The children killed in the chemical attack near Damascus was staged by U.S. Intelligence

jedi_hamster
reply to post by ML8715

 

forgot to mention (once again, but reading my previous posts is obviously too much to expect), emails from colonel's account (not his wife's) were from military accounts, nearly half of them is signed with digital signatures and i've started verifying those, successfully (details in RATS forum). that means those are real and were sent from military accounts, by military people, with digital signatures signed by US DoD.

My apologies for not being clear, i was talking about the email between furst and macdonald... macdonald's email was a yahoo account in that one.

reply to post by ML8715


true, the receiving account was macdonald's yahoo account, but the sender was [email protected], and email was signed by his digital signature, issued by DoD. i'm still working on verifying that signature, but the certificate itself is clearly valid, so it is his signature, the only thing uncertain is wether the email contents were tampered with.

reply to post by jedi_hamster


His email was hacked. The digital signatures are meaningless. I don't know why you think these are legitimate at all. The writing doesn't even sound like an english speaker. The hacker added bits to real emails. This is so transparently BS... You are beating a dead horse.

whatsup86
Even if you had a 100 mainstream sources; the problem with these kind of mails is that they are just too easy to fake. They dont proove a thing.

edit on 12-9-2013 by whatsup86 because: (no reason given)

There not probably fake, they are. Well I'd say altered. You can clearly see that the sentences in question simply don't fit with the rest of the mail, nor the word choices or word placement. Those were written by someone who thought they understood good English, when in fact they don't.

I read countless email every single day for 11 years. Often from same sources and just as often from new. You begin to recognize when people type their own thoughts as opposed to copying others. Especially when it shares the same body of an email. IMO epic fail. Like "Hi, my name is Sir Fredrick Brooks and I have 10,000,000.00 in $ that needs releasing to someone willing to send me" BAD. Sorry



In fact, this is obviously a distraction, if not an attempt to discredit.

reply to post by jedi_hamster

ATS, where is your common sense? open mind? intelligence? where are your damn brains?
the amount of completely pathetic posts on ATS, with opinions based entirely on "i didn't read a single sentence because i'm too lazy for that, but i know better", is increasing to dangerous levels.

think, people. THINK!

Hmmm, I've been here for yrs., am on ATS hours almost every day, mostly reading and researching what I read. I rarely purport to know much, let alone everything. Now it's only my opinion, but an educated one, that the meat of these e-mails are bogus. It does happen on occasion that I'm wrong but, I don't think so in this case.

You do know that it can be equally as dangerous to blatantly believe things simply because you want to, or if what you are reading fits into an agenda.

It's good to step back, take a deep breath, and try to be objective when looking at information.. especially when what you are looking at might be in favor of y/our own beliefs.

snowen20
reply to post by Variable

 

I'm aware that often times people can shorten sentences, and even put words in the wrong order. But when its between two English speaking people its still understandable and the context Isn't generally lost.

So as much as I try to believe this to be a legit email, something smells like low tide at the docks!

I saw it too and got afraid very much

AND

I’m still thinking about those Syrian kids. Thanks God, they are alive. I hope they got a kind of present or some cash.

I'm sorry, I'm just not feeling it. I need something better before I can honestly do more than take these emails with mountains of salt.

Need more then just salt, it stinks to high heaven. Sad really, because its just more mud added to an already murky situation making it that much harder to reconcile truth. There were after all hundreds of women and children gassed for someone's gain.

reply to post by jedi_hamster

US military uses free email accounts like yahoo or gmail for personal stuff, but they even started to forward all their military-related emails to those - at least those that are unclassified.

A hypothetical here. Let's say the e-mail(s) were hacked. Isn't it possible then, that the hacker added something to the body of e-mail to make it appear as if the actual sender/receiver wrote it ?

Variable
reply to post by jedi_hamster

 

His email was hacked. The digital signatures are meaningless. I don't know why you think these are legitimate at all. The writing doesn't even sound like an english speaker. The hacker added bits to real emails. This is so transparently BS... You are beating a dead horse.

yes, his email was hacked. that's the whole reason of this thread.
digital signatures aren't meaningless, that's one thing - because they CANNOT BE FAKED. it is mathematically IMPOSSIBLE to fake those in any reasonable time, even with the computing power of NSA, CIA and FBI combined.
second thing, when i say they are legitimate - it means i've verified them. signature contains certificate signed by US DoD (public keys of DoD can be downloaded from .mil sites to verify that the certificate is real and valid - and certificates from these emails ARE), and encrypted hashcode of the message contents, which cannot be faked without having the private part of the signing certificate, which is stored on personal smart card (CAC) of the sender of such message. i'm still verifying the signature on the email from Eugene Furst (wether the contents were altered, is uncertain, but the certificate is certainly his). all this info and more can be found in my topic in RATS forum.

but of course it's easier to call it BS, throwing the same "doesn't even sound like an english speaker" crap all over the place. that english-related crap is about colonel's wife's emails, NOT his. did you even bother to read HIS emails? hint: they're not in those fancy pictures. hint 2: it is you that is beating a dead horse, while making yourself look like a complete, uneducated, ignorant fool.

reply to post by RobinB022


in this case, i take nothing on belief. all i'm doing is a scientific research and i'm posting the results. results, which some of you obviously can't swallow.

the ignorance and stupidity on ATS nowadays makes me want to vomit.

