Bush Advisor: Hastings Crash ‘Consistent With a Car Cyberattack’

[The Patriot]

Tinfoil hats on! I've been following this story for a while and it seems plausible. The technology is there and Hastings was a pretty controversial journalist.


A former cybersecurity advisor to President George W. Bush says a sophisticated computer hack could have been the cause of the automobile accident that claimed the life of journalist Michael Hastings last week in Los Angeles.

Richard Clarke, a State Department official-turned-special advisor to several United States presidents, said the early morning auto crash last Tuesday was "consistent with a car cyberattack,” raising new questions about the death of the award-winning journalist.

http://rt.com/usa/michael-hastings-cyber-car-218/

[stillers4me]

Journalist Michael Hastings sent chilling email to colleagues before death

Mere hours before the fiery car crash that took his life, journalist Michael Hastings sent an email to friends and colleagues urging them to get legal counsel if they were approached by federal authorities.

“Hey [redacted] the Feds are interviewing my 'close friends and associates,'" read the message dated June 17 at 12:56 p.m. from Hastings to editors at the website BuzzFeed, where he worked.

"Perhaps if the authorities arrive 'BuzzFeed GQ', er HQ, may be wise to immediately request legal counsel before any conversations or interviews about our news-gathering practices or related journalism issues.”..........


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/06/24/journalist-michael-hastings-sends-chilling-e-mail-to-colleagues-before-death/?test=latestnews#ixzz2XGA8yHL9

[The Patriot]

Engineers have been talking about this threat for some time. Doesn't prove Hastings was hacked, but goddamn... what a way to kill someone.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D6jxBDy8k8

[Mach1]

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/945607_678533732173230_1917242402_n.jpg

[GoSlash27]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_d_4ug3ijzGw/TCUAo-PMWPI/AAAAAAAAFDY/fuhmrPPut-Q/s1600/TinFoilHatPootie.jpg

I never understood the allure of conspiracy theories.

[The Patriot]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_d_4ug3ijzGw/TCUAo-PMWPI/AAAAAAAAFDY/fuhmrPPut-Q/s1600/TinFoilHatPootie.jpg

I never understood the allure of conspiracy theories.

A conspiracy, by definition, is just a plot to commit a crime. Any computer can be hacked, and now that cars have computers, cars can be hacked. So technically, this doesn't even need to be a conspiracy theory when one person with a background in electrical engineering could possibly pull something like this off by himself. This isn't something far-fetched like computer-synchronized explosives lining the floors of the WTC.

[GoSlash27]

Looking into this, It's completely impractical. All these papers said is that you can steal a car by hacking it. It didn't say anything about remotely taking control of a car away from a driver. And seriously... how could such a thing be done? There aren't any direct inputs from OBD to the steering, accelerator or brakes.
You can remotely do stuff like pop door locks, remote start, and disable a steering wheel lock, but you can't hack a car and remotely control it like James freakin' Bond.
/too much kool- aid

- - - Updated - - -


A conspiracy, by definition, is just a plot to commit a crime. Any computer can be hacked, and now that cars have computers, cars can be hacked. So technically, this doesn't even need to be a conspiracy theory when one person with a background in electrical engineering could possibly pull something like this off by himself. This isn't something far-fetched like computer-synchronized explosives lining the floors of the WTC.

A whole lot more farfetched than you'd think. Having a computer in something doesn't give it God- like powers over all the systems.

[Godfather]

Looking into this, It's completely impractical. All these papers said is that you can steal a car by hacking it. It didn't say anything about remotely taking control of a car away from a driver. And seriously... how could such a thing be done? There aren't any direct inputs from OBD to the steering, accelerator or brakes.
You can remotely do stuff like pop door locks, remote start, and disable a steering wheel lock, but you can't hack a car and remotely control it like James freakin' Bond.
/too much kool- aid

- - - Updated - - -



A whole lot more farfetched than you'd think. Having a computer in something doesn't give it God- like powers over all the systems.

I would normally agree that it was farfetched. But this is a well-known federal cybersecurity expert making the claim. He's an established, credible source.

It's also important to note that he didn't say WHO did it. It could have been anyone...paranoia would lead the tinfoil hat crowd to assume it must have been Obama, but anyone could have an incentive to target Hastings, even someone as mundane as an angry ex.

[GoSlash27]

I would normally agree that it was farfetched. But this is a well-known federal cybersecurity expert making the claim. He's an established, credible source.

It's also important to note that he didn't say WHO did it. It could have been anyone...paranoia would lead the tinfoil hat crowd to assume it must have been Obama, but anyone could have an incentive to target Hastings, even someone as mundane as an angry ex.

His "claim" is merely a citation of a couple of research papers that say cars can be stolen because they lack sufficient protection. It's not really "consistent" at all. The computer can't work the steering, throttle or brakes.
If he were to claim that the 9/11 hijackings were "consistent" with a cyber attack, he'd actually have more of a legit claim. They have also demonstrated similar weaknesses, and airplane controls (unlike cars) are actually tied to the computers.

[The Patriot]

Looking into this, It's completely impractical. All these papers said is that you can steal a car by hacking it. It didn't say anything about remotely taking control of a car away from a driver. And seriously... how could such a thing be done? There aren't any direct inputs from OBD to the steering, accelerator or brakes.
You can remotely do stuff like pop door locks, remote start, and disable a steering wheel lock, but you can't hack a car and remotely control it like James freakin' Bond.
/too much kool- aid

- - - Updated - - -


A whole lot more farfetched than you'd think. Having a computer in something doesn't give it God- like powers over all the systems.


His "claim" is merely a citation of a couple of research papers that say cars can be stolen because they lack sufficient protection. It's not really "consistent" at all. The computer can't work the steering, throttle or brakes.
If he were to claim that the 9/11 hijackings were "consistent" with a cyber attack, he'd actually have more of a legit claim. They have also demonstrated similar weaknesses, and airplane controls (unlike cars) are actually tied to the computers.

Hate to disagree with you this adamantly, Slash, but you're wrong. Cruise control on most modern cars (a 2013 model Mercedes in this instance) is a computer receiving input from the speedometer and telling the throttle to speed up or slow down. All computers do is respond to a "yes" or "no" binary code (0100101101 etc). All a hacker does is feed a computer false information, so if a hacker wanted to manipulate a car's throttle on cruise control, he could feed the car's computer false information to make the car accelerate to a dangerous speed. That's one way to do it.

Another way is what Israel (allegedly) did to Iran's nuclear facilities. A virus called Stuxnet caused some moving components in their computerized machinery to move at irregular speeds which caused the machinery to break down over time. If it can be done to a top secret nuclear facility, it can be done to a car.

I wish this story wasn't attached to the theory that Michael Hastings was murdered, because while the theory is speculation, the potential to hack cars is fact, and it's a real threat. Imagine if China or Russia could hack a car driving in the United States! It's more fact than fiction.

[Mach1]

His "claim" is merely a citation of a couple of research papers that say cars can be stolen because they lack sufficient protection. It's not really "consistent" at all. The computer can't work the steering, throttle or brakes.
If he were to claim that the 9/11 hijackings were "consistent" with a cyber attack, he'd actually have more of a legit claim. They have also demonstrated similar weaknesses, and airplane controls (unlike cars) are actually tied to the computers.

A cars computer also controls the fuel and spark. Overload the fuel and spark it at the right time and boom.

[GBMelBlount]

A cars computer also controls the fuel and spark. Overload the fuel and spark it at the right time and

TOAST.

Fixed if for ya. :wink02:

[GoSlash27]

Hate to disagree with you this adamantly, Slash, but you're wrong. Cruise control on most modern cars (a 2013 model Mercedes in this instance) is a computer receiving input from the speedometer and telling the throttle to speed up or slow down. All computers do is respond to a "yes" or "no" binary code (0100101101 etc). All a hacker does is feed a computer false information, so if a hacker wanted to manipulate a car's throttle on cruise control, he could feed the car's computer false information to make the car accelerate to a dangerous speed. That's one way to do it.

