Hackers 'led warplanes to Syrian hospital' after targeting surgeon's computer(telegraph.co.uk)
telegraph.co.uk
Hackers 'led warplanes to Syrian hospital' after targeting surgeon's computer
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/20/british-surgeon-helped-syrian-operations-hacked-reveal-secret/
46 comments
I'm too young to remember the first cold war, but it seems totally insane to me that Russia is carrying out repeated war crimes routinely now, and the West is literally doing nothing to address it.
It's not insane if you consider the West is doing the very same thing (committing war crimes) but Western media doesn't report in the same way about it. Just check what the Americans did in Iraq, whom they deliver their weapons in Syria to, ...
One thing I always ask myself:
The war in Syria is basically won by the regime, so why the heck would they now resort to bombing hospitals and C-weapon attacks on the population? It just doesn't make sense so that's why I am very cautious here.
This is not to say that Russia is good and the US is bad, it's just that "The first casualty of War is Truth"
One thing I always ask myself:
The war in Syria is basically won by the regime, so why the heck would they now resort to bombing hospitals and C-weapon attacks on the population? It just doesn't make sense so that's why I am very cautious here.
This is not to say that Russia is good and the US is bad, it's just that "The first casualty of War is Truth"
Indeed, people have become skeptical of the mainstream narrative. Why does that happen? Because things don't add up.
mainstream narrative is nothing more than propaganda and any human with little brain can easily find the facts.
[deleted]
"Reichstag Fire"?
", it's just that "The first casualty of War is Truth""
And that with the war on terror, we are in war constantly since 2001. But apparently this was not enough and we need the old enemy again.
And that with the war on terror, we are in war constantly since 2001. But apparently this was not enough and we need the old enemy again.
Like the US is carrying out repeated war crimes and the West does nothing - or the "East" for that matter. If something goes to court in the US if it even does, punishment is light [2] and pushed down to the lowest levels (Lynndie England got 2 years [1]). Or pushed by the president (Drone kills without a declaration of war).
If you have nuclear weapons and a large defence budget, you can do whatever you like to other countries.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_torture_and_prisone...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai_Massacre#Officers
If you have nuclear weapons and a large defence budget, you can do whatever you like to other countries.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_torture_and_prisone...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai_Massacre#Officers
Drone kills without a declaration of war
That's not a war crime in itself.
That's not a war crime in itself.
Last I checked waging war without declaring one is a war crime.
Can you check again? Where is that defined as a war crime?
The Hague Convention: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_Relative_to_the_Ope...
That only applies to hostilities between the Contracting Parties; most of the drone strikes haven't even been against other countries, but independent militarized groups.
It's always good when you write the rules.
The US and Pakistan are Contracting Parties. Carrying out drone strikes against citizens of one of those parties constitutes hostility against that nation in my book. I'd wager to say that if Pakistan would carry out drone strikes on US soil, the US would count that as an act of war on the side of Pakistan.
Exactly. What would happen if Turkey kills Gülen with a drone strike in the US? Or China kills Falun Gong followers with drones in the US? I'm rather sure US would not follow their own line on drone strikes.
[deleted]
That's not a war crime in itself.
Do you want to be get hurt by it ? I am not suggesting, but that is still killing and trespassing international boundaries .
Do you want to be get hurt by it ? I am not suggesting, but that is still killing and trespassing international boundaries .
I went to a private talk in the last few days presented by an experienced member of the UK Foreign Office; said speaker regularly advises ministers and the Foreign Minister.
The question of Russia came up very strongly, and as I understand it (everything that follows is effectively what that speaker said) the feeling is that they're going to just keep doing things, testing the limits, seeing what they can do without repercussion. The deployment of chemical weapons on the streets of the UK in peacetime (which, the talker suggested, would have been absolutely off the table during the Cold War) is just another step in seeing how far the West can be pushed without doing anything. Shielding the government of Syria so they can routinely deploy chemical weapons in their civil war is another example; Russia will just keep taking liberties until they find where the limit is (if there is a limit). Not so long ago, the deployment of chemical weapons was considered a very serious thing; Russia has put them back on the table while the West sits on its hands.
I have to wonder if there is a limit, or if we will continue to put prosperity above security to the point that Russia has free reign to do what it likes (up until it runs into someone who will object, beyond Europe).
