![]() |
Does computer worm "stuxnet" attack Iranian Nuclear Program? - Printable Version +- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora) +-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-1.html) +--- Forum: Black Operations (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-9.html) +--- Thread: Does computer worm "stuxnet" attack Iranian Nuclear Program? (/thread-4480.html) |
Does computer worm "stuxnet" attack Iranian Nuclear Program? - Magda Hassan - 01-06-2012 It is an act of war. Does computer worm "stuxnet" attack Iranian Nuclear Program? - Peter Lemkin - 01-06-2012 Ah, another War...just what everyone wants and needs.... Report: Obama Has Waged Major Cyberweapons Campaign Against IranThe New York Times has revealed President Obama has waged a major cyberweapons operation against Iran since the early days of his administration. The program, known as "Olympic Games," has been used to sabotage the computer systems at Iran's nuclear facilities. It began under the Bush administration, but was significantly expanded when Obama took office in 2009. Obama decided to continue with the program in 2010 even after part of it became public when it accidentally unleashed a computer worm known as Stuxnet across the global internet. Developed with the help of Israeli intelligence, Stuxnet is said to have destroyed some of Iran's centrifuges, but the full extent of the damage is unclear. The Obama administration's cyber-campaign in Iran is believed to be the first sustained effort by one country to destroy another's infrastructure through computer attacks.Does computer worm "stuxnet" attack Iranian Nuclear Program? - Jan Klimkowski - 01-06-2012 More... Quote:US was 'key player in cyber-attacks on Iran's nuclear programme' Does computer worm "stuxnet" attack Iranian Nuclear Program? - Peter Lemkin - 01-06-2012 That 'ol 'Bama sure has fooled lots of folks......! No Changes - except for the worse - and you can believe [or by stock, futures or credit default swaps] in that!:captain: Does computer worm "stuxnet" attack Iranian Nuclear Program? - Carsten Wiethoff - 28-06-2013 From http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/28/general-cartwright-investigated-stuxnet-leak Quote:A retired US general, James Cartwright, is the target of a Justice Department investigation into the leaking of secret information about the Stuxnet virus attack on Iranian nuclear facilities in 2010, NBC News reported on Thursday, citing unidentified legal sources. This is of course the final admission that the U.S. (together with Israel and likely Siemens/Germany) was the author of Stuxnet. If a working international court of justice would exist, this would be a case. And, of course, getting the whistleblower is important, stopping the crime is not. Does computer worm "stuxnet" attack Iranian Nuclear Program? - Magda Hassan - 04-07-2013 The Strange Case of James CartwrightJohn Quiggin | July 2, 2013 In the flood of news surrounding Edward's Snowden's revelations about the surveillance operations of the National Security Agency, another equally consequential development in the crisis of the security state has gone largely unnoticed. This is the news that retired general James Cartwright, former vice chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is under investigation by the Justice Department in relation to the leaking of secret information about the 2010 Stuxnet virus attack on Iranian nuclear facilities. To understand the significance of this, it's important to observe that, as with the revelations of Edward Snowden and Bradley Manning, this alleged "leak" did not reveal anything that was not known to the enemies of the United States. In all these cases, the leaks only confirmed what any member of the general public who had bothered to follow the story could reasonably infer. A New York Times article from June 2012, which allegedly relied on leaks from Cartwright, revealed that Stuxnet was part of a U.S. program initiated by the Bush administration and carried on under Obama. However, a look at the May 2012 Wikipedia article on Stuxnet reveals that all this was already generally known, and unofficially acknowledged, although then, as now, neither the United States nor Israel has officially admitted involvement. The existence of the Stuxnet worm was discovered in 2010, when, as a result of defective code, it escaped from the targeted systems in Iran and spread rapidly around the world. It was soon apparent that it represented a cyber attack requiring the resources of a national government, and that the United States and Israel were the only plausible suspects. Although this was not officially conceded, neither was there any real attempt at denial, or even a refusal of comment. To quote Wikipedia (May 2012): In May 2011, the PBS program Need To Know cited a statement by Gary Samore, White House Coordinator for Arms Control and Weapons of Mass Destruction, in which he said, "we're glad they [the Iranians] are having trouble with their centrifuge machine and that we the US and its allies are doing everything we can to make sure that we complicate matters for them", offering "winking acknowledgement" of US involvement in Stuxnet. According to Daily Telegraph, a showreel that was played at a retirement party for the head of the Israel Defence Forces (IDF), Gabi Ashkenazi, included references