Another way is what Israel (allegedly) did to Iran's nuclear facilities. A virus called Stuxnet caused some moving components in their computerized machinery to move at irregular speeds which caused the machinery to break down over time. If it can be done to a top secret nuclear facility, it can be done to a car.

I wish this story wasn't attached to the theory that Michael Hastings was murdered, because while the theory is speculation, the potential to hack cars is fact, and it's a real threat. Imagine if China or Russia could hack a car driving in the United States! It's more fact than fiction.

I work on this crap for a living, and I can tell by your explanation that you haven't the foggiest idea what you're talking about.

[The Patriot]

I work on this crap for a living, and I can tell by your explanation that you haven't the foggiest idea what you're talking about.

Would you care to elaborate.

[GoSlash27]

A cars computer also controls the fuel and spark. Overload the fuel and spark it at the right time and boom.

I'd love to see a Mythbusters special episode on "crazy nonsense people spout on the internet".

- - - Updated - - -


Would you care to elaborate.

I'm an avionics technician for a military defense contractor and my area of expertise is digital processors. I know more about "binary" than most.

[Seven]

I work on this crap for a living, and I can tell by your explanation that you haven't the foggiest idea what you're talking about.

Not saying I buy the story, but I think you're underestimating the technology that is out there. I don't work on technical equipment or electronics for a living, but I do know the government often has access to stuff that the public doesn't - sometimes years in advance. I wouldn't rule this conspiracy theory out based on technological grounds.

[The Patriot]

I'm an avionics technician for a military defense contractor and my area of expertise is digital processors. I know more about "binary" than most.

Well, who better to explain why cars are invulnerable to being hacked.

Edit: Excuse me, throttles. I think you already acknowledged some systems can be hacked.

[GoSlash27]

Not saying I buy the story, but I think you're underestimating the technology that is out there. I don't work on technical equipment or electronics for a living, but I do know the government often has access to stuff that the public doesn't - sometimes years in advance. I wouldn't rule this conspiracy theory out based on technological grounds.

It's not even a "story". It's a fallacy mentioned in passing that a bunch of people who don't know what they're talking about are trying to *make* into a story.
A computer, no matter how intricate, can only interface with it's associated systems through the means with which it has been provided. Your car's OBD system doesn't have a gas pedal, or a brake pedal, or a steering wheel. It's not a Radio Shack RC buggy.
Yeah, there's a cruise control, but it's disassociated. It can report a fault, but the OBD doesn't direct it.

[Seven]

It's not even a "story". It's a fallacy mentioned in passing that a bunch of people who don't know what they're talking about are trying to *make* into a story.
A computer, no matter how intricate, can only interface with it's associated systems through the means with which it has been provided. Your car's OBD system doesn't have a gas pedal, or a brake pedal, or a steering wheel. It's not a Radio Shack RC buggy.
Yeah, there's a cruise control, but it's disassociated. It can report a fault, but the OBD doesn't direct it.

That's assuming the car is in standard operating conditions. If someone has the opportunity to modify the vehicle, though, doesn't that pretty much open up endless possibilities?

[Mach1]

I'd love to see a Mythbusters special episode on "crazy nonsense people spout on the internet".

So your saying the computer does not control the flow of fuel or the timing of the spark?

Thats a new one to me since I can hook up a programer to my truck and adjust both. huh who'd a thunk

[GoSlash27]

Well, who better to explain why cars are invulnerable to being hacked.

Edit: Excuse me, throttles. I think you already acknowledged some systems can be hacked.

They're not "invulnerable" and I never claimed they were. They're just incapable of being hacked in *this* way. Probably some day they will be, but they're not now.
Maybe someday your microwave will be "hackable" in such a way that somebody can make it grow legs and try to kill you, but the capability isn't there now.

[Seven]

Even something as simple as a mechanism to cut the breaks remotely would have the desired effect, no?

[The Patriot]

It's not even a "story". It's a fallacy mentioned in passing that a bunch of people who don't know what they're talking about are trying to *make* into a story.
A computer, no matter how intricate, can only interface with it's associated systems through the means with which it has been provided. Your car's OBD system doesn't have a gas pedal, or a brake pedal, or a steering wheel. It's not a Radio Shack RC buggy.
Yeah, there's a cruise control, but it's disassociated. It can report a fault, but the OBD doesn't direct it.

What controls cruise control? And from where does it receive information?

[GoSlash27]

So your saying the computer does not control the flow of fuel or the timing of the spark?

see... this is what I'm talking about.
It does both. But you don't know enough about it to realize that it can't make a car explode no matter what erroneous data you feed it. If you had any knowledge of how electronic ignition, fuel injection, or even just internal combustion engines work, you would realize how foolish that sounds.
If MythBusters ever had a "ridiculous shit somebody said on the internet" episode, it would clear up a lot of silliness.

[The Patriot]

I don't understand the hostility here to the mere suggestion that cars can be hacked, especially in a world that's becoming increasingly digital. I'm not claiming to be a mechanic or an engineer here, but I'm also not the one making the diagnosis. This is a former Pentagon employee and Bush adviser, and engineers have been discussing this possibility long before the Hastings crash.

[GoSlash27]

What controls cruise control? And from where does it receive information?
Don't you know? Or is this a rhetorical question?

- - - Updated - - -


I don't understand the hostility here to the mere suggestion that cars can be hacked, especially in a world that's becoming increasingly digital. I'm not claiming to be a mechanic or an engineer here, but I'm also not the one making the diagnosis. This is a former Pentagon employee and Bush adviser, and engineers have been discussing this possibility long before the Hastings crash.
This is from some dude who used to work in the State Department, and the reason for the hostility is because you're discussing it with a guy who happens to *be* a mechanic/ engineer and what you're proposing is flat-out wrong.

[The Patriot]

Don't you know? Or is this a rhetorical question?

No, I've already said I'm not an expert on cars. I assumed that it is some type of computer.

[Seven]

see... this is what I'm talking about.
It does both. But you don't know enough about it to realize that it can't make a car explode no matter what erroneous data you feed it. If you had any knowledge of how electronic ignition, fuel injection, or even just internal combustion engines work, you would realize how foolish that sounds.
If MythBusters ever had a "ridiculous shit somebody said on the internet" episode, it would clear up a lot of silliness.

Slash, I think everyone here are asking you legitimate questions without any malice intended based on your knowledge of the subject. I don't think anyone is sounding foolish because no one is suggesting anything, we're just asking. Can't expect everyone to know as much as you do about your profession.

[Mach1]

see... this is what I'm talking about.
It does both. But you don't know enough about it to realize that it can't make a car explode no matter what erroneous data you feed it. If you had any knowledge of how electronic ignition, fuel injection, or even just internal combustion engines work, you would realize how foolish that sounds.
If MythBusters ever had a "ridiculous shit somebody said on the internet" episode, it would clear up a lot of silliness.

I know how engines work, I've built many of them in my time. IF they can be hacked to sense a wreck MAYBE they can be programed to spurt fuel at that moment IF a fuel line/injector burst or whatever and start a fire.

I know it's a lot of if and maybes but thats what I was getting at anyways.

[The Patriot]

Don't you know? Or is this a rhetorical question?

- - - Updated - - -


This is from some dude who used to work in the State Department, and the reason for the hostility is because you're discussing it with a guy who happens to *be* a mechanic/ engineer and what you're proposing is flat-out wrong.

I recognize that. That's why I'm asking *you* why the computers in cars can't be hacked.

[Mach1]

I recognize that. That's why I'm asking *you* why the computers in cars can't be hacked.

Ever seen Bait Car. :chuckle:

[GoSlash27]

Slash, I think everyone here are asking you legitimate questions without any malice intended based on your knowledge of the subject. I don't think anyone is sounding foolish because no one is suggesting anything, we're just asking. Can't expect everyone to know as much as you do about your profession.

The short answer is this: You can't blow a car up no matter what you set the injector duty cycle to or where you set the ignition timing. You can foul the plugs or stall the engine, but no kaboom.

- - - Updated - - -


I recognize that. That's why I'm asking *you* why the computers in cars can't be hacked.

Scroll up and read. They *can* be hacked and nobody's saying they can't. I'm saying they can't execute functions with which they don't interface. Your thermostat has a microcontroller in it, but it can't be hacked to make your house get up and walk around.

[Seven]

The short answer is this: You can't blow a car up no matter what you set the injector duty cycle to or where you set the ignition timing. You can foul the plugs or stall the engine, but no kaboom.

- - - Updated - - -



Scroll up and read. They *can* be hacked and nobody's saying they can't. I'm saying they can't execute functions with which they don't interface. Your thermostat has a microcontroller in it, but it can't be hacked to make your house get up and walk around.

Are they suggesting the hack made the car explode, though? Couldn't something much more subtle cause the crash with a high probability of the desired outcome which is death? Such as stalling a vehicle at a proper time?

[GoSlash27]

I know how engines work, I've built many of them in my time. IF they can be hacked to sense a wreck MAYBE they can be programed to spurt fuel at that moment IF a fuel line/injector burst or whatever and start a fire.

I know it's a lot of if and maybes but thats what I was getting at anyways.

Try it some time.

[Mach1]

Try it some time.

To start a engine fire?

[GoSlash27]

Are they suggesting the hack made the car explode, though? Couldn't something much more subtle cause the crash with a high probability of the desired outcome which is death? Such as stalling a vehicle at a proper time?
Have you ever had a car stall out on *you* when driving? Did it cause a fatal crash?
This is silly.

- - - Updated - - -


To start a engine fire?
Yup. Or an "explosion". It'd be easier for you to prove it to yourself.

[Seven]

Have you ever had a car stall out on *you* when driving? Did it cause a fatal crash?
This is silly.


Have YOU? I had an Isuzu Rodeo that stalled about 25% of the time I drove it. And yes, it nearly caused crashes countless times. No one could fix it and that's why I no longer own it. It wasn't "silly" it was terrifying.

[Mach1]

Have you ever had a car stall out on *you* when driving? Did it cause a fatal crash?
This is silly.

- - - Updated - - -


Yup. Or an "explosion". It'd be easier for you to prove it to yourself.

Granted this isn't fuel injected but doesn't look to difficult to do. :noidea: Also kinda comical.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=2RBRCaVjYrM

[GoSlash27]

Have YOU? I had an Isuzu Rodeo that stalled about 25% of the time I drove it. And yes, it nearly caused crashes countless times. No one could fix it and that's why I no longer own it. It wasn't "silly" it was terrifying.
And you're still alive, else you wouldn't be responding to me.

Computers aren't something slightly to the left of witchcraft. They're machines just like any other machine. You have driven enough cars that stalled out at inconvenient moments to know that it's not an effective way to kill someone.

- - - Updated - - -


Granted this isn't fuel injected but doesn't look to difficult to do. :noidea:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=2RBRCaVjYrM

Should be easy, then. Have at it.

/ fuel injected systems don't have open bowls of gasoline sitting on top of the engine. "Should be". "Looks". ":noidea:

[Seven]

And you're still alive, else you wouldn't be responding to me.

Computers aren't something slightly to the left of witchcraft. They're machines just like any other machine. You have driven enough cars that stalled out at inconvenient moments to know that it's not an effective way to kill someone.

Maybe. But after the first few times I was always on the lookout for it. If the car I drive now randomly stalled I probably wouldn't react so well as I did then. The problem isn't necessarily the loss of acceleration, it's the sudden and surprising loss of power steering that's dangerous. It catches you off guard and totally changes the way the vehicle handles.

[Mach1]

And you're still alive, else you wouldn't be responding to me.

Computers aren't something slightly to the left of witchcraft. They're machines just like any other machine. You have driven enough cars that stalled out at inconvenient moments to know that it's not an effective way to kill someone.

- - - Updated - - -



Should be easy, then. Have at it.

/ fuel injected systems don't have open bowls of gasoline sitting on top of the engine. "Should be". "Looks". ":noidea:

Heil Slash :noidea:

[The Patriot]

We'll have to wait and see then. If this theory is truly baseless then we can expect it to fade into obscurity like all the other crackpot suggestions, but if there is something in this claim, the next logical step for the expert claimants is to prove it by doing it. Slash thinks it's unfeasible. Most of us aren't in a position to argue with his expertise, but we're not the relevant people in this discussion. I believe if there is a threat to the safety of drivers via hack, the auto-engineering community will quickly expose it.

[GoSlash27]

We'll have to wait and see then. If this theory is truly baseless then we can expect it to fade into obscurity like all the other crackpot suggestions, but if there is something in this claim, the next logical step for the expert claimants is to prove it by doing it. Slash thinks it's unfeasible. Most of us aren't in a position to argue with his expertise, but we're not the relevant people in this discussion. I believe if there is a threat to the safety of drivers via hack, the auto-engineering community will quickly expose it.

Agreed. If there are any safety issues with the processors, they tend to implement fixes outside of software anyway. They're more concerned with liability from failures than from hackers, but the end result is the same; these distributed systems aren't allowed to do things that could kill people unless there is a fail-safe override to shut it off.
Now in a few years when Google driverless car technology hits the market, it'll be a whole different ball game.

[Hindes204]

Aren't these the same cars that can parallel park themselves? I know it doesn't control the gas or brake features, but the computer takes over the steering feature

and yes Slash, I know how the systems work, I am also avionics, I have dealt with binary and processors my whole AF career

[Seven]

Aren't these the same cars that can parallel park themselves? I know it doesn't control the gas or brake features, but the computer takes over the steering feature

and yes Slash, I know how the systems work, I am also avionics, I have dealt with binary and processors my whole AF career

I do think the c250 does have parallel park assist and other assisted driving features.

[Seven]

This safety breakthrough first introduced by Mercedes-Benz continually monitors your driving inputs and the vehicle's motion to help keep it going in your intended direction, especially in corners and during evasive maneuvers. If it detects wheelspin, severe understeer (plowing), or oversteer (fishtailing), ESP can brake individual wheels and reduce engine power to help bring the vehicle under control. Hmm. Looks like computing does have input on actual maneuvering in the c250. Interesting.

[GoSlash27]

Hmm. Looks like computing does have input on actual maneuvering in the c250. Interesting.

Braking and interrupting ignition doesn't cause a car to hit a tree at a high rate of speed. Acceleration does that.

I do wonder what was going on that had him speeding in a residential neighborhood at 4 in the morning.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fweyFCFKcp0
^ This is interesting...

[Seven]

Braking and interrupting ignition doesn't cause a car to hit a tree at a high rate of speed. Acceleration does that.

I do wonder what was going on that had him speeding in a residential neighborhood at 4 in the morning.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fweyFCFKcp0
^ This is interesting...

If the electronics system can "reduce engine power", couldn't it theoretically be hacked to increase it? Which supports the theory.

[GoSlash27]

If the electronics system can "reduce engine power", couldn't it theoretically be hacked to increase it? Which supports the theory.
No, it couldn't. It reduces engine power by retarding ignition timing and eliminating spark. Advancing ignition timing would merely cause pinging and additional spark wouldn't do anything at all.

From what I'm seeing, the only thing that could cause a car to go full- tilt is by monkeying with the accelerator. Even chasing him wouldn't make him go that fast.

- - - Updated - - -

^ You could fairly easily kill an unwary driver by monkeying with the accelerator, and you don't have to "hack" the car to do it. There are much easier ways.
As long as we're exploring the implausible, we may as well also consider the possibility that this is his way of "going off the radar" (his words) by faking his own death. Highly implausible, but so is the idea of hacking a car to do it for real.

[The Patriot]

The whole thing struck me as a bit odd. Not trying to get into truther territory, but how unusual is it for a car wreck to catch fire and burn like this?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LSY3wVuASg

[Seven]

The whole thing struck me as a bit odd. Not trying to get into truther territory, but how unusual is it for a car wreck to catch fire and burn like this?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LSY3wVuASg

On impact? Unusual as fuck as far as I know.

[GoSlash27]

The whole thing struck me as a bit odd. Not trying to get into truther territory, but how unusual is it for a car wreck to catch fire and burn like this?

