Thursday, June 02, 2011

2009: Rep. Weiner Said Cyber Attacks "Demand Immediate Action," Continues Digging Himself In A Hole Today

Back in 2009, Rep. Horshack, aka Anthony Weiner, certainly didn't think cyber crimes were just a "prank."  From the usually liberal Mediaite.

A voice to add to the chorus calling on Rep. Anthony Weiner to take cyber security–and the alleged hacking a Congressman’s Twitter account–seriously? Anthony Weiner. The archives of the New York Daily News serve up a bland policy statement Weiner made in 2009 that suddenly seems newsworthy: “”Cyber attacks–both foreign and domestic–are real and demand immediate action,” Weiner said almost exactly two years ago. This would seem to conflict with the Rep. Weiner who met reporters Tuesday, who described what he says was the “hacking” of his Twitter account as a “distraction” and a “prank.”

Back in 2009, Weiner seemed to take the protection of the country’s information grid far more seriously–though he cautioned against giving too much power to the NSA. “We need a balanced approach. It is important that we don’t give too much authority to a government agency that collects information and rarely shares it.” As the Daily News’ Michael McAuliff reported then, one of Rep. Weiner’s concerns with added NSA power over cyber security is the agency’s lack of jurisdiction over domestic cyber attacks, which Weiner described–then–as significant.
But the same Congressman Weiner today dismisses what he called a hacking of his Twitter account as a "prank," even though it involved the married Congressman allegedly sending a photo of his crotch to a female follower.

Speaking of which, Weiner is digging himself a bigger hole over the photo and whether or not it is him.

He was interviewed by Brett Baier on Fox News (video link from American Power), and would not say if it was him.


Then he appeared on Rachel Madcow's MSNBC show and said "maybe it started out being a photograph of mine" (Gateway Pundit).

UPI quotes Weiner from the Madcow show also saying, "
"Or it could have been a photograph that was taken out of context or manipulated or changed in some way so maybe it did, it did -- or maybe it's a photograph that was dropped into an account from somewhere else," he told the program. "I can't say. I don't want to cast this net wider by saying it's someone else, so I'm going to say that I can't say with certitude that it's me or it's not."
Yes it could be.  But they would have had access to your Yfrog photo hosting service and posted it on your account.

I think we know who the sender is.

No comments: