Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [coldwarcomms] Official Business Members?

Expand Messages
  • David Lesher
    ... I doubt any one has time to care. As a domestic matter, it would be the Feebes terrain. They re still busy looking for the bomb in TWA 800 to bother us.
    Message 1 of 30 , Dec 5, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Unnamed Administration sources reported that albertjlafrance@... said:
      >
      > Perhaps those member know of the former AT&T Long Lines Eastern Region's
      > "Potomac District", which appears to have been responsible for AT&T
      > facilities at classified government sites :)
      >
      > Albert
      >
      > In a message dated 12/5/2001 7:38:49 PM Eastern Standard Time,
      > ozob99@... writes:
      >
      > > Anyone have a guess as to how many members here are Gov't agents
      > > monitoring security issues and/or gathering data?...I'd say at least
      > > one.While I dont think anyone has compromised anything, I'm sure they
      > > are surprised at the breadth of knowledge; and have had to get some
      > > info & nomenclature checked out by subject matter experts.

      I doubt any one has time to care.

      As a domestic matter, it would be the Feebes terrain. They're
      still busy looking for the bomb in TWA 800 to bother us.

      (Hell, at one point just asking about "SMO" [Southern MD
      Operations] would prick up ears. Now everyone knows where
      Mt. Weather is...)

      I did some WWII Open door work at Archives-II {that must be
      Albert's home...} and ftp'ed 1/2 GB of "TOP SECRET" etc docs
      to CERN. NARA didn't even want me to use a declas bug on the
      scanner...

      I chatted w/a friend still 'inside' and joked about making some
      analyst's day.. He thought and said "Yea, for about 10 seconds."



      --
      A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@...
      & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
      Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
      is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
    • somdchem
      I guess the sarcasm was lost if you missed the signature line. . . It made me chuckle though :-) In all seriousness, I agree most do not care anymore about
      Message 2 of 30 , Dec 5, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        I guess the sarcasm was lost if you missed the signature line. . .
        It made me chuckle though :-)
        In all seriousness, I agree most do not care anymore about such
        things, as secrecy ain't what is used to be! But it would not
        surprise me if a few member were involved in current project similar
        to older ones discussed here, but more for history, not monitoring
        to see what people know!

        --- In coldwarcomms@y..., "ozob99" <ozob99@y...> wrote:
        > --- In coldwarcomms@y..., "Mr. K. Rudolph, KD7JYK" <kc7vdg@e...>
        > wrote:
        > > People in the intelligence field? Not here...
        >
        > Why not?..
        > >
        > > Kurt
        > >
        > > ---
        > > Ross Technologies Signals Intelligence Division
        > > Rosetta Proving Grounds
      • kemartinsnetnet
        So just a question or two. Maybe security isn t what it once was but don t you think there are some things that should not be posted on an open forum?
        Message 3 of 30 , Dec 6, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          So just a question or two. Maybe security isn't what it once was
          but don't you think there are some things that should not be posted
          on an open forum? Perhaps people "looking" at certain sites might
          see information a little more sensative or detailed then they may
          otherwise know about?

          Ken

          --- In coldwarcomms@y..., "somdchem" <rickchem@h...> wrote:
          > I guess the sarcasm was lost if you missed the signature line. . .
          > It made me chuckle though :-)
          > In all seriousness, I agree most do not care anymore about such
          > things, as secrecy ain't what is used to be! But it would not
          > surprise me if a few member were involved in current project
          similar
          > to older ones discussed here, but more for history, not monitoring
          > to see what people know!
          >
          > --- In coldwarcomms@y..., "ozob99" <ozob99@y...> wrote:
          > > --- In coldwarcomms@y..., "Mr. K. Rudolph, KD7JYK" <kc7vdg@e...>
          > > wrote:
          > > > People in the intelligence field? Not here...
          > >
          > > Why not?..
          > > >
          > > > Kurt
          > > >
          > > > ---
          > > > Ross Technologies Signals Intelligence Division
          > > > Rosetta Proving Grounds
        • ozob99
          ... Assuming there are Carnivore/Echelon type surveillence devices checking relevent Usenet,Groups,Forums,etc for key words,content,phrases; i m sure some of
          Message 4 of 30 , Dec 6, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In coldwarcomms@y..., "somdchem" <rickchem@h...> wrote:
            > I guess the sarcasm was lost if you missed the signature line. . .
            > It made me chuckle though :-)
            > In all seriousness, I agree most do not care anymore about such
            > things, as secrecy ain't what is used to be! But it would not
            > surprise me if a few member were involved in current project similar
            > to older ones discussed here, but more for history, not monitoring
            > to see what people know!




            Assuming there are Carnivore/Echelon type surveillence devices
            checking relevent Usenet,Groups,Forums,etc for key
            words,content,phrases; i'm sure some of the words/acronyms here have
            triggered a look at the strings,not 24/7 becuz i agree this is'nt a
            priority,but i'd guess somebody is dropping in occasionally.




            >
            > --- In coldwarcomms@y..., "ozob99" <ozob99@y...> wrote:
            > > --- In coldwarcomms@y..., "Mr. K. Rudolph, KD7JYK" <kc7vdg@e...>
            > > wrote:
            > > > People in the intelligence field? Not here...
            > >
            > > Why not?..
            > > >
            > > > Kurt
            > > >
            > > > ---
            > > > Ross Technologies Signals Intelligence Division
            > > > Rosetta Proving Grounds
          • Frederick J Roecker II
            ... I am really new to this list and the subject material but most everything I have read on the posts to this group seems to be about outdated equipment and
            Message 5 of 30 , Dec 6, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              At 07:35 AM 12/6/01, kemartinsnetnet wrote:

              > So just a question or two. Maybe security isn't what it once was
              >but don't you think there are some things that should not be posted
              >on an open forum? Perhaps people "looking" at certain sites might
              >see information a little more sensative or detailed then they may
              >otherwise know about?
              >
              > Ken
              I am really new to this list and the subject material but most everything I
              have read on the posts to this group seems to be about outdated equipment
              and communication sites. If people are "looking" at sites on the net, there
              isn't anything too "sensitive" they would be looking at. To the best of my
              knowledge, in order to read truly "sensitive" material you would need some
              sort of security clearance to view such material. I like reading about the
              things that people post on here. There are parts of history that are not
              taught in school, the old communication infrastructure being one of them.
              Keep up the good work folks, I really enjoy your posts.

              Fred
            • Rick C.
              Well, the there is a difference between classified and publicized (or public knowledge). Take for example the Ground Entry Point system. To the best of my
              Message 6 of 30 , Dec 6, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                Well, the there is a difference between classified and publicized (or public
                knowledge). Take for example the Ground Entry Point system. To the best of
                my knowledge, it is not classified. But neither is it publicized as an
                asset, nor does the public have general knowledge of it. Discussion of it
                might raise eyebrows with certain people, not that anybody knows, but
                curiousity that you in particular know about it. In a similar vein, often
                the systems are not classified, but what they are used for or exactly how
                they work *is*. For example, the existence of a plane used for high
                altitude remote chemical sensing of the ground was not classified, as was
                not the use of certain analytical techniques and lasers to accomplish. But
                how they used those techniques and exactly how they used the lasers *was*,
                as was what they used that information *for*. It is much easier to guard
                information as an abstract rather than physical, geographic location from
                being revealed!(although, granted, the Greenbriar was a surprise!)
                I think most everyone here uses decent judgement. . . I am positive
                guru-LaFrance has documents up his sleave he hasn't web-published :-)

                _________________________________________________________________
                Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
              • ozob99
                ... (or public ... the best of ... as an ... Discussion of it ... but ... vein, often ... exactly how ... high ... as was ... accomplish. But ... *was*, ...
                Message 7 of 30 , Dec 6, 2001
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In coldwarcomms@y..., "Rick C." <rickchem@h...> wrote:
                  > Well, the there is a difference between classified and publicized
                  (or public
                  > knowledge). Take for example the Ground Entry Point system. To
                  the best of
                  > my knowledge, it is not classified. But neither is it publicized
                  as an
                  > asset, nor does the public have general knowledge of it.
                  Discussion of it
                  > might raise eyebrows with certain people, not that anybody knows,
                  but
                  > curiousity that you in particular know about it. In a similar
                  vein, often
                  > the systems are not classified, but what they are used for or
                  exactly how
                  > they work *is*. For example, the existence of a plane used for
                  high
                  > altitude remote chemical sensing of the ground was not classified,
                  as was
                  > not the use of certain analytical techniques and lasers to
                  accomplish. But
                  > how they used those techniques and exactly how they used the lasers
                  *was*,
                  > as was what they used that information *for*. It is much easier to
                  guard
                  > information as an abstract rather than physical, geographic
                  location from
                  > being revealed!(although, granted, the Greenbriar was a surprise!)
                  > I think most everyone here uses decent judgement. . . I am
                  positive
                  > guru-LaFrance has documents up his sleave he hasn't web-published :-
                  )



                  And since any "big brother" following arcane "leads" mentioned on
                  posts will conclude some members know more than they are telling,and
                  therefor may continue to watch for anything revealed that no one has
                  a "need to know".





                  >
                  > _________________________________________________________________
                  > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
                  http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
                • Chris Ness
                  ... Ahh, paranoia, the thinking man s mental illness. Then again, maybe... -- Chris Ness mailto:luxomni@yahoo.com All jobs are equally easy to
                  Message 8 of 30 , Dec 6, 2001
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On December 6, 2001 03:55 pm, ozob99 wrote:
                    >
                    >
                    > And since any "big brother" following arcane "leads" mentioned on
                    > posts will conclude some members know more than they are telling,and
                    > therefor may continue to watch for anything revealed that no one has
                    > a "need to know".

                    Ahh, paranoia, the thinking man's mental illness.
                    Then again, maybe...
                    --
                    Chris Ness
                    mailto:luxomni@... All jobs are equally easy to
                    http://vivid.nbank.net/~gloster the person not doing the work.
                    Holt's Law
                  • Stephen H Chapman
                    Decent judgment is not a criteria for disclosure. Establishing a need to know is the first question. A single dot or two is not a picture. Show enough dots of
                    Message 9 of 30 , Dec 6, 2001
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Decent judgment is not a criteria for disclosure.
                      Establishing a need to know is the first question.
                      A single dot or two is not a picture. Show enough dots of either positive or
                      negative information will create a picture.
                      While the picture might change on a time line, often the criteria that
                      directed that choice is still valid.
                      Silence on acknowledgement of any information is a more secure path that
                      random disclosure to unknown parties.
                      Steve.
                      ----- Original Message -----
                      From: "Rick C." <rickchem@...>
                      To: <coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com>
                      Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 12:33 PM
                      Subject: Re: [coldwarcomms] Re: Official Business Members?


                      > Well, the there is a difference between classified and publicized (or
                      public
                      > knowledge). Take for example the Ground Entry Point system. To the best
                      of
                      > my knowledge, it is not classified. But neither is it publicized as an
                      > asset, nor does the public have general knowledge of it. Discussion of it
                      > might raise eyebrows with certain people, not that anybody knows, but
                      > curiousity that you in particular know about it. In a similar vein, often
                      > the systems are not classified, but what they are used for or exactly how
                      > they work *is*. For example, the existence of a plane used for high
                      > altitude remote chemical sensing of the ground was not classified, as was
                      > not the use of certain analytical techniques and lasers to accomplish.
                      But
                      > how they used those techniques and exactly how they used the lasers *was*,
                      > as was what they used that information *for*. It is much easier to guard
                      > information as an abstract rather than physical, geographic location from
                      > being revealed!(although, granted, the Greenbriar was a surprise!)
                      > I think most everyone here uses decent judgement. . . I am positive
                      > guru-LaFrance has documents up his sleave he hasn't web-published :-)
                      >
                      > _________________________________________________________________
                      > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                      >
                      >
                      >
                    • Jason Grabill
                      Here either.... Jason Grabill Formerly on the Staff of Director, Marine Corps Intelligence Currently assigned to Fort Detrick, Frederick, Md DOD Police. ...
                      Message 10 of 30 , Dec 6, 2001
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Here either....
                         
                        Jason Grabill
                        Formerly on the Staff of Director, Marine Corps Intelligence
                         
                        Currently assigned to Fort Detrick, Frederick, Md
                        DOD Police.
                        ----- Original Message -----
                        Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 8:15 PM
                        Subject: Re: [coldwarcomms] Official Business Members?

                        People in the intelligence field?  Not here...

                        Kurt

                        ---
                        Ross Technologies Signals Intelligence Division
                        Rosetta Proving Grounds



                        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                      • Eric F. Richards
                        ... Just because you re paranoid doesn t mean... Interesting story I read on a web bulletin board just yesterday, about when a regular there made a joke
                        Message 11 of 30 , Dec 6, 2001
                        • 0 Attachment
                          At 04:45 PM 12/6/01 -0500, you wrote:
                          >On December 6, 2001 03:55 pm, ozob99 wrote:
                          >>
                          >>
                          >> And since any "big brother" following arcane "leads" mentioned on
                          >> posts will conclude some members know more than they are telling,and
                          >> therefor may continue to watch for anything revealed that no one has
                          >> a "need to know".
                          >
                          >Ahh, paranoia, the thinking man's mental illness.
                          >Then again, maybe...

                          "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean..."

                          Interesting story I read on a web bulletin board just yesterday, about
                          when a regular there made a joke about assassination. (Some
                          joke -- does he do kids parties, too?) Even though he clearly marked
                          it as a joke, the Men in Black showed up on his doorstep and took him
                          for a good quizzing before they decided he was harmless. I don't know
                          what parts of the story he didn't and couldn't tell, obviously, but it
                          took 'em no time at all to track him down.

                          On classification... anyone who has worked with even the lowest, most
                          boring classified stuff sees that the rules for it are strange. Imagine
                          a paragraph that is classified "confidential" until a single word is
                          struck from it, but that word can clearly be determined by context.
                          example: striking "phase modulation." Imagine getting a briefing from
                          uncleared people on a given subject to people cleared on that subject,
                          even though it is obvious that the uncleared people know more about it
                          than those with the need to know, etc.

                          Classification rules are weird things...

                          And don't make comments that'll get you in trouble! I hope the one
                          above doesn't do that!

                          (First post to this list -- hopefully not my last... :-))

                          Eric

                          --
                          Eric F. Richards
                          efricha@...
                          "The weird part is that I can feel productive even when I'm doomed."
                          - Dilbert
                        • Frederick J Roecker II
                          ... isn t that an oximoron along with Military Intelligence?? lol J/K
                          Message 12 of 30 , Dec 6, 2001
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Marine Corps Intelligence


                            isn't that an oximoron along with Military Intelligence??  lol

                            J/K

                          • albertjlafrance@cs.com
                            That s a very good question. Keeping an eye on a list where potentially sensitive topics might be discussed could serve a couple of purposes for government
                            Message 13 of 30 , Dec 6, 2001
                            • 0 Attachment
                              That's a very good question. Keeping an eye on a list where potentially
                              sensitive topics might be discussed could serve a couple of purposes for
                              government agencies concerned with secrecy. Because anyone can join the
                              list, the monitoring can be done without the legal and procedural
                              difficulties posed by more intrusive surveillance techniques (e.g.
                              wiretapping).

                              First, it's a way of making sure that people with access to classified
                              information aren't "spilling" anything, intentionally or by careless remarks.
                              The monitoring would be analogous to the Department of Energy reviewing
                              academic papers published by DoE scientists working on nuclear weapons.

                              Second, this group could serve as an early warning of lapses in security.
                              For example, a message like "does anyone know why 10 acres of XYZ National
                              Park were suddenly closed off and guarded by MPs last week?" might alert the
                              person responsible for that activity that he should be a little more subtle
                              in his approach to OPSEC, or he'll likely find the press snooping around
                              before long.

                              Albert

                              In a message dated 12/5/2001 7:38:49 PM Eastern Standard Time,
                              ozob99@... writes:

                              > Anyone have a guess as to how many members here are Gov't agents
                              > monitoring security issues and/or gathering data?...I'd say at least
                              > one.While I dont think anyone has compromised anything, I'm sure they
                              > are surprised at the breadth of knowledge; and have had to get some
                              > info & nomenclature checked out by subject matter experts.
                            • Mr. K. Rudolph, KD7JYK
                              That c cool! I thought about that in 93! Jason Grabill Currently assigned to Fort Detrick, Frederick, Md DOD Police. Kurt ... Ross Technologies Signals
                              Message 14 of 30 , Dec 6, 2001
                              • 0 Attachment
                                That'c cool!  I thought about that in '93!
                                 
                                Jason Grabill
                                Currently assigned to Fort Detrick, Frederick, Md
                                DOD Police.
                                 
                                Kurt

                                ---
                                Ross Technologies Signals Intelligence Division
                                Rosetta Proving Grounds
                              • combatsent
                                If you are interested in most of what is known about the GEP system, take a look at my web site. http://ncamonitor.tripod.com/ ... From: Rick C. To:
                                Message 15 of 30 , Dec 6, 2001
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  If you are interested in most of what is known about the GEP system, take a look at my web site.
                                   
                                  ----- Original Message -----
                                  From: Rick C.
                                  Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 8:33 PM
                                  Subject: Re: [coldwarcomms] Re: Official Business Members?

                                  Well, the there is a difference between classified and publicized (or public
                                  knowledge).  Take for example the Ground Entry Point system.  To the best of
                                  my knowledge, it is not classified.  But neither is it publicized as an
                                  asset, nor does the public have general knowledge of it.  Discussion of it
                                  might raise eyebrows with certain people, not that anybody knows, but
                                  curiousity that you in particular know about it.  In a similar vein, often
                                  the systems are not classified, but what they are used for or exactly how
                                  they work *is*.  For example, the existence of a plane used for high
                                  altitude remote chemical sensing of the ground was not classified, as was
                                  not the use of certain analytical techniques and lasers to accomplish.  But
                                  how they used those techniques and exactly how they used the lasers *was*,
                                  as was what they used that information *for*.  It is much easier to guard
                                  information as an abstract rather than physical, geographic location from
                                  being revealed!(although, granted, the Greenbriar was a surprise!)
                                     I think most everyone here uses decent judgement. . . I am positive
                                  guru-LaFrance has documents up his sleave he hasn't web-published :-)

