Forum: F-16.net feedback

Elite 1K Joined: May 26, 2005 - 08:39 PM Posts: 1496

Quote:

A flash drive also contained a classified briefing about the capabilities and limitations of a "man portable counter-mortar radar" used to find the source of guerrilla mortar rounds. A map pinpoints the U.S. camps and bases in Iraq where the sophisticated radar was deployed in March 2004

Yikes.

F-16.net Sponsor

Well, many people have provided feedback, that's good. Hopefully, the intent of the cautions and message traffic has gotten through. Many think it might have been overkill or a waste of time but I can assure you, if any of you were to get a knock on the door from a security service representative wanting to know answers about your involvement and information provided to this site, you might think a bit harder about what you write and the detail of information provided.

I am almost ashamed at the lack of consideration and understanding in many of the posts I have read surrounding this issue. Several people are only trying to remind the American sector that some of the information (answers to questions) boarder on unclassified controlled military information, better known as CUMI. That people (Americans) is a direction viotaional of AFI16-201 and Sup 1 (same regulation).

It is a great site for sharing general, unclassified information but many do boarder very closely on the edge os sensitive information. It is every Americans job to protect that information or we could suffer another attack as we did in 9/11. With out troops deployed globally, they are at risk daily, I know most of you know this and it should be in the back of your minds before you answer. The person out there is you friend, countrymen, son, daughter, the list goes on and you know it.

I am strongly suggesting...key word here, suggesting...be mindful of what you write, as many have echoed, when in doubt..Don't write it, be safe, keep our secrets..Our Secrets.

It is quite easy to back through this site to see who has posted what and to see at what level a possible compromise may or may not have occurred. I am just asking you all to be careful, in your zess to make a great site, it is very possible to over do it and inadvertently disclose information that should not have been put out into cyberspace.

Anybody wants this negative effort pushed, by all means be a jerk, call names and disregard the cautions being given. I'll be the first person to call on members of US Homeland Security, USAF OSI, FBI.....

Not a threat, that is a promise.

I do not wish to make trouble, I like the site collectively. But some of you clowns need to pull your head out of your a$$, do it now!

You foreigners, you do what you want, like you say, your country, your support is what you make it.

Part of my job is to guard against the likes of those that would give away our information (USA information). These are terrible times, terrorist are everywhere and in ever form, shape, size and color.

I for one feel too much information on this site that is over the edge, based on many posters not thinking there is anything to really to worry about, that bothers me, mainly since many of them appear to be from the USA or active duty in our forces.

Some of you have responded shamefully in my opinion, others have said the right thing and appear to be concerned too. The next time I see information from a US representative that is disclosing information, I will set the wheels in motion for an investigation if it is over the edge.

I don't care who among you gets pissed or not, if you have done nothing wrong, then you have no problems, but if you give away sensitive classified or CUMI...I will have you investigated.

Is that clear enough for the wise asses in the crowd.

Push to test if you think I am just bullshiting here. Protect out assets or you will be investigated. That is my last caution / warning on the subject.

Most of you know what I am talking about, enough is enough

Thank you for your time........want to get pissed, go right ahead, I am pissed too. Some of your responses make me sick!

Tom,

I think you are a little paranoid and fighting the last war instead of the next one. However, you are true to your believes so good luck doing what you believe in.

Take care.
Fez.

Fezt, we all have opinions, your entitled to yours, I have mine but the fact remains far too many disclosures issues are in question and in many cases have been exceeded.

All US Military personal, DoD Civilians, US Defense Contractors do must fall under the guidelines of both the Freedom of Information Act and USAF - AFI16-201, Sup1. Additionally, AFMAN16-101 outlines further guidelines for foreign disclosure, many violations have occurred on this site and are being investigated as we speak.

Your thoughts of me being paranoid are not taken that likely here in the US when our technology is being opened discussed without being "officially cleared". Which directly effects existing Foreign Military Sales contracts (open and future events) and 3rd Country Disclosure guidance set in place by the Department of Defense, 3rd Country Disclosure is discussing the capabilities of another nations defense systems without their written permission.

Thank you for your understanding, but even if you don't see the point being made by numerous posters, it does not the change the issues at hand.

Best of luck you to.....this can still be a great site for learning about this aircraft (within reason) without compromising sensitive or controlled unclassified military information (CUMI).

This is my last post on it, official directions have been taken. outlining, identifying those folks that have exceeded their limitations in releasing information surrounding this weapons system.

Of course, I am hoping this series of posting will also get the attention of future posters so they do not exceed their moral and legal responsibility of releasing information that should not be happening without official clearance.

Good day!

Tom,

I dont have a problem with your logic or your actions, and you can see my posts - I keep even my country's and the U.S non-secrets a secret. I write about nothing almost all the time except history facts, so in some way we are the same.

Still I don't believe anything that has been posted here can realy help the "bad guys" especially terrorist bad guys. It can help maybe a little in bussines-techno spying or whatever companys do today to succeed but not much more then that if any. In that way I think you might be a little paranoid. No 9/11 will come from any posts here (if they stay similar to what they have been in the past).

Anyway - keep up the good fight (I think thats how you say it ...)

Take care.
fezy.

Just been browsing other forums. There is one particular one here in the UK. It is populated by current and ex RAF RN flight crews mostly, with a few civvie` posters.

The difference between this forum and that particular place is astounding as regards information. On the UK forum, NO-ONE will give information about weapons loadouts, squadron deployments or whereabouts. In fact, virtually NO detail at all!

The exception is when posters ask about now defunct, retired aircraft. You will get weapons loads and some capabilities. However, there was a thread about nuclear weapons carrying Vulcan bombers in one thread. The veterans immediately went tight lipped. Even 30, 35 years after the Vulcan handed the strategic role over to the Royal Navy, these fellas` just said.."YOU don`t need to know". Tremendous sense of loyalty displayed there...

I Think you glean more info` on other UK forums but mostly it is just speculation.
This all might be a cultural difference, freedom of information is a relatively new thing in the UK. All in all, the UK is a more secretive society than the US I think.
Which is a shame sometimes.

We on this forum should think ourselves lucky we have such a wonderful font of knowledge, even though sometimes I am astonished by what I read. I think the technical info` is well guarded. The unit deployments, ie, which squadron is where at any given time and what weapons/pods they carry might be a little too much info`. At first glance I could see that as being a problem. However, air forces aircraft carry squadron id` on their tails that anyone can see, so that might not be a problem.

The only thing that would concern me is the kind of kit that is available to a particular unit that is based in a particular location. I think though, that personnel do not tell us about EVERY bit of kit carried or available, especially when they are told to keep their mouths shut.

In conclusion, I don`t see anything wrong with speculation, the guys who know the real facts don`t speak up, rightly so. I am not military,so I see things in a different light, forgive my ignorance! Lets not kill this forum though with red tape and thought police, just a little common sense is what is needed, on the whole, that is what I see.....

I could not agree with you more, remember the old WWII expression...Loose Lips Sink Ships, well, it made the point and was well taken back then. Sometimes, we collectively have forgotten the past and the lessons learned.

I merely wish to point out those lessons exist and should be adhered too before someone gets themselves into very serious trouble. Common sense should prevail but it normally doesn't as you pointed out in your comparison of sites. Sometimes in our collective zest to make someone happy or look 'cool or technically proficient" we may give away a bit too much information but many folks fail or refuse to recognize that simple fact.

My current job is to conserve and protect Us technical data, weapons system technology, information both unclassified controlled military information and classified information while responding to third party foreign country disclosure issue enforcement (on this siste, I feel like a kid in a candy store, shamefully) .

I have discovered far too many cases in this forum collectively where those principles have been blown out of the water siting operational security, planning aircraft (tail number) identification, munitions configurations (actual loads utilized during deployment's) site locations, base deployment names and much more, it is not only shameful but against US law.

Military members in US Forces can be jailed for that compromise (how quickly they forget), I have tried to "warn" many in a nice way but some feel it is a joke or make silly a$$ comments that "we" have nothing to collectively worry about, they could not be more wrong or stupid in those responses.

You yourself, have seen the difference in common sense cases where too much information has been disclosed, shame others do not see it. However, many others have (that's good). The creators of this site are not to blame but posters who exceed common sense Op Sec and Comm Sec principles are the ones at fault (when it exists).

I have received numerous private emails basically telling me I'm paranoid, that's fine but security violations are not looked at as paranoid by investigative services as many will possibly find out. It is much simpler to talk in generalities and not disclose information (and still have fun and be an asset to the site) some I guess must learn the hard way....time will tell.

I only wish common sense did prevail more often, look at the site information provided (on going missions still in country in Iraq, Afghanistan) but yet, we see photos of munitions loads, pictures of service members deployed, type aircraft, mission details outlined (after the mission too)...scary stuff an Op Sec nightmare...but it continues.

That is the focus to start with, details of system operation, quoting technical data. capabilities....all far too much information, look around this site...see for yourself. It has to stop (at that level of detail provided) especially if operations are still on-going in several overseas locations as they are now...dangerous work, stupid to blab it on this site too, it is open to the world.

There is Pride in what the Viper does, I'm all for that, then their is possible compromise, I'm all against that!

I am glad you can see my point.

Lets hope posters think abit more before they provide too much information that could get them into trouble (I would hate to see that but would be the first to suggest they be looked at more closely too. We all must be a bit more concerned these days, many feel it is not justified, I am not one of them.

Good day

Elite 1K Joined: May 26, 2005 - 08:39 PM Posts: 1496

Meathook, I hate to burst your bubble, but it is not YOUR job to police this site. It's the site admin and forum moderator's jobs. If you truly are concerned about information a user is posting, a PM to that user explaining your position and concerns would be much more effective. Failing that, an email to the site admins if you think there is information that you think is in violation.