Not all that uncommon according to the NFPA. Figure about 5% of high speed impacts.
http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files/pdf/osvehicle.pdf

[BnG_Hevn]

Hate to disagree with you this adamantly, Slash, but you're wrong. Cruise control on most modern cars (a 2013 model Mercedes in this instance) is a computer receiving input from the speedometer and telling the throttle to speed up or slow down. All computers do is respond to a "yes" or "no" binary code (0100101101 etc). All a hacker does is feed a computer false information, so if a hacker wanted to manipulate a car's throttle on cruise control, he could feed the car's computer false information to make the car accelerate to a dangerous speed. That's one way to do it.

Another way is what Israel (allegedly) did to Iran's nuclear facilities. A virus called Stuxnet caused some moving components in their computerized machinery to move at irregular speeds which caused the machinery to break down over time. If it can be done to a top secret nuclear facility, it can be done to a car.

I wish this story wasn't attached to the theory that Michael Hastings was murdered, because while the theory is speculation, the potential to hack cars is fact, and it's a real threat. Imagine if China or Russia could hack a car driving in the United States! It's more fact than fiction.


No, I don't believe it. It is farfetched.

How would you take control of the computer's cruise control? IF he even had it engaged to begin with.

And, if you're in a car and it accelerates uncontrollably, what would you do? Allow it to happen? I think applying the breaks is the most natural response to it.

I don't believe for a second that this could be done remotely. I'd have to see it to believe it.

[GoSlash27]

No, I don't believe it. It is farfetched.

How would you take control of the computer's cruise control? IF he even had it engaged to begin with.

And, if you're in a car and it accelerates uncontrollably, what would you do? Allow it to happen? I think applying the breaks is the most natural response to it.

I don't believe for a second that this could be done remotely. I'd have to see it to believe it.

I don't believe that his car was "hacked" to do this, but there's plenty of evidence to suggest that it was tampered with. There are too many coincidences to be ignored, and this is a bizarre way for *anybody* to go out, let alone someone with as many enemies as he had.

[GoSlash27]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNhqKRugk8Q <-- couple this with Patriot's footage above.

The LAPD said they didn't suspect foul play in this matter, and that's a real head- scratcher to me.

Setting aside everything we can't establish conclusively as fact, here's what we know:

He was going recklessly fast at 4:20 in the morning, blowing through red lights. According to the eyewitness, he went airborne, bottomed out, fishtailed, and hit a tree. The debris field shows that he was going tremendously fast on impact.

Just on that basis alone, how could foul play *not* be suspected? Was this normal behavior for him? Are there some sort of accidental circumstances that can bring this about? Anything in his toxicology report? Some plausible medical cause?

[GoSlash27]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/06/20/hastings-body/2443301/


Coroner's Lt. Fred Corral says Thursday that the findings on the cause of death are deferred pending the results of toxicology tests expected in eight to 10 weeks.

Corral says an autopsy was performed Wednesday and the 33-year-old Hastings was identified by matching fingerprints to prints the FBI had on file.

The car hit a tree early Tuesday and burned furiously. Police don't suspect any foul play.

2 questions:
1) Where did the coroner get the fingerprints: from the body itself or the car?
2) Why did the FBI have his fingerprints on file?

Is it possible that the body in the car was *not* actually Hastings?

BnG,

And, if you're in a car and it accelerates uncontrollably, what would you do? Allow it to happen? I think applying the breaks is the most natural response to it.
That would be the most natural response, and I've seen it happen out on the race track to experienced racing drivers. Hitting the brakes doesn't work on a stuck throttle. You have to put it in neutral and (if you're really cool) turn off the ignition without locking the steering.
Even those guys have gotten it wrong in the moment.

[GoSlash27]

One more piece of pertinent information and I'll leave it alone for a while:
In this article, Hastings admits to being a "recovering alcoholic/ addict/ screw-up", and states that he hasn't used since he was 19.
http://trueslant.com/michaelhastings/2009/04/28/a-case-of-the-relapse-for-young-addictauthor/

In this article, he admits to having smoked crack in his college days.
http://trueslant.com/michaelhastings/2010/02/09/my-advice-to-journalists-smoke-crack-twitter-occasionally/

In this book, he admits to having crashed his car drunk when he was 19.
http://www.amazon.com/Lost-My-Love-Baghdad-Modern/dp/B004JZWSZC/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1371682832&sr=8-3&keywords=michael+hastings (page 96)

We have to admit the possibility that he relapsed and crashed while drunk and/ or high on coke. Unseemly and impolite to speak ill of the dead, but it's something to consider.

[steeldawg]

One more piece of pertinent information and I'll leave it alone for a while:
In this article, Hastings admits to being a "recovering alcoholic/ addict/ screw-up", and states that he hasn't used since he was 19.
http://trueslant.com/michaelhastings/2009/04/28/a-case-of-the-relapse-for-young-addictauthor/

In this article, he admits to having smoked crack in his college days.
http://trueslant.com/michaelhastings/2010/02/09/my-advice-to-journalists-smoke-crack-twitter-occasionally/

In this book, he admits to having crashed his car drunk when he was 19.
http://www.amazon.com/Lost-My-Love-Baghdad-Modern/dp/B004JZWSZC/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1371682832&sr=8-3&keywords=michael+hastings (page 96)

We have to admit the possibility that he relapsed and crashed while drunk and/ or high on coke.

That's what I first thought when I saw the headline, tampering with his car or hacking his car as a means to kill him doesn't seem realistic. given hastings background with drugs if they wanted to get rid of him why wouldn't they just force him to OD in some run down motel, why mess with the car when there is no guarantee he dies in a crash.

[GoSlash27]

That's what I first thought when I saw the headline, tampering with his car or hacking his car as a means to kill him doesn't seem realistic. given hastings background with drugs if they wanted to get rid of him why wouldn't they just force him to OD in some run down motel, why mess with the car when there is no guarantee he dies in a crash.

Again, from what I know of these systems, "hacking" is highly implausible. But tampering is a very real possibility. You rig somebody's throttle to fully open and stay that way, and you could easily kill them. Physically, that would be child's play.

It's safe to say that there were a lot of people who wanted him dead, so tampering is highly plausible.

- - - Updated - - -


That's assuming the car is in standard operating conditions. If someone has the opportunity to modify the vehicle, though, doesn't that pretty much open up endless possibilities?

Sorry I missed this earlier on.
Absolutely, if somebody modifies the vehicle then anything is possible. In fact, it's downright simple. But that's not "hacking", it's "tampering".

[GoSlash27]

http://blog.newsok.com/carsok/2012/05/23/brake-throttle-override-becomes-the-new-standard/

The SmartThrottle system would have to be disabled unless the tampering occurs at the engine end. Otherwise touching the brakes is sufficient to kill the throttle.

[GoSlash27]

Okay, so I've been researching this subject all weekend, and I'm still at a loss to come up with a really good explanation. I don't go in for this "Alex Jones" tinfoil hat stuff, but there are some pretty important questions that nobody's asked and nobody's answered.
Bearing in mind that Hastings was who he was and did what he did, there's no possible way he could die without raising eyebrows... these circumstances *in and of themselves* are still pretty odd.
Setting aside what I don't/ can't know from what I do know, here's what went down to the best of my understanding:

14 years ago, Hastings was a self-admitted alcoholic/ drug user who crashed his car drunk.
Intervening years, Hastings was an investigative reporter who made plenty of powerful enemies and received death threats.
Approx. 13 hours before the crash, Hastings e-mailed his colleagues, saying that he was working a big story, was being investigated by the FBI, and "needed to go off the radar for a while".
According to WikiLeaks, Hastings contacted them approx. 3 hrs before the crash. This is only their word, and is not confirmed.
20 seconds before the crash, a car matching the description is filmed traveling southbound at an estimated 85MPH+ at the intersection of Highland & Santa Monica by "LoudLabs News" (more on them later), roughly a 1/2 mile north of the crash.
At the time of the crash, an eye witness saw the car cross Melrose Ave going "as fast as it can go", go airborne, bottom out trailing sparks, and fishtail left into a tree, bursting into flames. He did not witness anyone get out of the car.
4 minutes after the crash, LoudLabs News filmed footage of the car and interviewed witnesses. It was fully ablaze, and the debris field and location of the drivetrain (approx 160 ft away) indicated a very high speed at impact. A fire hydrant was sheared off. No occupant was visible from the outside.
5 minutes after, the fire department arrived and began extinguishing the fire. Police arrived shortly after and cordoned off the area.
Next morning: Police remove the driver's door and remove a body that appeared to be submerged in the footwell/ partially into the engine compartment.
The police issue a statement that the body has been burned beyond recognition and will require dental records to identify. They also state that no foul play is suspected, but will investigate.
2 days later, the coroner's office positively identifies the victim as Hastings. Not by dental records, but by fingerprints matched to the FBI's files.