                                  _________________________________________________________________
                                  Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp



                                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                                • ozob99
                                  ... Region s ... The Potomac District was formed to compartmentalize the operations of the 5 project offices
                                  Message 16 of 30 , Dec 6, 2001
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    --- In coldwarcomms@y..., albertjlafrance@c... wrote:
                                    > Perhaps those member know of the former AT&T Long Lines Eastern
                                    Region's
                                    > "Potomac District", which appears to have been responsible for AT&T
                                    > facilities at classified government sites :)
                                    >
                                    > Albert



                                    The Potomac District was formed to compartmentalize the operations of
                                    the 5 "project" offices
                                    (Chatham,Buckingham,Charlottesville#2,Leesburg#5,Hagerstown#2),
                                    Lewisburg#2(Greenbrier) & Berryville#2(Mt. Weather); it later
                                    included all 100% Gov't CO's in the Eastern Region(Pentagon #3[in
                                    1987] & Greenbelt).

                                    BTW this is a good example of the illustration posted earlier(2631)
                                    on "classified vs public" info; the project offices' location & some
                                    of the transmission facilities are known to those willing to explore
                                    online & elsewhere,so its available but not general public knowledge;
                                    but the projects' mission,etc then, & maybe now ,was/is classified.

                                    This also illustrates how one can be visited by men in black:if i
                                    speculated on here with info that was correct i might be checked out;
                                    if i never worked with, had a clearance,or knew anyone on the project
                                    it might pass as a lucky guess with no inquiry;however,if i worked
                                    with related stuff and/or had a clearance then i'd be investigated.

                                    So those of you who have documentable knowledge of something
                                    classified need to be careful not to slip up unless u know for sure
                                    its been declassified,& thats difficult to find out sometimes.

                                    I thought this issue would generate some dialog & glad to see it
                                    brought some out of the sidelines.




                                    >
                                    > In a message dated 12/5/2001 7:38:49 PM Eastern Standard Time,
                                    > ozob99@y... writes:
                                    >
                                    > > Anyone have a guess as to how many members here are Gov't agents
                                    > > monitoring security issues and/or gathering data?...I'd say at
                                    least
                                    > > one.While I dont think anyone has compromised anything, I'm sure
                                    they
                                    > > are surprised at the breadth of knowledge; and have had to get
                                    some
                                    > > info & nomenclature checked out by subject matter experts.
                                  • Mark Foster
                                    ... Blue Ridge Summitt? What is the difference between Washington #4 and Berryville #2. Or when did the designation change. Maybe Washington #4 was the AT&T
                                    Message 17 of 30 , Dec 7, 2001
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      At 03:24 AM 12/7/2001 +0000, you wrote:
                                      >The Potomac District was formed to compartmentalize the operations of
                                      >the 5 "project" offices
                                      >(Chatham,Buckingham,Charlottesville#2,Leesburg#5,Hagerstown#2),
                                      >Lewisburg#2(Greenbrier) & Berryville#2(Mt. Weather); it later
                                      >included all 100% Gov't CO's in the Eastern Region(Pentagon #3[in
                                      >1987] & Greenbelt).

                                      Blue Ridge Summitt?

                                      What is the difference between Washington #4 and Berryville #2.
                                      Or when did the designation change. Maybe Washington #4 was the
                                      AT&T designation and Berryville #2 the local provider? Maybe they
                                      were at the same place but physically different locations?
                                    • ozob99
                                      ... of ... Yes ,i forgot to include Blue Ridge Summitt #2(Site R) in the list; Wash #4 was a later designation for Berryville #2 in a different context;where
                                      Message 18 of 30 , Dec 7, 2001
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        --- In coldwarcomms@y..., Mark Foster <mfoster@c...> wrote:
                                        > At 03:24 AM 12/7/2001 +0000, you wrote:
                                        > >The Potomac District was formed to compartmentalize the operations
                                        of
                                        > >the 5 "project" offices
                                        > >(Chatham,Buckingham,Charlottesville#2,Leesburg#5,Hagerstown#2),
                                        > >Lewisburg#2(Greenbrier) & Berryville#2(Mt. Weather); it later
                                        > >included all 100% Gov't CO's in the Eastern Region(Pentagon #3[in
                                        > >1987] & Greenbelt).
                                        >
                                        > Blue Ridge Summitt?
                                        >
                                        > What is the difference between Washington #4 and Berryville #2.
                                        > Or when did the designation change. Maybe Washington #4 was the
                                        > AT&T designation and Berryville #2 the local provider? Maybe they
                                        > were at the same place but physically different locations?


                                        Yes ,i forgot to include Blue Ridge Summitt #2(Site R) in the list;
                                        Wash #4 was a later designation for Berryville #2 in a different
                                        context;where there was a #2 office,#1 was usually the local company
                                        CO, & Berryville #1 was the C&P CO although C&P did'nt refer to it
                                        that way. There was a C&P Tel Co presence at Mt Weather but i don't
                                        know if it had a alias.
                                      • albertjlafrance@cs.com
                                        I learned of Washington #4 when I saw it listed as a station name in the FCC microwave-license database. Although the name is deceptive, the license entry
                                        Message 19 of 30 , Dec 7, 2001
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          I learned of Washington #4 when I saw it listed as a station name in the FCC
                                          microwave-license database. Although the name is deceptive, the license
                                          entry gives the correct coordinates and even the street address for the
                                          Special Facility.

                                          The database shows the antenna site is about 100 ft. lower in elevation than
                                          the public road which runs along the mountain ridge, and no tower is visible
                                          from the road. The antenna height above ground is unusually low (25 ft., I
                                          think), suggesting to me that it's a hardened dish like the one at Monrovia.

                                          A couple of other noteworthy things about Washington #4: The callsign
                                          (WPNL603) differs from the usual 3-letter + 2 digit calls used for older
                                          common-carrier fixed microwave stations. And the license renews on a
                                          different date from the February cycle apparently used for most AT&T stations.

                                          Albert

                                          In a message dated 12/7/2001 8:52:04 AM Eastern Standard Time,
                                          ozob99@... writes:

                                          > Yes ,i forgot to include Blue Ridge Summitt #2(Site R) in the list;
                                          > Wash #4 was a later designation for Berryville #2 in a different
                                          > context;where there was a #2 office,#1 was usually the local company
                                          > CO, & Berryville #1 was the C&P CO although C&P did'nt refer to it
                                          > that way. There was a C&P Tel Co presence at Mt Weather but i don't
                                          > know if it had a alias.
                                        • Jason Grabill
                                          Naturally... Jason ... From: Frederick J Roecker II To: coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com ; coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:57 PM
                                          Message 20 of 30 , Dec 7, 2001
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            Naturally...
                                             
                                            Jason
                                            ----- Original Message -----
                                            Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:57 PM
                                            Subject: Re: [coldwarcomms] Official Business Members?

                                            Marine Corps Intelligence


                                            isn't that an oximoron along with Military Intelligence??  lol

                                            J/K



                                            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                                          • Jason Grabill
                                            Well, we are still looking for bodies! Drop me a line off the list if you are interested...that goes for anyone. Jason DOD Police, Fort Detrick, Md. ... From:
                                            Message 21 of 30 , Dec 7, 2001
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              Well, we are still looking for bodies!  Drop me a line off the list if you are interested...that goes for anyone.
                                               
                                              Jason
                                              DOD Police, Fort Detrick, Md.
                                              ----- Original Message -----
                                              Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 8:10 PM
                                              Subject: Re: [coldwarcomms] Official Business Members?

                                              That'c cool!  I thought about that in '93!
                                               
                                              Jason Grabill
                                              Currently assigned to Fort Detrick, Frederick, Md
                                              DOD Police.
                                               
                                              Kurt

                                              ---
                                              Ross Technologies Signals Intelligence Division
                                              Rosetta Proving Grounds

                                              Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                                            • albertjlafrance@cs.com
                                              In a message dated 12/6/2001 3:34:54 PM Eastern Standard Time, ... public ... of ... Yes, I think that s a very important point. There s a substantial amount
                                              Message 22 of 30 , Dec 11, 2001
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                In a message dated 12/6/2001 3:34:54 PM Eastern Standard Time,
                                                rickchem@... writes:

                                                > Well, the there is a difference between classified and publicized (or
                                                public
                                                > knowledge). Take for example the Ground Entry Point system. To the best
                                                of
                                                >
                                                > my knowledge, it is not classified. But neither is it publicized as an
                                                > asset, nor does the public have general knowledge of it. Discussion of it
                                                > might raise eyebrows with certain people, not that anybody knows, but
                                                > curiousity that you in particular know about it. In a similar vein, often
                                                > the systems are not classified, but what they are used for or exactly how
                                                > they work *is*.

                                                Yes, I think that's a very important point. There's a substantial amount of
                                                potentially sensitive but unclassified information which can be found - often
                                                in public documents - with a little effort. And where no records are
                                                available, field work can answer a lot of questions. For example, the
                                                obvious directionality and limited range of a terrestrial microwave dish
                                                often make it fairly easy to guess the other end of a link even when no paper
                                                records are available. And marked routes of buried cables are, of course,
                                                even simpler to trace.