to Stuxnet as one of his operational successes as the IDF chief of staff. The only effect of the New York Times report was to extend awareness of Stuxnet to a much broader cross section of the American public and to provide sufficient detail to make any attempt at denial futile. Exactly the same was true of the leaks of Manning and Snowden.The only difference between the Cartwright leak and those of Manning and Snowden is that Cartwright was not a whistleblower seeking to expose government wrongdoing. Rather, as is the case with the great majority of leaks, Cartwright was an insider, presumably providing information to a friendly journalist that would allow his role in the case to be presented in a favorable light. It's precisely for this reason that the investigation, and likely criminal prosecution, of this alleged leak is so significant. The investigation would not be happening without significant support from within the political class. In this case, the main instigators appear to be Republicans, angry that the original report was broadly sympathetic to the Obama administration, and supporters of Israel, concerned that revelations about Stuxnet might undermine their position of reflexive support for Israel's foreign policy. This is something quite new. While politicians have been happy to go after their opponents for financial and sexual improprieties, there has been a clear taboo on criminalizing policy actions, such as the use of torture under the Bush administration. This has been a bipartisan position, allowing the commission of the gravest crimes in pursuit of U.S. policy goals. The only comparable case, the conviction of former vice president Dick Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, on perjury charges relating to the leaking of the identity of a U.S. agent, ended with the commutation of his sentence and no prison time served. But while Libby's leak served the usual purpose of achieving favorable coverage for his policy goals, the naming of a secret agent was a genuine breach of security. Even so, there was no serious attempt to pursue the case once the perjury sentence was commuted. The remorseless pursuit of whistleblowers under the Obama administration has raised the stakes considerably. For revealing information to the general public, Edward Snowden has been charged with multiple felonies under the 1917 Espionage Act, which carries a maximum penalty of ten years imprisonment for each crime. For the same offence, Bradley Manning, a member of the military, has been charged with "aiding the enemy," a crime which carries the death penalty (though it is not being sought in his case). There is no logical reason why similar charges could not be brought against Cartwright. Other whistleblowers are already serving lengthy prison sentences. It is hard to know how this will play out. Perhaps we will see the end of the apparent immunity of the political class from prosecution in matters of this kind. In the absence of statutes of limitations, that will make for an uncomfortable retirement for many public officials past, present and future. On the other hand, the possibility that politicians and senior officials might be subject to the same machinery that has been unleashed against the whistleblowers might lead them to draw back from the precipice. Perhaps we will see a rethinking of the view that telling the truth to the American public, when government officials would prefer to keep it secret, is a crime rather than a public service. John Quiggin is a professor of economics at the University of Queensland, Australia and adjunct professor at the University of Maryland, College Park. He is author of Zombie Economics: How Dead Ideas Still Walk Among Us. http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/the-strange-case-james-cartwright-8683 Does computer worm "stuxnet" attack Iranian Nuclear Program? - Peter Lemkin - 04-07-2013 Nah.....One set of rules for 'them'; one for the rest of us. 'They' leak regularly very Top Secret stuff - when it suits them for political or financial advantage - even just to boast or threaten. However, a real pleb whistleblower trying to alert the rest of the plebs of illegality or worse is apt to get the Manning/Assange/Snowden treatment - or worse. Does computer worm "stuxnet" attack Iranian Nuclear Program? - David Guyatt - 04-07-2013 Peter Lemkin Wrote:Nah.....One set of rules for 'them'; one for the rest of us. 'They' leak regularly very Top Secret stuff - when it suits them for political or financial advantage - even just to boast or threaten. However, a real pleb whistleblower trying to alert the rest of the plebs of illegality or worse is apt to get the Manning/Assange/Snowden treatment - or worse. Oddly enough... I agree entirely. :mexican: Whenever we see one set of rules invoked against a particular person or group, we probably need to post a contrasting example of another set of rules being invoked that insist on blind eyes being turned for the same sort of activity. One example here would be the sale of US top secret info and weapons including nuclear secrets via the Turkish American Council mob for sale to the highest bidder including, possibly, international terrorists - a shocking story largely outed by Sybil Edmonds. This example, obviously, is nothing new. Does computer worm "stuxnet" attack Iranian Nuclear Program? - David