That's all we can say is fact without speculating....

[GoSlash27]

First and most obvious question is "Where did the coroner get those fingerprints"? Were they off the car or the body? If the body was intact enough to get fingerprints, why would they claim the body was too damaged to identify without dental records, and why would it take 2 days to notice they were there?
Nobody asked that question and nobody answered it, but it's a critical question. If the fingerprints didn't come off the body, then we don't actually know that the body was, in fact, Hastings.
Next question, who is "LoudLabs", and why were they at that particular location with their dash cam running at that particular time? Loud Labs is a freelance organization that spray- tags streets, prints t-shirts, and records night footage to sell to local news outlets. Their website is devoid of information. They state that their dash cams are always on and recording, but the released video has been edited for brevity. They have not released an unedited copy of their footage although they have been requested to do so.
Finally, the odd statement by the LAPD that no foul play was suspected. How does somebody end up crashing into a tree at that speed at that time of night with no suspicion of foul play?

I ran the numbers, and concluded that the car in question would need most of a quarter mile to get up to the speed it was traveling at Santa Monica, or about 3/4 mile from the crash site. It could've been more, but not less.

So 3 possible scenarios I can see to account for these facts (in no particular order)
1) He relapsed and crashed his car drunk/ high/ both.
2) The car was modified and loaded with a body that's not actually Hastings in order to fake his death.
3) The car was modified and used to kill Hastings and make it appear to be an accident.

Any one of these 3 scenarios is plausible and each leaves some questions unanswered. Important thing is that any of them *should* raise suspicions of foul play.

That's all I've got that doesn't wander off into complete speculation. Comments/ questions welcome.

[Seven]

You guys make good points. But I'm not ready to totally dismiss this. I think there is enough there that hacking was a possibility. A slim one? Sure. But I don't think I can totally rule it out even if other ways to get the job done would have been presumably easier.

[The Patriot]

First and most obvious question is "Where did the coroner get those fingerprints"? Were they off the car or the body? If the body was intact enough to get fingerprints, why would they claim the body was too damaged to identify without dental records, and why would it take 2 days to notice they were there?
Nobody asked that question and nobody answered it, but it's a critical question. If the fingerprints didn't come off the body, then we don't actually know that the body was, in fact, Hastings.
Next question, who is "LoudLabs", and why were they at that particular location with their dash cam running at that particular time? Loud Labs is a freelance organization that spray- tags streets, prints t-shirts, and records night footage to sell to local news outlets. Their website is devoid of information. They state that their dash cams are always on and recording, but the released video has been edited for brevity. They have not released an unedited copy of their footage although they have been requested to do so.
Finally, the odd statement by the LAPD that no foul play was suspected. How does somebody end up crashing into a tree at that speed at that time of night with no suspicion of foul play?

I ran the numbers, and concluded that the car in question would need most of a quarter mile to get up to the speed it was traveling at Santa Monica, or about 3/4 mile from the crash site. It could've been more, but not less.

So 3 possible scenarios I can see to account for these facts (in no particular order)
1) He relapsed and crashed his car drunk/ high/ both.
2) The car was modified and loaded with a body that's not actually Hastings in order to fake his death.
3) The car was modified and used to kill Hastings and make it appear to be an accident.

Any one of these 3 scenarios is plausible and each leaves some questions unanswered. Important thing is that any of them *should* raise suspicions of foul play.

That's all I've got that doesn't wander off into complete speculation. Comments/ questions welcome.

You've really taken to this story, Slash. What is it that changed your mind? The circumstances of the crash?

I still think it's weird the police didn't investigate the email. Either Hastings was being paranoid or someone was questioning his friends. The least the police could do was ask around to see if there was any legitimacy to the claims.

[GoSlash27]

You've really taken to this story, Slash. What is it that changed your mind? The circumstances of the crash?

I still think it's weird the police didn't investigate the email. Either Hastings was being paranoid or someone was questioning his friends. The least the police could do was ask around to see if there was any legitimacy to the claims.

The one thing that raised a flag with me, as well as everyone I've discussed it with, is the fact that the LAPD said right out the gate that foul play was not suspected. The next was the Coroner positively identifying Hastings by the fingerprints 2 days later. Neither claim of fact makes sense in context.

[Mach1]

Some more conspiracy theory.


Obama Requests 15,000 Russian Troops For “Upcoming” Disaster

An unsettling report prepared by the Emergencies Ministry (EMERCOM) circulating in the Kremlin today on the just completed talks between Russia and the United States in Washington D.C. says that the Obama regime has requested at least 15,000 Russian troops trained in disaster relief and “crowd functions” [i.e. riot control] be pre-positioned to respond to FEMA Region III during an unspecified “upcoming” disaster.

According to this report, this unprecedented request was made directly to Minister Vladimir Puchkov by US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Director Janet Napolitano who said these Russian troops would work “directly and jointly” with her Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), part of whose mission is to secure the continuity of the US government in the event of natural disasters or war.

Important to note, this report says, is that FEMA Region III, the area Russian troops are being requested for, includes Washington D.C. and the surrounding States of Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia, “strongly suggesting” that the Obama regime has lost confidence in its own military being able to secure its survival should it be called upon to do so.

In his public statements, yesterday, regarding these matters Minister Puchkov stated, “We have decided that the US Federal Emergency Management Agency and Russia’s Emergencies Ministry will work together to develop systems to protect people and territory from cosmic impacts,” and further noted that his meeting with DHS Director Napolitano also covered other kinds of natural emergencies, such as recent years’ extreme weather in both Russia and United States.

In this EMERCOM report, however, Minister Puchkov notes that the Russian troops being requested by the Obama regime would “more than likely” be paired with US-DHS troops who last year purchased nearly 2 billion rounds of ammunition and just this past month placed and emergency order for riot gear.

As to what “upcoming disaster” the US is preparing for, this report continues, appears to be “strongly related” to last weeks assassination of American reporter Michael Hastings who was killed while attempting to reach the safety of the Israeli Consulate in Los Angeles, and as we had reported on in our 20 June report Top US Journalist Attempting To Reach Israeli Consulate Assassinated.

Further to be noted about Hastings assassination by the Obama regime is the continued US mainstream propaganda news cover-up of it, though many freelance reporters continue to uncover the truth, such as Jim Stone whose investigation noted that the rear portion of Hastings car was blown open and shredded with the rest of the car nicely intact, which runs counter to the “official” story that this vehicle has hit a tree.

Not mentioned in this EMERCOM report is any suggestion that Russia would comply with this request from the Obama regime, especially in light of the horrifying information being given to Russian intelligence analysts from Edward Snowden who has been labeled as the most wanted man in the world.

According to one Federal Security Services (FSB) bulletin on their continued debriefing of Snowden, and analysis of the information he has provided Russian intelligence officers, his father, Lonnie Snowden, was an officer in the US Coast Guard during the 11 September 2001 attacks on the United States who had “direct knowledge” of the true events that occurred and whom the real perpetrators were.

Being directly affected by the events of 9/11, this FSB bulletin says, Snowden “self initiated” a multi-year effort to gain access to America’s top secrets, a mission which when recently completed led him to contact various international reporters, including Hastings, whom he believed could be trusted with disseminating the information he had obtained.

Though known to us directly from our Kremlin sources as to the exact connections Snowden’s information proves regarding 9/11 and both the Bush and Obama regimes, and the even more horrific event soon to come, a June 2013 Defence Advisory Notice (DA-Notice) prevents our being able to…at this time.