                                                Whether or not one's interest in a particular asset gets the attention of a
                                                federal agency is probably a matter of chance (the agency discovering that
                                                someone is looking at a sensitive system or facility) and context (who's
                                                interested, for how long, and how seriously, who the information is being
                                                shared with and for what alleged purpose, the nation's overall security
                                                posture at the time, any known or anticipated threats to the asset).

                                                > For example, the existence of a plane used for high
                                                >altitude remote chemical sensing of the ground was not classified, as was
                                                >not the use of certain analytical techniques and lasers to accomplish. But
                                                >how they used those techniques and exactly how they used the lasers *was*,
                                                >as was what they used that information *for*. It is much easier to guard
                                                >information as an abstract rather than physical, geographic location from
                                                >being revealed!(although, granted, the Greenbriar was a surprise!)

                                                Also very good points. And, I think the unsung hero in maintaining the low
                                                profile of sensitive facilities has been the fact that most people just don't
                                                care. I'm always surprised by the number of people I encounter here in the
                                                Washington suburbs who haven't heard of the legendary Mount Weather, and
                                                other local facilities like Site R, the AT&T bunkers, and FEMA's Federal
                                                Support Center remain even less known. And most people don't seem very
                                                interested in knowing about them; they just take for granted that the places
                                                exist but aren't at all curious about the details.

                                                Regarding the Greenbrier, it's worth noting that someone curious about the
                                                AT&T network, as many of us are, potentially could have stumbled on the
                                                facility as a result of that interest. The Greenbrier's interface to the
                                                Long Lines microwave network was through a mountaintop station several miles
                                                away, connected to the hotel by a buried cable. The station is in a state
                                                forest, far from any transcontinental cable routes and major population
                                                centers, and reached by a long, winding and steep gravel road. So a
                                                researcher looking at the station would likely have been surprised to find
                                                AT&T cable markers leading from the station down the heavily-wooded
                                                mountainside. He would have been further puzzled by the signs on the
                                                markers, which identify Dranesville, VA (over 180 miles away) as the AT&T
                                                facility responsible for the cable.

                                                If this list had existed back in the days when the Greenbrier facility was
                                                operational, and if one of us had discovered that cable and posted the
                                                information, I'll bet the feds would have been *very* interested!

                                                > I think most everyone here uses decent judgement. . . I am positive
                                                >guru-LaFrance has documents up his sleave he hasn't web-published :-)

                                                Not much in the way of documents, but there is one interesting facility whose
                                                original mission was very secret, which has changed hands and now houses a
                                                different but still sensitive activity for a civilian federal agency. When I
                                                contacted the official in charge of the place and asked about its history, he
                                                became very suspicious and wanted to know how I found out about it, and
                                                finally asked me not to publicize it. The situation is complicated because
                                                the previous occupant is also very security-conscious and has apparently
                                                requested that the current user to maintain the secrecy of the previous
                                                mission, so I'm not sure which activity is the main beneficiary of this
                                                secrecy. Confusing? It sure is for me!

                                                Albert
                                              • mikemakar
                                                Group, To supplement Alberts comments, this appeared in the London Telegraph. The term accessing national secrets is an interesting concept. Where do you
                                                Message 23 of 30 , Dec 12, 2001
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  Group,

                                                  To supplement Alberts comments, this appeared in the London Telegraph.

                                                  The term "accessing national secrets" is an interesting concept.
                                                  Where do you draw the line? I agree the best protection has been
                                                  public apathy.

                                                  I understand planespotting is quite a serious hobby and has been for
                                                  decades. There is even Yahoo Groups that facilitate this
                                                  information.

                                                  Mike Makar

                                                  Planespotters freed on bail
                                                  (Filed: 12/12/2001)

                                                  TWELVE British planespotters are being released on bail and will
                                                  stand trial on lesser charges than spying, their lawyer said.

                                                  The 12 British and two Dutch planespotters have been in custody for
                                                  more than a month after being accused of spying by taking photographs
                                                  of military planes. The bail was set at 5 million drachmas each, the
                                                  equivalent of £10,000, the lawyer said.

                                                  "If we can come up with the money we might manage to get them
                                                  released today," lawyer Yannis Zacharias said.

                                                  Mr Zacharias said the 14 now faced misdemeanour charges of "accessing
                                                  national secrets". No date has been set for the trial.