This attempted atmosphere of threat and secrecy is disgusting. "We all must be a bit more concerned these days". These days? As opposed to which days, exactly? The United States doesn't have a Thought Police (yet).

Remember citizen:
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Extra points if you can identify this quote:

Quote:

Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.

Nuremberg! http://www.snopes.com/quotes/goering.htm

For my part, I only get disturbed when I see people soliciting maintenance information on this site, such as a recent topic that asked for information on whether older F-16s have flight control problems.

Best Regards,

As an afterthought, the use of aliases and the lack of any profile information on some users bothers me. Everybody on this site who reads one of my posts knows exactly who I am; same with the moderators and administrators. Why would you want to use an alias anyway, unless you don't want someone to know what you are doing?

(That should open a can of worms, no flames please.)

Guysmiley...you have no idea what my job is, I am not acting like police but a concerned veteran and current disclosure officer. Why don't you act a bit more responsible, your quotes merely show me you have no grip on the state of the world these days or this countrys concerns for disclsoure....you appeard to be far to liberal but that's your choice I'm glad you can have it.

Stick to your business and I will do mine and have my opinion on some of these matters or do you think I need your permission or some sh*t like that? I suggest you show common sense or say nothing at all, I don't need to remember any of the quotes you provided, I have been there and done that...you?

Until then, I will try and ask the posters to act responsibly, your choice too, just don't bother me with your wit or lack of or the "big brother" routine you seem to enact or suggest is happening.

Let it go...no threats made, cautions given only, actions to reactions You got a problem with me, email me as you did before.

If you think your above any of this or it is being blown out of proportion, we can discuss that too. I can organize a conference call with the OSI (you included) if you like, you (we) can talk with them about subject matter on the site and me requesting caution. Email me your phone number, I will accommodate you, maybe your get a better understanding of what is being asked here and stop acting like I am out there in the blue and talking about mind police, that is whacked, you need to get a grip.

Elite 1K Joined: May 26, 2005 - 08:39 PM Posts: 1496

So, no threats made, but "I'll call the OSI on you"? LMAO

And I'm the one without a grip. No disrespect, but this is not the military, I am not in the military and your perceived authority is baffling to me.

Also, I never sent an email to you. I sent a PM to TomWharton about how I felt about bringing certain events into this debate, are you and he the same person?

Yes, I am one and the same, I stated that several times during the postings. It was not a threat but a promise to call the OSI if I see material compromised, that has not changed.

Perceived authority? I know my limitations surrounding disclosure of foreign government issues with the USAF and FMS world, it is my job dude...again, you appear to not understand what might be happening.

Here is a taste of what I do for the US: right now, websites included and for the DoD.

Technically directs the actions to develop, interpret, implement policies and give procedural guidance as well as exercise staff surveillance in the Foreign Disclosure Policy Office. Foreign Disclosure Management: Develops, implements the program directives, and provides logistic/technical guidance. Initiates investigations of suspected violations of the National Disclosure Policy. Conducts a review of facts leading to incident and recommends corrective action. Prepares outlines and background data for training technical specialists in disclosure release policies and philosophies. This position has a critical bearing upon USAF relations with foreign governments. Decisions made by the incumbent and actions taken upon the FDPOs advice could result in serious security or diplomatic compromise involving the USAF.

We have been closely monitoring the Opsec discussion and we have been in touch with some of you individually but perhaps it's best to post something too... Smile

The Opsec message has been clearly stated before, it has been repeated now and it will most likely be repeated again in the future. However, let's move on now as it seems that this thread is starting to overshoot it's target now.

Note that when requested we have always removed and edited sensitive posts before and this not only for the US military but also for other nations. When we do that, we do this as much as possible behind the scenes without making a fuss of it.

We're always available via the '<a href="index.php?module=feedback&func=view">contact</a>' link so whenever you have serious concerns, just let us know and we'll take care of it (try us, we're fast Smile

).

Meathook wrote:

Yes, I am one and the same.

Hi GuySmiley, I agree that that was confusing so after talking to Tom, I merged his two accounts.

Hello everyone

Just saw another nice thread turn into yet another boring, devastating fact crushing debate about OPSEC.

Can those of you conserned about wether OPSEC having been breached or not PLEASE advise this to the moderators of this fine Web page, and let them take action as necessary ?

It is not fair that questions from people who really try to learn about the F-16 or other aircraft keep getting hammered because someone think something might possibly be a breach of OPSEC Exclamation

PLEASE NOTE that I am here talking about the inquiries into PUBLIC information!
Yet still, if you find someone who you think asks the wrong or improper questions, contact the moderators instead of ruining a otherwise fine thread !

Thanks all Cool

Forum: F-16.net feedback

The OPSEC thread