The question of Russia came up very strongly, and as I understand it (everything that follows is effectively what that speaker said) the feeling is that they're going to just keep doing things, testing the limits, seeing what they can do without repercussion. The deployment of chemical weapons on the streets of the UK in peacetime (which, the talker suggested, would have been absolutely off the table during the Cold War) is just another step in seeing how far the West can be pushed without doing anything. Shielding the government of Syria so they can routinely deploy chemical weapons in their civil war is another example; Russia will just keep taking liberties until they find where the limit is (if there is a limit). Not so long ago, the deployment of chemical weapons was considered a very serious thing; Russia has put them back on the table while the West sits on its hands.
I have to wonder if there is a limit, or if we will continue to put prosperity above security to the point that Russia has free reign to do what it likes (up until it runs into someone who will object, beyond Europe).
But to what end? What is their endgame? The USSR testing boundaries in the Cold War made sense because they needed real data for their concrete plans to cross the Rhine and conquer Western Europe - that’s what the Cold War was all about! Now it’s 2018 and I know Russia has lost their designs on Germany and France and seem primarily motivated to maintain a buffer territory, but testing limits is only going to move Russia’s neighbors into NATO - whereas if they at least played-by-the-rules and not acted so hostile and belligerent then it’s possivle they’d still hold a far more legitimate sway over eastern Ukraine and maybe even the Balkans.
Again, going on the opinions of others (who are in positions such that they should know, but ultimately it's all opinion) a lot of it (by no means all) is about prestige and being seen and respected as a world power again. Which is not just for show; if people respect you as a world power, they are far more likely to do what you want.
Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia was made a number of promises that really weren't kept (for example, about how far NATO would wander into Eastern Europe) and when Russia objected, they were ignored. The very significant modernisation of their military and the recent adventurism is part of that. Nobody is ignoring Russia anymore.
They did play by the rules; it got them side-lined and ignored, promises broken.
Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia was made a number of promises that really weren't kept (for example, about how far NATO would wander into Eastern Europe) and when Russia objected, they were ignored. The very significant modernisation of their military and the recent adventurism is part of that. Nobody is ignoring Russia anymore.
They did play by the rules; it got them side-lined and ignored, promises broken.
> Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia was made a number of promises that really weren't kept
For example, not expanding NATO wasn't even a promise, it was a rumour.
OTOH, Russia broke several international _agreements_ and started waging wars with their neighbours.
Can you really equal those? Waging war and ephemeral promises?
For example, not expanding NATO wasn't even a promise, it was a rumour.
OTOH, Russia broke several international _agreements_ and started waging wars with their neighbours.
Can you really equal those? Waging war and ephemeral promises?
[deleted]
"There's a war out there, old friend. A world war. And it's not about who's got the most bullets. It's about who controls the information. What we see and hear, how we work, what we think... it's all about the information!"
-Cosmo
The leadership of Russia might be worried that the same techniques used by Western NGOs to depose the leadership of the Ukraine in 2014 will be used to depose them. The endgame might be that they remain in control of the government of Russia.
I believe (but of course cannot prove) you underestimate Putin. Real political threats get neutered (Alexei Navalny et al), tame opposition parties get induldged. The West is by no means sweetness and light in their attitude towards and dealings with Russia, but foment a revolution in Russia through the use of NGOs? Fantasyland.
Sorry, leadership in Ukraine wasn't "deposed". President simply fled the country.
How you believe that behind those CWs it was Russian ? In last few Decades we have not found a single truth from Western so-called civilized leadership, all lies, straight. Just take the example of WMD. Even this time if its truth that Russia is behind those CW, let it be because they lied to international community in the past so blatantly that all their words look lies.Its time West should pay to what they have done to Iraq, Libya, Syria and elsewhere.
I am pretty sure that UK is lying again, by the way.
I am pretty sure that UK is lying again, by the way.
Its time West should pay to what they have done to Iraq, Libya, Syria and elsewhere.
Murdering ex-spies on the streets of Salisbury with chemical weapons certainly seems like the appropriate response, yes. Although interesting to see that it was the Swedes who did it, according to the Russian Foreign Ministry.
It's an interesting double-game they play; Russia needs people to know it was them, but they also need to be able to deny it.
Murdering ex-spies on the streets of Salisbury with chemical weapons certainly seems like the appropriate response, yes. Although interesting to see that it was the Swedes who did it, according to the Russian Foreign Ministry.
