uforn
Administrator
Investigator In Training
In Search For The Truth
Posts: 5,400
|
Post by uforn on Nov 15, 2012 15:22:37 GMT 1
I belong to MUFON, and here we have local chapters. I was at a meeting this past weekend and we had an unexpected visitor. She was a woman almost 80 years old… She asked what we knew about this guy – Gary… Specifically, she mentioned, from what she had heard…. That when he first broke into these computers… DOE, NASA, DOD, and etc… he had uncovered some documents and before he was caught, he had posted these documents to the web somewhere has anyone ever heard of this before? I know Gary had claimed there were other "hackers" but has anyone ever heard of these documents being posted anywhere? Specifically, there was one document in particular that she had mentioned and is scouring the earth to find it…. Okay… I guess Gary located a “flight manifest” that had listed all of the soldiers and the duties of these soldiers of a fleet of craft that was stationed in space. She also made some claims that on this manifest were names of aliens who were also onboard. I am not saying I believe, I am just passing this along…. The reason for her visiting us is that she was also told, from someone else who had seen this manifest that her sons name was on this list. She was also told from the US government... like 25 years ago that, her son had died in a military accident but was never told exactly when, where, or how. Like I said, since then she was told her sons name was on this list and is attempting to find out the truth… Do any of know or ever heard of any such document? If this is true, might there be a site out there that contains his uploaded documents? When she first started telling this story, I immediately thought of this group as being one who might know any sort of additional information. Any help or guidance would be greatly appreciated. dbh What is it that you do for MUFON dbh ? Ive watched a few interviews and read the transcripts and I dont recall Gary saying that he had documents hidden away. The question was asked by Kerry Cassidy if he had a scapegoat kinda thing (something to fight back at the authorities with) in which he told her even if he did he wouldnt tell her. Your going to have to find every interview Gary has done in order to see if he names anyones name. I think this is just a rumour I could be wrong tho
|
|
|
Post by dbh on Nov 15, 2012 15:37:37 GMT 1
he says, he was never alone."Once you're on the network, you can do a command called NetStat - Network Status - and it lists all the connections to that machine. There were hackers from Denmark, Italy, Germany, Turkey, Thailand ..."
"All on at once?" I ask. "You could see hackers from all over the world, snooping around, without the spaceniks or the military realising?"
"Every night," he says, "for the entire five to seven years I was doing this."
I thought this worthy of a point, these hackers from around the world would have seen whatever Gary McKinon saw, why has no other hacker backed up McKinon's version ? wow.... where to start...where to start.... We know he got caught... so we know he did something.... Do you... or anyone here think he really seen the document that he claims?, meaning... do we believe such a document exist? if it is true, it is pretty damning...but at the same time.... almost unbelievable and I would think, the defense of the US might be... he was high... stoned... drunk... this is obviously all a dream... in other words...deny deny...deny.... had it played out that way.... i believe in the public eye the US prob could have won... however, the fact that it never happened, makes one wonder the truth, could he be sensationalizing the story to gain support? if I was one of the other hackers.... there is no way I would openly admit that I was there... this is like committing suicide.... lets assume for a sec... the entire story is true... it is possable, then... that this lady may have seen this document becasue in theory... it COULD exist? It is just that it may not have come from Gary... but one of the others.... thanks Mildrew.....I don't beleeeeeeive it!!! is it wrong for me to wonder what kind of bud he had? lol I mean Fosters...ehhh ok... but i personally prefer something a little stronger....
|
|
|
Post by meldrew on Nov 15, 2012 17:03:02 GMT 1
I say you have to watch all the interviews and read all the articles he has done, to see if he said that he hid files, a bit of research there dbh, I don't think he's mentioned them, I think the old lady might have been given some duff information. its also strange an old lady knows something that researchers didn't know about.