Likewise, and as the assassination of Hastings clearly shows, the Obama regime claims a legal right to kill anyone it so chooses without charges or trial they believe may threaten US national security, and what Snowden’s information reveals definitely falls into that category.

What can be said though, there is a critical reason billionaires all over the world have been dumping their stocks, and fast; and those who are not able to read between the lines will soon find themselves in the most dangerous situation they’ve ever encountered
http://www.eutimes.net/2013/06/obama-requests-15000-russian-troops-for-upcoming-disaster/

[The Patriot]

Some more conspiracy theory.
http://www.eutimes.net/2013/06/obama-requests-15000-russian-troops-for-upcoming-disaster/
Oh dear.

Also. The Occupy Wall Street crowd has been clamoring about this supposed declassified FBI document that indicates there was a plan involving sniper rifles to take out the OWS leaders if the protests got out of hand.
http://whowhatwhy.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/FloridaFBISniperMemo.jpg
http://whowhatwhy.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/HoustonFBISnipermemo.jpg
http://whowhatwhy.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/FloridaFBISniperMemo.jpg
http://whowhatwhy.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/HoustonFBISnipermemo.jpg

[GBMelBlount]

So what do you guys feel the odds are this was not an accident...

[The Patriot]

So what do you guys feel the odds are this was not an accident...

I can't realistically figure the odds. The realist in me wants to say its still a slim chance this was a homicide, but you do have a potential motive and a realistic means and enough unanswered questions to make me want to wait for developments. As I think was noted earlier, you don't have to be the FBI or some government agency to tamper with a car. Assassins have been killing people by tampering with cars as long as cars have been in existence.

[GBMelBlount]

I can't realistically figure the odds. The realist in me wants to say its still a slim chance this was a homicide, but you do have a potential motive and a realistic means and enough unanswered questions to make me want to wait for developments. As I think was noted earlier, you don't have to be the FBI or some government agency to tamper with a car. Assassins have been killing people by tampering with cars as long as cars have been in existence.

I would imagine some cars need less tampering than others...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f0/AMC_Pacer_1975-1978.jpg

[The Patriot]

I would imagine some cars need less tampering than others...

Haha. Yeah.

Here's another good article and video from a San Diego local news station.
http://www.sandiego6.com/story/details-of-reporter-hastings-death-remain-elusive-20130708

[GBMelBlount]

So he told his friends he was being investigated and was on to something big and was going off the grid.

Less than 24 hours later he is in a fatal crash with an off the charts explosion and the engine 200 feet from the car and his body burned beyond recognition.

....if this was just coincidence it sounds like one hell of a coincidence.

[GoSlash27]

So he told his friends he was being investigated and was on to something big and was going off the grid.

Less than 24 hours later he is in a fatal crash with an off the charts explosion and the engine 200 feet from the car and his body burned beyond recognition.

....if this was just coincidence it sounds like one hell of a coincidence.

Not all that much of a coincidence IMO. He was an investigative journalist with a lot of people who hated his guts. He could've died at any time in any way and it would appear suspicious. What catches my attention is that this death looks a little hinky even if you ignore all that.

[steeldawg]

Im still waiting on toxicology reports to come back. If I was going to go with a conspiracy theory on this, it seems a faked death would be more plausible. Hastings wanted off the grid what better way to get off the grid than if everyone thinks your dead. Also anything he emailed before the cash I have to assume it would be something he wanted people to find especially the government since he knows they can track his emails.

[GBMelBlount]

Im still waiting on toxicology reports to come back. If I was going to go with a conspiracy theory on this, it seems a faked death would be more plausible. Hastings wanted off the grid what better way to get off the grid than if everyone thinks your dead. Also anything he emailed before the cash I have to assume it would be something he wanted people to find especially the government since he knows they can track his emails.

That's an interesting theory.

Why would they have still positively ID'd him though.

[The Patriot]

That's an interesting theory.

Why would they have still positively ID'd him though.

It took the pathologist two days and he had to use fingerprints. The flesh was so charred, the toxicology report is still pending.

[GoSlash27]

That's an interesting theory.

Why would they have still positively ID'd him though.

They never asked *where* the coroner got the fingerprints (the body or the car) and the coroner never said. Definitely odd that they said the body was so destroyed they'd only be able to identify it by dental records, then 2 days later said they identified it by fingerprints.
It *is* possible that the body isn't actually Hastings.

[steeldawg]

They never asked *where* the coroner got the fingerprints (the body or the car) and the coroner never said. Definitely odd that they said the body was so destroyed they'd only be able to identify it by dental records, then 2 days later said they identified it by fingerprints.
It *is* possible that the body isn't actually Hastings.

It seems if the body was burned so badly taking fingerprints from the body would be tough and if they took it from the car of course they would find hastings fingerprints because it was his car. It could also be he fell off the wagon was stoned out his mind and paranoid the government was investigating him, thought he saw a black SUV behind him took off lost control and hit a tree.

[The Patriot]

What would a journalist accomplish by faking his own death? If he was hiding from the law, it's pretty implausible that he could pull it off with modern forensics.

[GoSlash27]

It seems if the body was burned so badly taking fingerprints from the body would be tough and if they took it from the car of course they would find hastings fingerprints because it was his car. It could also be he fell off the wagon was stoned out his mind and paranoid the government was investigating him, thought he saw a black SUV behind him took off lost control and hit a tree.
If that's the case, he musta been *really* paranoid. By my math, he had the throttle pegged for at least 3/4 of a mile. No attempt at turning to evade capture, just full speed ahead.

- - - Updated - - -


What would a journalist accomplish by faking his own death? If he was hiding from the law, it's pretty implausible that he could pull it off with modern forensics.

Giving himself enough breathing room to get into contact with Wikileaks and pass on his info. Trashing your c-class is kinda an extreme way to go about it, tho'. The only scenario I see this working requires the coroner to be in on it. Kinda hard to picture that happening.

[steeldawg]

What would a journalist accomplish by faking his own death? If he was hiding from the law, it's pretty implausible that he could pull it off with modern forensics.

I don't know his reasoning for wanting to go off the grid, and I think it would be just as hard to pull of a hit like this. Tampering with the car cyber or mechanical would be just as easily identitfied.

[GBMelBlount]

This case is very interesting.

Based on the little I read I would put odds on the body being him AND there being no funny business at maybe 10%-20%.

[GoSlash27]

I don't know his reasoning for wanting to go off the grid, and I think it would be just as hard to pull of a hit like this. Tampering with the car cyber or mechanical would be just as easily identitfied.
Well... Tampering would be easy to pull off, difficult to detect, and untraceable. "Hacking" to repeat what was done here isn't feasible because of the way the accelerator is driven. And even if it *was* possible, it would point to who was responsible just due to the sheer difficulty.
If the goal is to murder somebody without anybody realizing he was murdered, this is not the way to do it.

That's what I'm talkin' about; no good answers here.

[Dwinsgames]

What would a journalist accomplish by faking his own death? If he was hiding from the law, it's pretty implausible that he could pull it off with modern forensics.


also it is pretty tough to TRY and fake your own death without also being a murderer ...

you need a body from somewhere and it is doubtful you will find a willing participant

[GoSlash27]

also it is pretty tough to TRY and fake your own death without also being a murderer ...

you need a body from somewhere and it is doubtful you will find a willing participant

That's why that scenario requires the coroner to be in on it. #1 to provide the body in the car. #2 to "identify" the body as you. Otherwise, the "fake your death" scenario doesn't work.

[The Patriot]

That's why that scenario requires the coroner to be in on it. #1 to provide the body in the car. #2 to "identify" the body as you. Otherwise, the "fake your death" scenario doesn't work.

If the FBI was really investigating Hastings and he mysteriously died while they were closing in, you can bet they'd perform their own private autopsy.

...But what if someone killed Hastings, put his body in a modified car, and remotely drove it 70 miles an hour into a tree to make it look like an accident? :scared: ...Or what if the government kidnapped Hastings, faked his death with the automobile accident, and now is extracting information from him in a secret prison??!!! :horror:

Now I just feel silly. :flap:
http://bios.weddingbee.com/pics/148857/conspiracy_cat.jpg

[GoSlash27]

That's kinda my point. There are only really 3 scenarios that I can see possible, and none of them are what I'd call "plausible". So what actually happened?

