Syrian Rebels Told to Expect Western-Led Strike in Days
August 27th, 2013I don’t know, so I’ll ask you guys.
Read about the Britam Defence hack that occurred back in January and then vote below.
Loading ...My guess is that there’s just about zero chance that such a conversation would be stored anywhere in cleartext.
But then again… Here we are.
Via: CBC:
Syrian opposition leaders have been told to brace for a foreign strike against President Bashar al-Assad’s regime within days, according to sources who attended a meeting with the Syrian National Council in Turkey.
“The opposition was told in clear terms that action to deter further use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime could come as early as in the next few days, and that they should still prepare for peace talks at Geneva,” one of the sources who was at the meeting on Monday told Reuters.
Reuters reported that the notice came from “Western powers” and that Syrian opposition leaders have also handed over a wish list of targets should a possible strike be imminent.
Deleted: U.S. ‘backed plan to launch chemical weapon attack on Syria and blame it on Assad’s regime’
Related: Why would Assad invite a Western intervention by using WMDs in a war he was winning?
The Daily Mail story is what I would call a ‘credibility spoiler’. In this time of the open internet there is always a risk the truth of a covert operation will leak – or that someone will put two and two together. The truth cannot be hidden – but the truth *can* be camouflaged. The business of Infowars is putting out stories that *look* like they challenge the government narrative, but all they achieve is to confuse anyone who doubts the government narrative. This is deliberate. Why does Infowars look and feel so much like the main stream media it supposedly exists to challenge? Why does Alex Jones act like such an oaf? Anyone who naively digs into this chemical warfare story will be led to this Daily Mail story and from there to infowars.com and from there to some youtube video of Alex Jones ranting like a nut. Now they are tired and confused. Perhaps they give up. This is deliberate.
So, no, coming from Infowars this story is almost certainly not true. But it is probably a bit like the truth – similar enough to discredit the truth. Similar enough to hide the truth.
The only strategy to conceal the truth in the age of the internet is to make *multiple* *false* copies of the truth so that the truth cannot be found. This could be a single story, or it could be an *entire website*. See Cyber-Herding and Cyber Activism: Countering Qutbists on the Internet
At first glance I find it hard to believe somebody working for a defense contractor would have files in plain text like this, let alone plain text files containing user names and passwords to everything… but then again the NSA put their entire surveillance program on PowerPoint slides to show off to new personnel so anything seems possible.
@dt
Why make this about Infowars and Daily Mail? They aren’t the sources on this. The fact that they mentioned something doesn’t have to mean that it didn’t happen.
I see this all the time when people submit Cryptogon posts on other sites. Comments always follow attacking the stories based only on the fact that they appear on Cryptogon! Conspiracy theory! Conspiracy theory! haha. This is just bozoism.
I’m absolutely open to arguments that the email in the hack described above isn’t genuine, but the fact that Daily Mail and Infowars mentioned it doesn’t do much to sway me that way.
I was aware of this story when news of it originally broke. You may have noticed that I didn’t publish it back then… based on my knowledge and background in IT. I only mention it now because the script is now actually in play.
This could very well be a case of: It’s not what happened, but it’s how things are. In other words, maybe the hacked email was a hoax, but the U.S. has gone ahead with a false flag chemical weapons attack anyway. I should have had that as a third option on the poll above.
I definitely would have chosen the third option if it was offered.
The key points to me are that the US and UK are supplying conventional arms and chemical weapons to terrorists on their payroll for use in Syria. Why should a hack (either real or fake) make people suddenly believe that false flag attacks don’t happen.
Step back and look at the big picture. Follow the money. Why would Syria use chemical weapons after Obama stated that chemical weapons use were his “line in the sand”? So do you think the Syrian government also conveniently hacked the NY Times and Twitter this week?