Guyatt - 04-07-2013 A timely piece from Voltaire Network: Quote: Does computer worm "stuxnet" attack Iranian Nuclear Program? - Magda Hassan - 24-10-2013 Fired White House Tweeter Accused Official of Leaking Stuxnetby Josh Rogin Oct 23, 2013 4:35 PM EDTAs the anonymous tweeter @natsecwonk, Jofi Joseph insulted a lot of peoplebut perhaps none more so than Obama's close advisor Ben Rhodes, whom he accused of leaking. By Josh RoginJofi Joseph, the National Security Council official fired last week for Tweeting secretly under the moniker @natsecwonk, had publicly, albeit anonymously, accused a senior White House official of leaking classified information related to United States intelligence operations against Iran. ![]() Joseph, who was outed in a report Tuesday in The Daily Beast, criticized and insulted dozens of Obama administration officials, lawmakers, Capitol Hill staffers, and journalists during his two-year stint on social media. But his number-one target was Deputy National Security Advisor for Communications Ben Rhodes, a senior official close to President Obama. Rhodes worked for the same department as Joseph, albeit at a much higher level. In the summer of 2012, Joseph issued multiple tweets under his @natsecwonk account suggesting that Rhodes was the source of classified information leaked to the press about the Stuxnet virus, a joint U.S.-Israeli cyber warfare effort to sabotage Iran's nuclear centrifuge program. Joseph, as an official in the non-proliferation bureau of the State Department and later inside the White House, was part of the administration's team working on the Iranian nuclear issue. On June 14, just days after the FBI began a probe into the leak and the Senate Intelligence Committee started planning public hearings on the matter, Joseph, posing as @natsecwonk, pointed the finger at Rhodes. "Gotta imagine Ben Rhodes is lawyering up now that a leak investigation is underway. If anyone in the Obama White House leaked, it was him," he tweeted. Two days later, as speculation mounted that then National Security Advisor Tom Donilon was a source of the Stuxnet leaks, Joseph again suggested publicly on Twitter that Rhodes was the culprit. "Folks, even if a National Security Advisor wanted to leak, he wouldn't be the one doing the leaking. His staff would #keepyoureyeonbenrhodes," he tweeted on June 16. Joseph never indicated why he suspected Rhodes or presented any evidence that Rhodes had leaked classified information. On Tuesday, he told Politico that he regrets "violating the trust and confidence placed in me. He said the account started off as a parody but "developed over time into a series of inappropriate and mean-spirited comments." This past June, CNN reported that the FBI was investigating former Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. James Cartwright in connection with the Stuxnet leak. "Gotta imagine Ben Rhodes is lawyering up now that a leak investigation is underway." Rhodes declined to comment on Joseph's allegation. Former National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor, who worked for Rhodes from 2009 through 2012, strongly disputed Joseph's claims."I sat 10 feet away from Ben for two years and have worked closely with him since 2007. The guy has spent more time trying to prevent the publication of damaging classified information than you could ever imagine," Vietor told The Daily Beast. "These allegations are flat wrong, and they're completely ridiculous to anyone who knows Ben and the work he does at the White House." Joseph's tweets about Rhodes were not limited to the senior official's handling of national security information. The account of @natsecwonk has been shut down, but The Daily Beast has archived records of the tweets, many of which refer directly to Rhodes: NatSecWonk Did I just hear Tom Donilon bitch slap Jim Clapper? Wow! And then his teenage aide Ben Rhodes piles on… Meow! 8:36 PM Mar 10th, 2011 NatSecWonk Poor, poor Ben Rhodes … madly spinning away, trying to explain a policy that just makes no sense to anyone, right or left. 12:42 AM Mar 24th, 2011 NatSecWonk Hey @erin_pelton - when was the last time Ben Rhodes said something not painfully banal and obvious? What does Obama see in this guy anyway? 1:37 PM Nov 23rd, 2011 NatSecWonk Hey @joshroginhearing that some in the WH not very happy with Ben Rhodes' self-congratulatory and ill-informed Iraq commentary recently! 4:11 PM Dec 18th, 2011 NatSecWonk Apparently, Mr. Rhodes chose to send an email to WH/NSC staff a few minutes before midnight to inform everyone that the Iraq War has ended. 4:13 PM Dec 18th, 2011 NatSecWonk Prepare to be utterly bored: @erin_pelton Deputy Nat'l Security Advisor @rhodesb talks to CBS's @Norahodonnell on #Syria options and #Iran. 3:27 AM Feb 9th NatSecWonk @CrowleyTIME It doesn't help that watching Ben Rhodes mouth banal platitudes at the podium is less interesting than watching paint dry… 2:25 AM Mar 28th NatSecWonk What's so disturbing about the Hillary dancing photo is the high-def resolution of Ben Rhodes' balding pate. And Jake Sullivan behind him. 1:08 AM Apr 16th NatSecWonk Oh Ben Rhodes, the sad and pathetic life of constantly spinning appears to be getting to you … 11:09 PM Jun 18th http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/10/23/fired-white-house-tweeter-accused-official-of-leaking-stuxnet.html |