[The Patriot]

That's kinda my point. There are only really 3 scenarios that I can see possible, and none of them are what I'd call "plausible". So what actually happened?

A mundane explanation? Hastings relapsed into drug use, became paranoid the FBI was spying on him, got high one night and thought he was being chased by imagined assassins, drove his car into a tree, and the LAPD immediately ruled out foul-play because they were being lazy.

Which, of course, begs the question: was there any veracity to Hasting's claim that someone claiming to be an FBI agent was questioning his friends.

[GoSlash27]

A mundane explanation? Hastings relapsed into drug use, became paranoid the FBI was spying on him, got high one night and thought he was being chased by imagined assassins, drove his car into a tree, and the LAPD immediately ruled out foul-play because they were being lazy.

Which, of course, begs the question: was there any veracity to Hasting's claim that someone claiming to be an FBI agent was questioning his friends.

That's one of the 3 possibilities I was thinking. IMO it's the least implausible explanation of the 3, but it's still got holes.
Being high on crack would explain the recklessly fast driving.
From the NHTSA (http://www.nhtsa.gov/People/injury/research/job185drugs/cocain.htm):

Effects on Driving: Observed signs of impairment in driving performance have included subjects speeding, losing control of their vehicle, causing collisions, turning in front of other vehicles, high-risk behavior, inattentive driving, and poor impulse control. As the effects of cocaine wear off subjects may suffer from fatigue, depression, sleepiness, and inattention. In epidemiology studies of driving under the influence cases, accidents, and fatally injured drivers, between 8-23% of subjects have had cocaine and/or metabolites detected in their blood. An examination of 253 fatally injured drivers in Wayne County, Michigan between 1996-1998, found that 10% of cases were positive for blood cocaine and/or metabolites. On review of accident and witness reports, aggressive driving (high speed and loss of vehicle control) was revealed as the most common finding. Ethanol was detected in 56% of these cases, and all of these drivers lost control of their vehicles. In Memphis, Tennessee in 1993, 13% of 150 drivers stopped for reckless driving were determined to be driving under the influence of cocaine based on observations of behavior and appearance, performance on field sobriety tests, and positive urine cocaine tests.

But I still question the coroner's identification of the body. I saw the pics of the inside of that car when they yanked the door off and began removing the body (won't share 'cuz it's freakin' gross), and I have a really hard time believing they identified what was left by fingerprints. Especially 2 days after they said the body was so destroyed that it would be impossible to identify it in any way other than dental records.
That's fishy IMO.

[The Patriot]

That's one of the 3 possibilities I was thinking. IMO it's the least implausible explanation of the 3, but it's still got holes.
Being high on crack would explain the recklessly fast driving.
From the NHTSA (http://www.nhtsa.gov/People/injury/research/job185drugs/cocain.htm):


But I still question the coroner's identification of the body. I saw the pics of the inside of that car when they yanked the door off and began removing the body (won't share 'cuz it's freakin' gross), and I have a really hard time believing they identified what was left by fingerprints. Especially 2 days after they said the body was so destroyed that it would be impossible to identify it in any way other than dental records.
That's fishy IMO.

That also could be a rush to judgment by law enforcement. Hastings' fingerprints in Hastings' car doesn't prove the body was Hastings', but for a coroner who probably deals with these types of deaths routinely, it was probably enough for him to write this off his list and pass the buck to the toxicologist.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here. I find the death suspicious and I won't be satisfied until the toxicology report finally comes back.

[GoSlash27]

That also could be a rush to judgment by law enforcement. Hastings' fingerprints in Hastings' car doesn't prove the body was Hastings', but for a coroner who probably deals with these types of deaths routinely, it was probably enough for him to write this off his list and pass the buck to the toxicologist.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here. I find the death suspicious and I won't be satisfied until the toxicology report finally comes back.

I think I'm in about the same place. Not "suspicious", exactly... but definitely worth keeping an eye on.

[GBMelBlount]

I think there is more to this than meets the eye.


http://l3.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/IwIIoUQDNO_ux9qLxdzjFg--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Zmk9aW5zZXQ7aD0zOTY7cT04NTt3PTU5MA--/http://l.yimg.com/os/153/2011/09/13/83-handfish-moilogo_010306.jpg

[Mach1]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=21WnsubYFps



Details uncovered by this reporter shed new light into the June 18 death of journalist Michael Hastings.

Hastings' friend and confidant SSgt. Joe Biggs disclosed a macabre twist in the award-winning journalist's death in a suspicious single-car accident. According to SSgt. Biggs, "Michael Hastings' body was returned to Vermont in an urn." He further alleged, "Family members did not want Michael's body cremated."

This revelation provides another wrinkle in the Los Angeles Police Department's (LAPD) handling of a case they labeled "no foul play" only hours after the writer's death.


Nevertheless LA County assistant corner, Ed Winter, said it took two days to identify the burned-beyond recognition body of Hastings. Officials also confirmed that an autopsy has been performed, but the cause of death is still pending. Unfortunately the family will have to wait for cause of death answers as LAPD media spokesperson Lieutenant Andrew Neiman indicated, "It will take several weeks to get the toxicology results."


SSgt. Biggs also emphatically stated that liquor was not a factor in the accident, as Hastings hadn't consumed alcoholic beverages in five years.


So why is the LAPD delaying the reports?


It was SSgt. Biggs who released the following chilling email to members of the media; "Subject: FBI Investigation, re: NSA -Hey (redacted names) — the Feds are interviewing my "close friends and associates." Perhaps if the authorities arrive "BuzzFeed GQ," er HQ, may be wise to immediately request legal counsel before any conversations or interviews about our news gathering practices or related journalism issues. Also: I'm onto a big story, and need to go off the rada[r] for a bit. All the best, and hope to see you all soon. Michael"


The receipt of this email from Hastings tipped the scales for SSgt. Biggs. "This wasn't an accident and I will continue to investigate his death."

As an investigative journalist, Hastings saw his fair share of threats. One particular passage in Hastings book, "The Operators: The Wild and Terrifying Inside Story of America's War in Afghanistan," revealed that a former McChrystal staff member made a death threat. "We'll hunt you down and kill you if we don't like what you write," the unnamed staffer said. Hastings coolly retorted: "Well, I get death threats like that about once a year, so no worries."

Despite the LAPD's categorization of the Hasting fatal accident as a "no (evidence of) foul play," LAPD continues to ignore FOIA (CPRA in Calif.) requests made by San Diego 6 News for the police report, 9/11 call, autopsy, bomb squad and toxicology reports, or make the Mercedes available for inspection which only fuels conjecture.

[The Patriot]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=21WnsubYFps

:mad2::mad2::mad2:

[smokin3000gt]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/07/24/hackers-reveal-nasty-new-car-attacks-with-me-behind-the-wheel-video/


As I drove their vehicles for more than an hour, Miller and Valasek showed that they’ve reverse-engineered enough of the software of the Escape and the Toyota Prius (both the 2010 model) to demonstrate a range of nasty surprises: everything from annoyances like uncontrollably blasting the horn to serious hazards like slamming on the Prius’ brakes at high speeds. They sent commands from their laptops that killed power steering, spoofed the GPS and made pathological liars out of speedometers and odometers. Finally they directed me out to a country road, where Valasek showed that he could violently jerk the Prius’ steering at any speed, threatening to send us into a cornfield or a head-on collision. “Imagine you’re driving down a highway at 80 ,” Valasek says. “You’re going into the car next to you or into oncoming traffic. That’s going to be bad times.”


A team of researchers at the University of Washington and the University of California, San Diego, experimenting on a sedan from an unnamed company in 2010, found that they could wirelessly penetrate the same critical systems Miller and Valasek targeted (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/10/business/10hack.html?_r=0) using the car’s OnStar-like cellular connection, Bluetooth bugs, a rogue Android app that synched with the car’s network from the driver’s smartphone or even a malicious audio file on a CD in the car’s stereo system. “Academics have shown you can get remote code execution,” says Valasek, using hacker jargon for the ability to start running commands on a system. “We showed you can do a lot of crazy things once you’re inside.”



http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/10/business/10hack.html?_r=1& (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/10/business/10hack.html?_r=1&)


Because many of today’s cars contain cellular connections and Bluetooth wireless technology, it is possible for a hacker, working from a remote location, to take control of various features — like the car locks and brakes — as well as to track the vehicle’s location, eavesdrop on its cabin and steal vehicle data, the researchers said. They described a range of potential compromises of car security and safety.