                                                  Stephen Warren, the son of one of the accused Lesley Coppin, branded
                                                  the decision "disgusting" and said there was little hope of raising
                                                  the bail money in time for their release before Christmas.

                                                  But Labour East MEP Richard Howitt, who has been campaigning on
                                                  behalf of the group, said: "I regard this as a victory. I have no
                                                  doubt that when it comes to trial the case will collapse - although
                                                  technically this misdemeanour allegation could carry a five-year jail
                                                  sentence if proved.

                                                  "It does worry me that asking each family to find £10,000 for bail
                                                  is
                                                  a lot.

                                                  http://portal.telegraph.co.uk/
                                                • Rick C.
                                                  Many people from my informal surveys are not only uninterested, but actively do not want to know what goes on at facilities, or the dual nature of facilities.
                                                  Message 24 of 30 , Dec 12, 2001
                                                  • 0 Attachment
                                                    Many people from my informal surveys are not only uninterested, but actively
                                                    do not want to know what goes on at facilities, or the dual nature of
                                                    facilities. According to one person, it ruins their view of a safe world, in
                                                    just needing these types of things.
                                                    Similar to this but 180 degrees opposite is the smug assumption that
                                                    these sorts of black facilities exist in much greater numbers than commonly
                                                    assumed - same idea, comfort - but comfort in the believed existence of a
                                                    vast security complex that is much weaker than imagined. Thus, known
                                                    facilities are passe, and these people ignore the.
                                                    On this second point, I recall that I argued in vain to a woman that
                                                    there currently existed no deployed missile defense system, and that if
                                                    someone launched a missile, there was nothing we could do wait for it to
                                                    arrive. She didn't want to hear it and went as far to ask me to stop
                                                    because she had faith our government would do "something" to stop it. I
                                                    then found out that this is a widely held view, that "star wars" exists, is
                                                    deployed, and works. If people knew the truth, perhaps the clamor would be
                                                    high for such as system, but then they would all live in total fear. . .it
                                                    is a psychological trade off.
                                                    Rick




                                                    >surprised by the number of people I encounter here in the
                                                    >Washington suburbs who haven't heard of the legendary Mount Weather, and
                                                    >other local facilities like Site R, the AT&T bunkers, and FEMA's Federal
                                                    >Support Center remain even less known. And most people don't seem very
                                                    >interested in knowing about them; they just take for granted that the
                                                    >places
                                                    >exist but aren't at all curious about the details.


                                                    _________________________________________________________________
                                                    MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
                                                    http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
                                                  • long-lines@att.net
                                                    You have to wonder, with respect to this -- and Sept 11, how air traffic controllers felt watching their scopes that day...
                                                    Message 25 of 30 , Dec 15, 2001
                                                    • 0 Attachment
                                                      You have to wonder, with respect to this -- and Sept 11,
                                                      how air traffic controllers felt watching their scopes
                                                      that day...
                                                      > She didn't want to hear it and went as far to ask me to stop
                                                      > because she had faith our government would do "something" to stop it.
                                                    • Dave Emery
                                                      ... The very careful reader will see the clue here, but the way the article was qouted it sure doesn t stand out. This case is not a case in the UK but in
                                                      Message 26 of 30 , Dec 17, 2001
                                                      • 0 Attachment
                                                        On Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 02:23:24PM -0000, mikemakar wrote:
                                                        >
                                                        > Planespotters freed on bail
                                                        > (Filed: 12/12/2001)
                                                        >
                                                        > TWELVE British planespotters are being released on bail and will
                                                        > stand trial on lesser charges than spying, their lawyer said.
                                                        >
                                                        > The 12 British and two Dutch planespotters have been in custody for
                                                        > more than a month after being accused of spying by taking photographs
                                                        > of military planes. The bail was set at 5 million drachmas each, the
                                                        > equivalent of £10,000, the lawyer said.
                                                        >

                                                        The very careful reader will see the clue here, but the way the
                                                        article was qouted it sure doesn't stand out. This case is not a case
                                                        in the UK but in Athens Greece. Apparently the Greeks don't understand
                                                        the European (and especially UK) fantatical plane spotter/photographing
                                                        culture and arrested a bunch of spotters who had traveled to Athens
                                                        specifically to see and photograph certain Greek aircraft at an airbase
                                                        there.

                                                        Like so many other things in that area of the world, the rules of
                                                        acceptable behavior and what is considered treasonable spying are a bit
                                                        different than in the UK...


                                                        --
                                                        Dave Emery N1PRE, die@... DIE Consulting, Weston, Mass.
                                                        PGP fingerprint = 2047/4D7B08D1 DE 6E E1 CC 1F 1D 96 E2 5D 27 BD B0 24 88 C3 18
                                                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.