It's an interesting double-game they play; Russia needs people to know it was them, but they also need to be able to deny it.
Murdering ex-spies on the streets of Salisbury with chemical weapons certainly seems like the appropriate response, yes.
Its not appropriate response, that is way everyone is skeptical. Why use a missile when you can kill the bird with a slingshot ?
Its not appropriate response, that is way everyone is skeptical. Why use a missile when you can kill the bird with a slingshot ?
Its not appropriate response, that is way everyone is skeptical.
Ah, I see. You're derailing the conversation. You've tried to change it to "because murdering an ex-spy with a chemical weapon on the streets of Salisbury is not an appropriate response to the West's actions in the middle east, it can't have been Russia who did it."
You've been rumbled. Jog on.
Ah, I see. You're derailing the conversation. You've tried to change it to "because murdering an ex-spy with a chemical weapon on the streets of Salisbury is not an appropriate response to the West's actions in the middle east, it can't have been Russia who did it."
You've been rumbled. Jog on.
You've been rumbled. Jog on
My argument was two pronged.
1) UK lied in several cases or most of the cases and now UK==lier so Once a lier always a lier
2) Its not me or Russian who rumbled , but instead it is and it was West( France in case of Libya, UK in case of Iraq, US in case of Syria) has be rumbled.
My argument was two pronged.
1) UK lied in several cases or most of the cases and now UK==lier so Once a lier always a lier
2) Its not me or Russian who rumbled , but instead it is and it was West( France in case of Libya, UK in case of Iraq, US in case of Syria) has be rumbled.
[deleted]
Is there any proof that it was Russia? Anything, even a shred of evidence? I see only a weasel expression "believed to" - not explaining by who and why.
These dirty trick they always play when they see that fair play will not given them any advantage in their economical and political goals. All the yardsticks they use be superior are b.s now I think, like democracy, freedom of press/speech, human rights etc. Instead they are least democratic and free states run by conglomerate of capitalist like selling their rights with soap and diapers.
West has done too much in the middle east that we are here. It was West to find WMD, CMDs and to install so-called democracy here and there, it was not Russia. I think Russian is doing the necessary cleanup the West as made.
It is horrendous. I suspect the reason it's not addressed is that Russia has a list of alleged war crimes carried out by Western-supported forces, and so long as the victims are mostly Arab the West doesn't care.
Probably because it's propaganda.
> The hospital had been bombed at least 17 times, but Mr Nott believes that the only way that they could have got the precise co-ordinates of the operating theatre was through his method of directing the operation.
This article seems like total baloney to me. A hospital gets bombed for the 18th time and a doctor thinks it can only happen because his Skype got hacked?
(Of course, the more compelling story is that Russia bombed another hospital, but that's not the crux of this article.)
This article seems like total baloney to me. A hospital gets bombed for the 18th time and a doctor thinks it can only happen because his Skype got hacked?
(Of course, the more compelling story is that Russia bombed another hospital, but that's not the crux of this article.)
Slightly off topic, but still relevant to Syria.
Makes one wonder why ISIS never attacked their sworn enemies (Israel). In fact once they accidentally attacked and apologized. Now which militant org does that.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-is...
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-is...
Because fighting with several enemies at once is the sure way to lose a war?
There’s not a single factual support to justify that title. Should b flagged.
doctor have used skype and whatsapp for sending very private information about his patients. This is the most important part of the article.
So now we have all this GDPR and doctors who's openly share personal information through skype at the same time.
So now we have all this GDPR and doctors who's openly share personal information through skype at the same time.
I don't think the GDPR applies to underground Syrian hospitals.
[deleted]
It seems unlikely to me that hacking the doctor would allow precise localisation of the operating theatre within the hospital complex. It could maybe reveal there is a hospital in the area, but it's been hit 17 times before, so it doesn't seem necessary.
I think it's more likely that the hospital is regularly bombed, and this time the operating theatre is where they happened to hit.
What should happen is that the Doctor's computers should be sent for computer forensics to see if there is any evidence of this hack. There is no mention of this happening.
I think it's more likely that the hospital is regularly bombed, and this time the operating theatre is where they happened to hit.
What should happen is that the Doctor's computers should be sent for computer forensics to see if there is any evidence of this hack. There is no mention of this happening.