If you watch the video in the first link, you can see they can disable brakes and could jerk the steering wheel among other things. Yes, these hackers are hardwired into the car but as you can see remote hacking via On Star/bluetooth/ect is possible and has already been done. If anyone could have hacked Hasting's car, the feds could have and frankly I wouldn't be surprised if they did.

[GoSlash27]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/07/24/hackers-reveal-nasty-new-car-attacks-with-me-behind-the-wheel-video/



http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/10/business/10hack.html?_r=1& (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/10/business/10hack.html?_r=1&)



If you watch the video in the first link, you can see they can disable brakes and could jerk the steering wheel among other things. Yes, these hackers are hardwired into the car but as you can see remote hacking via On Star/bluetooth/ect is possible and has already been done. If anyone could have hacked Hasting's car, the feds could have and frankly I wouldn't be surprised if they did.

1)What they're missing from each of these experiments is the key factor in Hastings' death; runaway acceleration. They can't demonstrate that. 2) those reports don't mention what was required to implement those abilities: Physically removing processors for a week to discover valid countersigns. 3) This was done with a Prius, which has vulnerabilities that violate the CAN bus standard. Mercedes not only meets CAN standards, but goes beyond them.

This conspiracy theory junk science debases the argument IMO. There was almost certainly something hinky going on here, but if people insist on pushing tin foil hat theories, nobody's ever gonna take it seriously.

[Seven]

They sent commands from their laptops that killed power steering
I brought that up earlier in the thread. I think cutting power steering could definitely cause a crash. In this instance I'm not sure it can be pointed to, but in general.

[The Patriot]

1)What they're missing from each of these experiments is the key factor in Hastings' death; runaway acceleration. They can't demonstrate that. 2) those reports don't mention what was required to implement those abilities: Physically removing processors for a week to discover valid countersigns. 3) This was done with a Prius, which has vulnerabilities that violate the CAN bus standard. Mercedes not only meets CAN standards, but goes beyond them.

This conspiracy theory junk science debases the argument IMO. There was almost certainly something hinky going on here, but if people insist on pushing tin foil hat theories, nobody's ever gonna take it seriously.

The "how" theories are just fun speculation. They really don't do anything (except maybe irk a few industry experts like yourself). What's really driving the conspiracy narrative is the email, the mysterious nature of the crash, and the amount of nondisclosure the authorities have been exercising toward the local press regarding a case they ruled an accident at the scene.

[GoSlash27]

The "how" theories are just fun speculation. They really don't do anything (except maybe irk a few industry experts like yourself). What's really driving the conspiracy narrative is the email, the mysterious nature of the crash, and the amount of nondisclosure the authorities have been exercising toward the local press regarding a case they ruled an accident at the scene.

What the "how" theories do is draw attention away from all of those valid concerns. They make people who share those concerns seem like kooks by association.

It's like how all the wild 9/11 truther conspiracy theories drew attention away from the administration's failures and towards the junk science that "proved" it was an inside job. Everybody who had questions, whether valid or not, ended up getting lumped together as "truthers" and lost credibility as a result.

The arrant speculation about "how" may be fun, but it's definitely not harmless.

[The Patriot]

Well, they've released video of the actual crash. But more importantly, some of Hastings' family members have come out and said that they do not believe this is a conspiracy. That definitively undercuts the conspiracy theories.

http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2013/07/michael_hastings_crash_video.php

[The Patriot]

Completely unrelated topic, but CNN is reporting that there were dozens of CIA operatives on the ground during the Benghazi attack and that the CIA is now subjecting operatives to frequent polygraph tests in an apparent attempt to make sure they're not talking to the media. What the hell is going on? :huh:

http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/08/01/exclusive-dozens-of-cia-operatives-on-the-ground-during-benghazi-attack/

[GoSlash27]

Completely unrelated topic, but CNN is reporting that there were dozens of CIA operatives on the ground during the Benghazi attack and that the CIA is now subjecting operatives to frequent polygraph tests in an apparent attempt to make sure they're not talking to the media. What the hell is going on? :huh:

http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/08/01/exclusive-dozens-of-cia-operatives-on-the-ground-during-benghazi-attack/

That *is* a completely unrelated topic, but there's definitely some "there" there. I think it's exactly what we all thought; the CIA was funneling arms to the Libyans and left them to die rather than going public with it.

[The Patriot]

That *is* a completely unrelated topic, but there's definitely some "there" there. I think it's exactly what we all thought; the CIA was funneling arms to the Libyans and left them to die rather than going public with it.

Is there evidence they were funneling arms? Why were they attacked then?

I'm sorry, I really took a rain check on this whole story as it developed.

[GoSlash27]

Sorry, I meant Syrians, not Libyans.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/05/its-dishonest-to-talk-about-benghazi-without-talking-about-the-syrian-war.html
We were apparently arming Syrian rebels through Libya. It was a covert activity because American public opinion was against doing that. The reason they were attacked is because a large proportion of the Syrian rebels (especially those coming from Libya) are Al Qaeda.
None of this is officially confirmed yet and it might never be, but it's the most likely explanation.

[The Patriot]

Sorry, I meant Syrians, not Libyans.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/05/its-dishonest-to-talk-about-benghazi-without-talking-about-the-syrian-war.html
We were apparently arming Syrian rebels through Libya. It was a covert activity because American public opinion was against doing that. The reason they were attacked is because a large proportion of the Syrian rebels (especially those coming from Libya) are Al Qaeda.
None of this is officially confirmed yet and it might never be, but it's the most likely explanation.

Thanks for the source. It's a lot to process. I'll have to read that article again.

I guess the million dollar question is "why?" Why is the United States engaging in this type of destructive foreign policy? We're willing to fund Al Qaeda in order to see the overthrow of one or two regimes? I just don't know... There appears to be this desire among those paying attention to reduce the forces behind this chaos into something that can be rationalized or easily understood: oil, geopolitics, monetary greed, military-industrial complex, administrative incompetence, political realism. But all of these explanations fall short. I'd like to believe that our US leaders, the CIA, the Syrian rebels, and even Al Qaeda are behaving rationally, that they are pursuing rational goals (good or evil) through rational means, and that the muddied water and the bullshit explanations are just sloppy veneers to cover up what they're really fighting about, but to be honest, it just feels like a shit-slinging contest. You think you have a decent understanding about how the world works and then Arab Spring comes along...

This probably deserves its own thread.

[GoSlash27]

Good call. Done...

[The Patriot]

Looks like San Diego 6 isn't jumping off the conspiracy theory bus anytime soon. Apparently because the LAPD has been sitting on the details for two months now of what was supposed to be a routine accident.

http://www.sandiego6.com/story/Hastings_Death_Examined-20130804

[The Patriot]

Michael Hastings' wife tells San Diego 6 local news that Hastings was doing a story on CIA Director, John Brennan, before his death. The story is scheduled to be published posthumously in the Rolling Stone. Hastings sourced a leaked internal email from a CIA contractor that was released by Wikileaks last year which accuses Brennan of cracking down on investigative journalism to protect the Obama administration.



Obama Leak Investigations (internal use only - pls do not forward) 2010-09-21 21:38:37

Brennan is behind the witch hunts of investigative journalists learning
information from inside the beltway sources.

Note -- There is specific tasker from the WH to go after anyone printing
materials negative to the Obama agenda (oh my.) Even the FBI is
shocked. The Wonder Boys must be in meltdown mode...

http://www.wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/1210665_obama-leak-investigations-internal-use-only-pls-do-not.html

http://www.sandiego6.com/story/cia-director-brennan-confirmed-as-reporter-michael-hastings-next-target-20130812

Conspiracy theories notwithstanding, I wonder if Hastings dug up any dirt.