maroonlegions Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 Fate of UFO Hacker Will Be Decided Soon Gary McKinnon A judgement will be made in 3 weeks about whether or not the UK will extradite Gary McKinnon, the UK citizen who hacked into NASA computers in order to get UFO information, to the US. McKinnon, who lives in the UK did his hacking there, has spent for 6 years in fear of being extradited to the US for trial. US authorities have threatened to try him as a terrorist and give him a life sentence in a maximum security prison. BBC News quotes US embassy officials as saying that the US wants to see him "fry.":eek: see him fry eh, feck they are so understanding and forgiving , to put someone away for the rest of his life for what he done is just barbaric to me there must be something in this UFO information that they dont want the public to know , mmmm, what are they really hiding . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toggie88 Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 The Government know stuff/done stuff that they would do anything not to have leaked. We'll never know any of juicey stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Das Root Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 Is he the guy that got into the systems as one of the admins had a password so basic a 2yr old could crack it? Be nice if Broon stepped in and told the yanks to **** right off, but he won't as he has no spine unfortunately Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jam Tarts 1874 Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 The idiot committed a serious crime, bang him up. How do we know that it was only UFO information he was after? If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toggie88 Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 The idiot committed a serious crime, bang him up. How do we know that it was only UFO information he was after? If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. Well it was NASA. If he was after bank account details, CIA agent details etc he would of hacked in to other places. So my conclusion is, he was after UFO details or was trying to built his own rocket. Hope he doesn't get extradited Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Payton Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 Well it was NASA. If he was after bank account details, CIA agent details etc he would of hacked in to other places. So my conclusion is, he was after UFO details or was trying to built his own rocket. Hope he doesn't get extradited I read another report Toggie that mentioned other databases (unfortunately can't remember which) that he'd hacked into as well. Regardless of which database it was, hacking into databases that don't belong to you is illegal (Rightly IMO- I wouldn't want someone going through my stuff without permission and that's without me having information that could compromise peoples' safety) and I think he should be extradited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Brow Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 If he is extradited he will face severe penalties. Life imprisonment? You really think that punishment fits his crime? How come rapists dont get life (generally)? Which crime is worse? Some folk need to have a word. The man will get punished, he broke the law and knew if caught he would face the consequences. However, the punishment certainly doesnt fit the crime in this case IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Payton Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 If he is extradited he will face severe penalties. Life imprisonment? You really think that punishment fits his crime? How come rapists dont get life (generally)? Which crime is worse? Some folk need to have a word. The man will get punished, he broke the law and knew if caught he would face the consequences. However, the punishment certainly doesnt fit the crime in this case IMO. Was that directed at me? I'd be interested in who MaroonLegion's source is (not a dig, but is there legal connotations if you copy and paste something without crediting the source?) but there seems to be some deliberately strong and emotive language in there and given the OP's track record of posting articles that don't tend to try and paint a balanced viewpoint I'd need to know more before I start lambasting a sentence that hasn't been handed out yet. My response was to Toggie's post, where he suggested extradition shouldn't happen- My suggestion (and it seems that you agree with me) was that he should have known that it was a criminal act he was commiting which would earn him time in the US and there is an extradition treaty in place between the two countries. I think he should be extradited for those reasons, and that GB have to assume he'll get a fair trial and that the sentencing will be reasonable- this does not mean for 1 second that (only based on my limited knowledge of the case gleaned from snippets like Maroon Legion's) I think he deserves life in prison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maroonlegions Posted June 19, 2008 Author Share Posted June 19, 2008 The idiot committed a serious crime, bang him up. How do we know that it was only UFO information he was after? :rolleyes: If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. you should really do some research before jumping to conclusions and posting , were else would he look for UFO files if not NASA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maroonlegions Posted June 19, 2008 Author Share Posted June 19, 2008 Was that directed at me? I'd be interested in who MaroonLegion's source is (not a dig, but is there legal connotations if you copy and paste something without crediting the source?) but there seems to be some deliberately strong and emotive language in there and given the OP's track record of posting articles that don't tend to try and paint a balanced viewpoint:eek: I'd need to know more before I start lambasting a sentence that hasn't been handed out yet. TRACK RECORD, eh my posting of articles come from very reliable and Researched sources and they make sure there are no legal risks , so what is a ballanced view point when you do not agree with a certain article or are proved wrong by a lack of research into a topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Brow Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 Was that directed at me? Nope, it was intended for JAM TARTS 1874. Sorry if it appeared to be aimed at you. The boy hacked into all sorts of DB's. Not just NASA. He didnt appear to profit from the information and used a Perl script to search for blank password fields (i.e. they still used the frickin default!). Anyone who has any sort of clue about network security (which is my job) could have hacked these systems if (and its a big if) this is how he gained access. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Payton Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 Was that directed at me? I'd be interested in who MaroonLegion's source is (not a dig, but is there legal connotations if you copy and paste something without crediting the source?) but there seems to be some deliberately strong and emotive language in there and given the OP's track record of posting articles that don't tend to try and paint a balanced viewpoint:eek: I'd need to know more before I start lambasting a sentence that hasn't been handed out yet. TRACK RECORD, eh my posting of articles come from very reliable and Researched sources and they make sure there are no legal risks , so what is a ballanced view point when you do not agree with a certain article or are proved wrong by a lack of research into a topic. A balanced viewpoint would be one that tries to inform the reader of both arguments in a debate without trying to lead the reader to a specific opinion. Your track record would be constantly quoting sources (that may be well researched, I never said they weren't) that have a particular stance and are trying to sway opinion or favour- I'd point particularly to you always quoting the latest trade union media release whenever anybody has a go at a union. My query about the legality of you quoting sources without crediting them isn't negated by them making sure they haven't said anything libellious- you simply can't quote something verbatim in this day and age without giving credit. TBH this honestly isn't me trying to point score against you, it's just that the owners of Kickback would probably be the ones that get the grief if anybody complained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maroonlegions Posted June 19, 2008 Author Share Posted June 19, 2008 Last moments of freedom for McKinnon UFO hacker Gary McKinnon's last chance of avoiding extradition to the United States, for a trial that could lead to 70 years in prison or an indefinite term at Guantanamo, takes place on February 13, when his case will be decided by London's Court of Appeal. Since his crime took place on UK soil, he wants to be tried in the UK, and is appealing extradition to the United States. McKinnon's hacking of NASA computers was accomplished by simply finding systems that had blank passwords and opening them. He did no damage, and reported that some NASA files made reference to an apparently extensive secret US manned presence in space. While he is apt to get a fair trial in the United Kingdom, there is every likelihood that the United States will treat him as a terrorist and he will disappear into the night and fog of American justice. If he is tried, conviction will be virtually automatic, and sentencing brutal. Ken Lewis writes in the New Zealand news site M-net that McKinnon, who broke into US military computers and found evidence of aliens and UFO technology, faces up to 70 years in a US prison. If you take UFOs seriously (and maybe you have a special reason to do this), you should investigate the UFO section of our website bookstore. Almost every one of our authors has been interviewed on Dreamland and we can vouch for their legitimacy. Please make sure we'll be here tomorrow so we can continue our important work: Subscribe today. For more information, click here. Related Stories: 18-Jun-2008: Fate of UFO Hacker Will Be Decided Soon 05-Apr-2007: UK UFO Hacker Loses Appeal 19-Feb-2007: Update on UFO Hacker so the real reason seems to be the EVIDENCE he found of UFOs and their hardware ,if that is the case and ufos are real then is it not the case he is merely trying to make people aware of the cover up that exists on this subject, we do have a right to know whats going on and no way does he deserve 70 years in prison for that ,in fact the very people that are covering up and denying us this information should be made accountable. there are lots of credible sources from sites that have very hard working and dedicated people who have been researching this subject matter for years , from retired people from the military , nasa scientists who have work on various jet propulsion systems ect, these people put their very freedom on the line to post information about what they have seen and experienced, its straight from the horses mouth so to speak , do they deserve to have their freedom taken away so brutally , they are doing this not for money or fame but because they feel we need to and have a RIGHT to know in this thing we call democracy , that hacker opened up a can of worms and the authorities are running scared and trying to make an example of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maroonlegions Posted June 19, 2008 Author Share Posted June 19, 2008 A balanced viewpoint would be one that tries to inform the reader of both arguments in a debate without trying to lead the reader to a specific opinion. Your track record would be constantly quoting sources (that may be well researched, I never said they weren't) that have a particular stance and are trying to sway opinion or favour- I'd point particularly to you always quoting the latest trade union media release whenever anybody has a go at a union. My query about the legality of you quoting sources without crediting them isn't negated by them making sure they haven't said anything libellious- you simply can't quote something verbatim in this day and age without giving credit. TBH this honestly isn't me trying to point score against you, it's just that the owners of Kickback would probably be the ones that get the grief if anybody complained. , what do you take me for do you think i would not make sure i was posting something that was legal and these sources do the same thing or they would be bankrupt or in jail.:rolleyes: http://www.davidicke.com/http://, have some time on there and do some real research, balanced view ,it does not exist in this world , the media and authorities make sure of that, and what if i try to defend the unions , most people do not have a clue or even bother to research their sites , balanced view= media view and status quo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Payton Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 so the real reason seems to be the EVIDENCE he found of UFOs and their hardware ,if that is the case and ufos are real then is it not the case he is merely trying to make people aware of the cover up that exists on this subject, we do have a right to know whats going on and no way does he deserve 70 years in prison for that ,in fact the very people that are covering up and denying us this information should be made accountable. there are lots of credible sources from sites that have very hard working and dedicated people who have been researching this subject matter for years , from retired people from the military , nasa scientists who have work on various jet propulsion systems ect, these people put their very freedom on the line to post information about what they have seen and experienced, its straight from the horses mouth so to speak , do they deserve to have their freedom taken away so brutally , they are doing this not for money or fame but because they feel we need to and have a RIGHT to know in this thing we call democracy , that hacker opened up a can of worms and the authorities are running scared and trying to make an example of him. So because he felt the government was withholding information that in his opinion the public should know about he shouldn't be held accountable for his crime? How would that differ from me breaking into somebodys house because they had information I wanted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Payton Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 , what do you take me for do you think i would not make sure i was posting something that was legal and these sources do the same thing or they would be bankrupt or in jail.:rolleyes: http://www.davidicke.com/http://, have some time on there and do some real research, balanced view ,it does not exist in this world , the media and authorities make sure of that, and what if i try to defend the unions , most people do not have a clue or even bother to research their sites , balanced view= media view and status quo. Without even going into my personal opinion on whether David Icke is a credible source (if you think he is you've got every right to quote him), you're not understanding what I'm saying. My problem isn't with your argument, or whether what the people you're quoting is saying is legal- You should not quote a source without saying "this is where I'm quoting from". You don't need to say it quite as explicitly as that, but you at least have to provide a link so people can see that somebody else has gone to the effort of putting it together rather than yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.