: “He needs to get an attorney if things are flowing the way they are going right now. The Feds will be around soon, I’m sure.”

The NYT found this guy before the feds did? Wonder if FBI agents refused to investigate the case?

And what does that tell you instinctively?

I'm hoping that the FBI hadn't moved on the guy yet because they'd had him under surveillance???? They aren't really as incompetent as this NYT story make them appear, right??? Right???

I just watched the Boston Bombing doc on Netflix. The FBI had images of the suspects fairly quickly and were determining the identity when someone leaked the images. I got the sense it was BPD, but idk. Anyways, the reason the FBI and DOJ didn't want to release them was b/c they didn't want to alert the bombers that they were on to them. Ultimately, FBI had to get out ahead of the leak, and then there was a lot of death and destruction that followed when they tried to escape. Not to mention the bombers' friends trying to destroy evidence once they recognized who it was.

Revealing that the government has been lying about its involvement in Ukraine? Sounds like whistleblowing.

Where's the big lie?

We've been transparent on equipment being transferred. As for other "involvement" the leak said there were 50 US soldiers in Ukraine. 50. Whoopie doo. Four dozen. Like we're supposed to believe that 50 American soldiers are going to take on 200,000 Russian soldiers? The role of those Americans is no doubt to observe, advise and provide training where needed, pretty standard kind of stuff.

That's a FAR cry from the stupid and ridiculous lies your Russian friends have been telling, that they are "fighting NATO troops" and claims that there were no Ukrainian troops at the front, all black GIs from America and other horsecrap.

You say lie? That's pretty ridiculous.

Their role is most likely Embassy security.

+1. It's never been a secret that there are 50 marines protecting the embassy. It was announced when we reopened it after the invasion.

Oh my god, there are US troops in China too! We’re basically at war with China!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've no idea what his motive was, but he should be punished in any case.

However, I am more disturbed that so many people have access to so much information.

This should go up the chain of command for negligence--beginning with whoever approved him for this clearance. How much training did this kid get on what would happen if he shared information? Did he get any training on the seriousness of his job?

We hear an awful lot about training on social issues, sexual issues, etc. How much training are these young people getting on the importance of their jobs.

Wow slow down there skippy! That is not how things work and why after Snowden(low level employee) we are seeing the same thing. There will be no comprehensive review as to why a low level employee has access to all the top secret files(many that are outside of his purview), can make copies, just take them home or post on the web(for months before anyone notices).

DO NOT LOOK BEHIND THE CURTAIN….you will be arrested! So next times this happens do not ask these type of questions

What bs. There was no way to know this idiot would betray his country for his ego so no one did anything wrong giving him a clearance. People really think that the people vetting candidates for clearances have amazing powers of esp and see the future?

Your reply is BS. You will always have people like this. He is a very low level person with no need to have access to this broad array of information. This is a system failure. The people and the leadership of the department tasked with keeping this information classified need to lose their job but that will not happen. Instead it will be the same BS you regurgitate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone seen a description of what this kids job was?

IT support, basically. I don’t know enough about the field to weigh in but the comments on the Wapo article said it was very possibly he didn’t have actual access, but that he hacked in.

Interesting and makes sense. Pretty rare a junior enlisted would have any clearance much less a high level one.

He worked on the computer network infrastructure in an intel wing. Classified info is their wheelhouse. It's pretty hard to do anything without a security clearance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've no idea what his motive was, but he should be punished in any case.

However, I am more disturbed that so many people have access to so much information.

This should go up the chain of command for negligence--beginning with whoever approved him for this clearance. How much training did this kid get on what would happen if he shared information? Did he get any training on the seriousness of his job?

We hear an awful lot about training on social issues, sexual issues, etc. How much training are these young people getting on the importance of their jobs.

Wow slow down there skippy! That is not how things work and why after Snowden(low level employee) we are seeing the same thing. There will be no comprehensive review as to why a low level employee has access to all the top secret files(many that are outside of his purview), can make copies, just take them home or post on the web(for months before anyone notices).

DO NOT LOOK BEHIND THE CURTAIN….you will be arrested! So next times this happens do not ask these type of questions

What bs. There was no way to know this idiot would betray his country for his ego so no one did anything wrong giving him a clearance. People really think that the people vetting candidates for clearances have amazing powers of esp and see the future?

Your reply is BS. You will always have people like this. He is a very low level person with no need to have access to this broad array of information. This is a system failure. The people and the leadership of the department tasked with keeping this information classified need to lose their job but that will not happen. Instead it will be the same BS you regurgitate.

DP. You don't know what you're talking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MAGA extremist, no matter how much folks here want to claim he's a"libertarian"

And if it’s shown he’s not a MAGA extremist, the narrative will be spun that the leak was a good thing, just watch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Whistleblower

You don't blow a whistle to a small group of teen gamers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MAGA extremist, no matter how much folks here want to claim he's a"libertarian"

And if it’s shown he’s not a MAGA extremist, the narrative will be spun that the leak was a good thing, just watch.

Let’s stop with the MAGA vs non MAGA. We should all be outraged that this kid felt such a need to be popular that he leaked top secret documents and put US source and intel at risk. It’s a HUGE problem with youth feeling they deserve their 15 min of fame, that being a decent person isn’t enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whistleblower

You don't blow a whistle to a small group of teen gamers.

It does if you're trying to live out the plot of a YA novel/manga/game. This generation may have a harder time with the barrier between reality and fantasy than any before.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MAGA extremist, no matter how much folks here want to claim he's a"libertarian"

And if it’s shown he’s not a MAGA extremist, the narrative will be spun that the leak was a good thing, just watch.

Let’s stop with the MAGA vs non MAGA. We should all be outraged that this kid felt such a need to be popular that he leaked top secret documents and put US source and intel at risk. It’s a HUGE problem with youth feeling they deserve their 15 min of fame, that being a decent person isn’t enough.

This is true. But, it does not negate the seriousness of the action.

There are so many things that are coming to the surface here:

1. The lack of serious vetting.
2. Accessibility to so many documents.
3. Possible lack of training and instruction on the seriousness of this action by his superiors--all the way up the chain to the SecDef. SecDefm seems more concerned with training on sexual assault, pronouns, and diversity than on the mission.

And, then we have the issue of what is revealed:

1. Are the documents accurate?
2. Is our government lying to us?

And, then, the social issues with the young man sharing this information.

All of this is troubling.
Sadly, and rightly, the Airman will pay a heavy price.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
2. Is our government lying to us?

Perhaps the question we should be asking the most, but one most rather avoid. It is either assumed that they are both lying to us and have a right to do so. The man who pointed out the lies is the one they want to punish, not the government engaging in at best questionable behavior.

I don't ever recall a candidate campaigning on a promise to surveil allies. What kind of government engages in behavior it never obtained consent to do and hides that behavior from the governed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
2. Is our government lying to us?

Perhaps the question we should be asking the most, but one most rather avoid. It is either assumed that they are both lying to us and have a right to do so. The man who pointed out the lies is the one they want to punish, not the government engaging in at best questionable behavior.

I don't ever recall a candidate campaigning on a promise to surveil allies. What kind of government engages in behavior it never obtained consent to do and hides that behavior from the governed? [/quote]

All governments.

Spy balloon ring a bell?