
Found: British Military Documents, Scattered on the Street
As he was rushing to attend a soccer match in Newcastle, England, Michael Gibbard stepped on a pile of sensitive military documents.
At first, he thought the papers scattered along a street near the stadium were trash, dumped there from a nearby office building. But when he bent down and examined them closely, he was stunned by what he saw.
Names and ranks of soldiers. Detailed base patrols. Drug test results. Codes to weapon armories.
'I thought, bloody hell, this shouldn't be here,' said Mr. Gibbard, a 41-year-old owner of a delivery service.
Mr. Gibbard's accidental discovery this month of what appeared to be hundreds of military documents on an industrial street in Northern England has shocked a country known for zealously protecting state secrets. It also comes as the United States, Britain's close military ally, has been facing its own crisis over the handling of sensitive national security information, after battle plans in Yemen were discussed in a group chat that included a journalist.
But while the United States' security breach came about because of a technological blunder on the encrypted app Signal, the apparent error in the United Kingdom was much more analog.
'I thought a lot of this would be online, and there would be military software you'd need to access it,' Mr. Gibbard said. 'But here it was, printed off for all the world to see. It was very old-school.'
As he picked documents off the street and out of the gutter, he became aware of just how much material, from threat assessments to mundane requests for leave, he had stumbled upon. 'It was like a library of information,' he said.
A Ministry of Defense spokesperson said that the incident was being investigated and that 'no sensitive operational defense information is contained within the documents.'
The papers appeared to originate from a black trash bag slumped against a nearby brick wall. As Mr. Gibbard dug through the bag, he noticed a name repeated on the top of some documents: Catterick Garrison.
Mr. Gibbard, who said he had no interest in the military, didn't know what that was, so he typed the term into Google.
The garrison, he discovered, is a major military base in North Yorkshire, about 50 miles south of Newcastle. It's the largest garrison in the British Army, and home to more than 13,000 people.
'I was like, How on earth has this bag traveled like 50 minutes away?' Mr. Gibbard said.
More surprising, he added, was that the documents had been printed at all.
'You put your safety in the hands of the military and the government to make sure that this information is kept away from us, so it doesn't potentially get in the wrong hands,' he said. 'And they're still printing loads and loads of paperwork out, explaining everything.'
After spending a few minutes reading through lists of weapons and phone numbers of high-ranking officers, Mr. Gibbard began to feel uneasy about the position he had found himself in.
He decided to take a photograph — but only one, he said, because he didn't know if it was legal to have images of the documents. 'I can't imagine the army would let me into the base and start taking photos of all their paperwork, would they?' he said. 'So this felt no different.'
After he snapped an image, he called the police.
When no one arrived after about 15 minutes — and with the kickoff to the soccer match moments away — he collected what he judged to be the most sensitive documents and took them to the police at the soccer arena. They found his tale highly suspicious.
'Their reaction was like, 'Riiiiiight,'' he said. 'I said, 'Wait a minute, I've done nothing wrong here, I'm just passing on the information.''
A Northumbria Police spokesperson confirmed that the department had received a report on March 16 that potentially confidential documents had been found near the center of Newcastle, and said that they had been given to the Ministry of Defense.
When Mr. Gibbard left the soccer match about four hours later, he said, many of the papers were gone, but some remained scattered in the area.
'The timing is quite ironic,' Mr. Gibbard said, pointing to the leaked Signal conversation in the United States.
'I mean, you've got these two powerhouses, the U.K. and America,' who, he said, love to 'brag about how great they are at everything.'
If that's true, he added, then 'we're a country that should know how to handle our military paperwork better — same with America.'

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hill
43 minutes ago
- The Hill
How we are ending Iran's and all other governments' power to censor online
Increasingly centralized control over digital identity and online interactions has led to widespread censorship and ideological engineering, reinforcing a model that strips individuals of their autonomy in the digital world and allows governments to censor content and opinion in the name of national security. The current crisis over the intransigent radical Islamic regime in Tehran, hellbent on the development of nuclear weapons in the teeth of world opinion and Trump administration efforts to prevent it, highlights the need for new technology that can prevent heavy-handed efforts to suppress free speech and manipulate popular opinion. After the outbreak of hostilities with Israel and the beginnings of street demonstrations in Tehran in support of the Israeli effort to decapitate the lawless regime of the mullahs, the Iranian government almost immediately attempted to block all social media apps as protestors flooded the streets and attempted to organize messages and activity in opposition to the regime. The terrified government was able to block most communication via the traditional technology of shutting down access to the central hub, or internet server. But because the social media app Parler (in which I am a major investor) is now designed so that content and speech cannot be pulled offline — even if tech companies, banks, or governments want it taken down — it remained online and saw a massive surge in usage on the part of Iranians opposed to the government. Protestors are now organizing in every major Iranian city on Parler, because its innovative blockchain technology is designed to stop online censorship. Whether or not this spells the end of the mullahs' dictatorship, it spells the end of their lock on information. Parler learned its lesson about the need for a platform impervious to government censorship the hard way in January 2021, when Big Tech colluded with government to destroy its platform. Parler was forced offline after tech giant Amazon, under pressure from American intelligence agencies and other U.S. government entities, suspended server access. The Parler app was also booted from Google's and Apple's app stores after similar strong-arming from Washington. The ostensible reason for the unprecedented action was that Parler had allowed communications seeking 'to incite violence' in the U.S., specifically postings that had encouraged the riots at the U.S. Capitol on January 6. But the motivations for suppressing Parler were related less to incitement of violence (Facebook and Instagram had been the primary means of communication for most of the groups in question) and more concerned with censorship of unauthorized opinion. At the time of its shutdown, Parler had rapidly grown to 18 million users, due to the fact that, unlike other social media platforms, it refused to censor content at the behest of government authorities. While other sites were engaged in active shadow-banning of users, suppression of proscribed opinion, and other forms of censorship, Parler had become known as one of the last bastions of free expression. In just 24 hours, it went from being the number one app in America to digitally extinction. The trauma of being taken offline birthed the project on which I serve as an advisor — OPTIO, a blockchain infrastructure that makes such deplatforming impossible. We are not making it legally or politically impossible, mind you, but technologically impossible. This is the first such decentralized internet network of its kind. It can be used across a variety of applications, including social media, digital wallets, streaming platforms, and enterprise services. By eliminating centralized gatekeepers, we intend to empower users to participate in a transparent, censorship-resistant, and user-driven digital economy. Users will retain full control over their personal information, free from centralized exploitation. For the first time in human history, even a government with total control over its digital infrastructure cannot silence its people. The old playbook of tyrants determined to suppress information and control opinion is now officially dead. Authoritarian governments depend upon the control of information and the ability to disseminate an official narrative to their populations. Views contrary to the government-approved narrative cannot be tolerated, and platforms for alternative opinion or for organizing opposition groups are quickly dispatched. Unfortunately, authoritarian governments can easily use the tools developed over the last 30 years by big tech and the giant social media companies to construct a vast web of surveillance and censorship. And we're not just talking about Iran — this applies to Russia, China, North Korea, and even to the Big Tech-Big Government nexus in the U.S. The power to control information is the foundation of every authoritarian system. But now, that power is obsolete because of a technological innovation bigger than messaging apps or social media. The entire concept of government censorship is now threatened. The Iranian protesters flooding the streets of Tehran aren't just organizing demonstrations, they are demonstrating that the age of digital censorship is over. Big Tech and Big Government wanted to kill free speech in America in 2021. Instead they inspired the invention of a free speech firewall. What just happened in Iran proved that it works. Erik Finman is one of the youngest bitcoin millionaires and a major investor in Parler. He is also a tech entrepreneur and senior strategic advisor at OPTIO.


CNBC
an hour ago
- CNBC
Meta is absent from SF Pride this year, as tech industry retreats from public support of LGBTQ+
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg is staying mum these days when it comes to the LGBTQ+ community. It wasn't always that way. San Francisco Pride Executive Director Suzanne Ford told CNBC she remembers when Zuckerberg personally called the nonprofit to ensure that the company then known as Facebook had a spot at the annual event. As the world's largest LGBTQ+ parade, the SF Pride event has become a symbol representing advocacy and social justice for members of the community. In 2015, SF Pride was prohibiting Facebook from marching at the event because of the company's policies that required people to use their legal names on the social network, Ford said. Members of the LGBTQ+ community were worried that bad actors were exploiting the company's account policy by reporting transgender Facebook users and others who no longer identify by their legal names. After Facebook updated the policy, Zuckerberg called SF Pride's then-executive director George Ridgely to ask him that Facebook be included in the parade, Ford said. The relationship between SF Pride and Meta has since splintered. SF Pride formally cut ties with Meta in March after the company enacted a number of new policies, including a scaling back of internal programs designed to increase hiring of diverse candidates, which CNBC reported in January. Meta also eased content-moderation guidelines as part of its policy changes, which multiple current and former employees told CNBC could instigate more online abuse toward marginalized communities, including members of the LGBTQ+ community. Zuckerberg has also made an effort to curry favor with President Donald Trump, who signed an executive order in January calling for investigations into companies that support diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, initiatives. Since the organization's decision to end its relationship with Meta, Ford said that she hasn't heard from Zuckerberg or anybody that SF Pride used to have a relationship with at the company. Meta will not be taking part in this year's SF Pride festival, set to take place this weekend at San Francisco's Civic Center. The annual parade will be held on Sunday, according to the event's website. The theme for 2025 is "Queer Joy is Resistance." "Why was it so important for Mark back then, and why is it so important for Mark now not to be associated with San Francisco Pride?" Ford said. Meta declined to comment. Meta isn't the only company distancing itself from SF Pride. Other major companies like Anheuser-Busch, Comcast, Diageo and Nissan are also no longer sponsoring SF Pride after years of support, CNBC previously reported. Given that SF Pride shares a geographic center with Meta and so much of the tech industry, the lack of support for the LGBTQ+ community after years of public trumpeting cuts especially deep, Ford said. Google-parent Alphabet has also stopped sponsoring SF Pride this year, she Francisco represents both the "home of innovation" for the tech industry and the "home and the birthplace of the LGBTQ community in the United States," said Ford, adding that it's no mistake why so much innovation comes from the region. "Creative and wonderful people want to come to San Francisco — it's not the drinking water — but they come here because you can be yourself here," she said. "You can love who you love, you can be who you are and you don't have to march to any certain drumbeat." Tech companies represent a little over 15% of SF Pride's overall sponsorship funding for the event. The organization's budget is down $180,000 from their target because of a drop of overall corporate sponsors, a spokesperson told CNBC on Wednesday. There are still large tech sponsorships from the likes of Apple, Amazon and Salesforce, but otherwise, there's a palpable silence from the tech industry this year about supporting LGBTQ+ causes, Ford said. For instance, Ford said that in previous years, her time was often spent speaking to tech companies' employee resource groups in the lead-up to SF Pride, but she has yet to receive any invitation of that kind this year. Ford said she also hopes that OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, who married his partner Oliver Mulherin in 2024, will be more vocal about supporting the LGBTQ+ community and SF Pride. Ford said she briefly met Altman a few months ago to discuss SF Pride, but she has not heard from him since. "One would think that OpenAI here in San Francisco, that they would think that they should be supporting the fabric of the community," said Ford, adding that the lack of support from OpenAI and Altman is "painful because Sam is a member of our community, and he certainly has resources." OpenAI declined to comment. Prominent tech companies like Meta, Amazon and Uber have posted rainbow-coated messages on their websites and social media accounts in years past to show support for Pride Month, which is observed in June, but this year, tech companies' online presence are noticeably less colorful. The threat of a lawsuit coupled with the possibility of a public tongue-lashing by Trump, other politicians and social media has caused many tech leaders and corporate executives to stay quiet on LGBTQ+ issues, said Amy Dufrane, CEO of human resource certification organization HRCI. "Anything that touches the space of DEI, we're seeing companies pull back from that out of fear," she said. Executives who support LGBTQ+ and related DEI issues are doing so under the radar to avoid drawing attention, Dufrane said. For example, a spokesperson for SF Pride said that two tech companies have recently donated to the organization but want to remain anonymous. Ford declined to name the tech companies. "Sometimes people in our community assume there's no good, there's no one at these corporations that cares about us," Ford said. "Sometimes they do, and they don't want the consequences of caring about us." Ford said that the door is still open for Zuckerberg to contact SF Pride, but ultimately, it would be up to the nonprofit's board to decide the next steps. Ford said that Zuckerberg would likely have to make a "commitment to some things that I don't think that he would be willing to do." "We have got to leave space for people to change, we got to leave space like if at Meta there's a leadership change or they come to the realization that this is just bad, the track they're going down is wrong," Ford said. "I want to leave space for them to come and have a discussion with us and to show us that they are in line with our values."
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Google fights monopoly inquiry with attack on UK ‘roadblock to growth'
Google has attacked Britain's competition watchdog after it unveiled a sweeping crackdown on the tech giant's search engine. The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) on Tuesday concluded that Google's search division was too dominant, labelling it as having 'strategic market status'. It prompted a swift response from the Silicon Valley giant, which warned that 'punitive regulations' could delay the launch of its latest innovations in Britain and said the CMA's approach risked becoming a 'roadblock to growth in the UK'. The CMA proposed a series of measures aimed at loosening Google's hold over the internet. These included providing extra choice for users between search products and clear attribution for publishers when their content is used to generate answers using artificial intelligence (AI). It also said it would consider whether news publishers should be paid for how their content is used by Google, although it delayed this decision to next year. Oliver Bethell, the senior director of competition at Google, said: 'The UK has historically benefitted from early access to our latest innovations, but punitive regulations could change that. 'Proportionate, evidence-based regulation will be essential to preventing the CMA's roadmap from becoming a roadblock to growth in the UK.' A source close to the investigation suggested that the CMA was not in 'lockstep' with the Government and its growth agenda. The CMA's crackdown on 'big tech' has clashed with Labour's push to cut red tape and make Britain a more attractive place to invest. In January, Marcus Bokkerink, the CMA's chairman, was forced out by ministers over concerns the regulator was not aligned with Labour's efforts to boost growth. In a speech in December, Sir Keir Starmer took aim at 'the regulators, blockers and bureaucrats' whom he said were hurting the UK economy. On Tuesday, the CMA said its planned measures would 'help unlock broader growth, investment and innovation in the UK tech sector and wider economy'. It will make its final decision on its designation of Google in October. Google search accounts for more than 90pc of all queries in the UK, far eclipsing rivals like Microsoft's Bing and new services such as OpenAI's ChatGPT. The average Briton makes between five and 10 Google searches per day. For years, news groups, rival technology companies, online retailers and travel providers have warned that Google's dominance of the internet has distorted markets and threatened their businesses – prompting competition scrutiny around the world. The CMA's findings are its first under new powers brought in this year, providing it with wide-ranging authority to demand tech giants change how their products work, hit them with fines, or even break them up. The watchdog said it would include Google's AI search tools, such as AI Overviews, within its crackdown, although not its standalone AI app, called Gemini. Publishers have warned that Google's AI Overviews is diverting traffic from their websites. The CMA said it could force Google to show rival search engine products and AI tools on phones or within its Chrome web browser. Sarah Cardell, the chief executive of the CMA, said: 'Google search has delivered tremendous benefits – but our investigation so far suggests there are ways to make these markets more open, competitive and innovative.'