|
|
uforn
Administrator
Investigator In Training
In Search For The Truth
Posts: 5,400
|
Post by uforn on Nov 15, 2012 17:08:11 GMT 1
I say you have to watch all the interviews and read all the articles he has done, to see if he said that he hid files, a bit of research there dbh, I don't think he's mentioned them, I think the old lady might have been given some duff information. its also strange an old lady knows something that researchers didn't know about. I more or less said this in an above post
|
|
bazmatic
Researcher
I'm watching
Posts: 195
|
Post by bazmatic on Nov 15, 2012 19:20:28 GMT 1
If Gary has a 'stash of secrets' then he becomes a target, if he spills the beans on national television then he is no longer worth worrying about, the secrets are out there This happened to Colin Andrews (crop circles) he realised that if he told everybody all he knew then he would no longer be in the frame
|
|
|
Post by dbh on Nov 15, 2012 20:17:17 GMT 1
hey Baz...
good points.... but if he does nothing with his stash..... other than smoke it.... is he not also going to fade away to nothing but a memory?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2012 23:14:38 GMT 1
Hello All,
I'm going to take a wild guess on the deal made between GM's lawyer and the U.S. gov. Leave Gary in the UK and he won't say anything about anything. Haven't seen anything new come out since what he said he saw in 2002. I agree all the interviews should be watched but I doubt if anything "new" will surface. I think the one who should be looking over their shoulder at this point is actually his lawyer who at this stage more than likely knows everything there is to know which may be too much. A behind-the-scenes deal with disclosure to the U.S. in affidavits is the only reason Gary is still in the UK. No doubt Number 10 Downing is heavily involved.
edited to include better spelling and such. Terrible!
|
|
|
Post by dbh on Nov 15, 2012 23:45:06 GMT 1
So... how much of his story do you all believe to be true? 10%, 50%...100%??
to be honest.... I think I am pretty high on the chart.... upper 80's for me....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2012 23:59:14 GMT 1
Hello dbh, So... how much of his story do you all believe to be true? 10%, 50%...100%?? to be honest.... I think I am pretty high on the chart.... upper 80's for me.... The story? 100%. The data fed Gary and the other "hackers" in there when he was? 50%. They knew he was there and who he was. He and the others more than likely hit a shell and the disimformation was sown. This is what Gary really found out and what his lawyer really knows. They know about the disinformation data- the non-terrestrial officers stuff. Now saying this might not sit too well but I honestly doubt anyone gets into these servers. ANYONE!
|
|
|
Post by meldrew on Nov 16, 2012 3:17:15 GMT 1
how much time was Gary inside these computers, over the period of seven years, a hell of a lot of hours I would say, and how much information has he released, not thousands and thousands of hours worth, so that doesn't add up. Gary wasn't a very good hacker by all accounts and even left calling cards, but it still went on for 7 years before he was caught. no information has come out from the other hackers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2012 3:50:35 GMT 1
Hello meldrew,
GM did hint that the process was apparently addicting. So to me the whole case that's presented to the public is the tip of the tip of the iceberg. & years of strutting around places we only dream of. Quite the lad he is!
|
|
|
Post by dbh on Dec 14, 2012 22:22:05 GMT 1
source - blog.cps.gov.uk/2012/12/gary-mckinnon.html14/12/2012 Joint CPS/MPS statement on the case of Gary McKinnon Statement by Keir Starmer QC, Director of Public Prosecutions, and Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service Mark Rowley QPM on the case of Gary McKinnon Between 1 February 2001 and 19 March 2002, Gary McKinnon allegedly gained unauthorised access to 97 United States (US) Government computers. An investigation was launched in the US and a request for assistance was made to the National Hi-Tech Crime Unit in England and Wales. Following discussions between the US Department of Justice, the police and the Crown Prosecution Service in the autumn of 2002, a decision was taken that the appropriate place for Mr McKinnon to be tried was the United States. The reasons for that decision were: 1.The harm occurred in the US - the activity was directed against the military infrastructure of the US; 2.An investigation had already been launched in the US; 3.There were a large number of witnesses, most of whom were located in the US; 4.All of the physical evidence (with the exception of Mr McKinnon’s computer) was located in the US; 5.The US prosecutors were able to bring a case that reflected the full extent of Mr McKinnon’s alleged criminality; and 6.The bulk of the unused material was located in the US. Given the nature of the offence, this inevitably included highly sensitive information and the US courts were best placed to deal with any issues arising in relation to this material. As a result, the US sought Mr McKinnon’s extradition from England and Wales for trial in the US. The decision that the appropriate place for Mr McKinnon to be tried was the US was affirmed in 2009 and subsequently challenged in the High Court. That challenge failed. As Lord Justice Stanley Burnton said in his judgment: “… [it is] the decision of the DPP, which I consider to be lawful and unchallengeable, not to prosecute him here … the USA is the appropriate forum for his prosecution.” On 16 October 2012, the Home Secretary decided not to extradite Mr McKinnon to the US on the basis of his health. She also announced that it was now for the DPP to decide whether Mr McKinnon had a case to answer in a UK court. At that stage there was no live criminal investigation in England and Wales, nor had there been for many years. The DPP and the Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police therefore agreed to convene a joint police/CPS panel to consider whether a new criminal investigation should be commenced. None of the reasons for the original decision in 2002 that the appropriate place for Mr McKinnon to be tried was the United States have altered. So far as the evidence is concerned, the position in 2012 is the same as it was in 2002. Most of the witnesses are in the US, as is nearly all the physical evidence and the bulk of the unused material, some of which is sensitive. Accordingly, in November this year, the CPS and the police met senior officials from the US Department of Justice to discuss the possibility of bringing the US witnesses to England and Wales for trial and of transferring all the US material to this jurisdiction to be considered. The potential difficulties in bringing a case in England and Wales now should not be underestimated, not least the passage of time, the logistics of transferring sensitive evidence prepared for a court in the US to London for trial, the participation of US government witnesses in the trial and the need fully to comply with the duties of disclosure imposed on the CPS. The prospects of a conviction against Mr McKinnon which reflects the full extent of his alleged criminality are not high. After consulting with the Metropolitan Police Service and the CPS and having carefully considered matters, on 4 December this year, US authorities indicated to us that they would be willing to co-operate with a prosecution in England and Wales if that would serve the interest of justice. However, they do not consider that making all the US witnesses available for trial in London and transferring all of the US material to this jurisdiction would be in the interests of justice given our representations and the reasons for the decision that the US was the appropriate forum as set out above. That is a decision the US authorities are fully entitled to reach and we respect their decision. Against this background, the joint CPS/police panel recommended to the Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police that he should not commence a new criminal investigation into Mr McKinnon. The Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police has accepted that advice.
|
|
uforn
Administrator
Investigator In Training
In Search For The Truth
Posts: 5,400
|
Post by uforn on Dec 15, 2012 12:53:03 GMT 1
Reading that article you posted dbh, it doesnt look like Gary will face trial for this.
|
|
|
Post by meldrew on Dec 15, 2012 17:17:43 GMT 1
I wonder if a deal has been made, his story is worth money, he could embarrass someone even, perhaps a non disclosure deal.
|
|
uforn
Administrator
Investigator In Training
In Search For The Truth
Posts: 5,400
|
Post by uforn on Dec 15, 2012 17:36:13 GMT 1
I wonder if a deal has been made, his story is worth money, he could embarrass someone even, perhaps a non disclosure deal. I very much doubt a deal has been made, here's my opinion, the US Gov could only have got a conviction if he was extradited to the US, as they have very little evidence and he was guilty in their eyes before a trial, but as we know thats not going to happen, so they are coming up with excuses as to why it wont be feasible to bring all the evidence over here. They have no evidence because if they did that wouldnt be a problem. They know for a fact that what they have got wont stand up in a court of law over here, Its as simple as that if you ask me
|
|
|
Post by meldrew on Dec 15, 2012 18:01:47 GMT 1
you may be right judge but I do like to look for a conspiracy, if only to rule it out, this happened 12 years ago right, people in middle management then, who were responsible, might well be top government advisor's now, or have ambitions that they don't want to jepodised
|
|