PS. i've posted the details of my research in RATS forum on purpose - first, it is not finished, second, i didn't want to attract the newbies to it - but that could be a mistake. besides, i could be posting the contents of emails with the damage done by yahoo mail servers reversed, so that one can simply install DoD certificate from a .mil site, grab the email, open it in outlook express and see with his own eyes that it is real - but posting those would be a violation of ATS rules i believe. i'm surprised this thread is still around.

reply to post by RobinB022


yes, it is possible, but it will invalidate the signature - it'll be possible to detect that the contents were altered. validating the signatures on these emails though isn't that simple, because the email contents were damaged by yahoo mail server. message may be the same, but it's as simple as throwing in one space, change newline encoding, anything, and the signature becomes invalid - and yahoo mail server simply isn't taking the existence of those signatures into account. i wrote a script to reverse the damage and i've successfully verified some of those messages as real and unaltered, but not the one from Eugene Furst. not yet. i'll repeat myself, all the details - together with the script and instructions how to use it - were posted in RATS.

and for those that think it's impossible:
rt.com...

If it was staged to ignite a war for profit (which I personally believe to be the case), then they would not go the trouble and expense of staging a fake attack. It's simpler, much cheaper and more authentic to simply make sure it happened for real impact - a political snuf film with an agenda. Whether that means our govt or corporate put the weapons in the hands of syrian govt or opposition via mercenaries, contractors or black ops, does it really matter?

If you read the hackers release on pastebin you'll notice his grammar is about as bad as the wife's emails.

http:///zeXpsRnh

This is beyond laughable. To think a military spouse, let alone a high ranking military spouse, would email such things is sooooo not close to reality. Officers wives are just as invested in their husbands careers as the husband are. They are very careful about what they say. Do you actually think they would say things like this knowing that all the emails are screened? Come on. If gullibility was money, this site would be full of rich people.

jedi_hamster
and for those that think it's impossible:
rt.com...

Of course! The news front for the Russian govt would never lie. lol. Time to get out the popcorn.

reply to post by Tekner


care to paste an example of colonel's 'bad grammar'? because i've checked all his emails and i haven't noticed any.

reply to post by fenson76


it's not the only website posting that info, and it's not just some online propaganda attempt.

Footage and photos of the alleged chemical attack in Syria, which the US cites as the reason for a planned military intervention, had been fabricated in advance, speakers told a UN human rights conference in Geneva.

Evidence for the Russian case, including numerous eyewitness reports and results of investigations of the chemical weapon incident by activists, was handed over to a UN commission of experts probing the Syrian crisis, the ministry said.

but it's of utter importance to bash it with whatever BS one can spit out, to prevent people from learning the possible truth, right?

OK...since ATS is a conspiracy site...I propose the following. The US with its CIA on the ground in Benghazi were caught transporting and giving chemical weapons or their components to the rebels in either Libya or Syria. This caused an attack on our people there or, the attack was an inconvenient coincidence. Regardless, this forced the government to hide the truth and hide the Benghazi witnesses so this illegal action on the part of our government remained a secret. The plan was to allow the rebels to use the chemical weapons on civilians and give us a reason to get into a fight with Libya, Syria and/or Iran. Obama failed at this plan because the American people didn't want another war, our representatives smelled a rat and with Putin's help...the whole thing fell apart.

Sounds crazy...huh?

jedi_hamster
did it happen? DID IT?

Yes. Obviously it did. I gave multiple sources showing it did. Countries on all sides of this did investigations. The United Nations did an investigation. DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS did an investigation. HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH did an investigation. They ALL say it happened. They just can't agree on who did it.

FACT .. it happened.
FACT .. this thread belongs in the hoax bin.

reply to post by FlyersFan


even if it did happen - and i don't really agree with that yet - that doesn't equal to this whole affair being a hoax.

you see, Eugene Furst hinted at the fact that colonel was involved in staging the whole operation. that's from colonel's email account and that doesn't say if it was done by US military or faked by US military, just that they were the ones responsible.

what would be a hoax in such scenario, would be what was mentioned in colonel's wife emails - and that doesn't have to be true and at the same time colonel's emails may be real. his wife emails could be just altered to add some 'drama' to the whole leak. we really don't know who the hacker was or what his true motives were. it could be true, but only partially. you cannot exclude such possibility.

and if you would read the thread in RATS, you would see that i don't really care about his wife's emails. all that i consider important, are colonel's emails, especially the one from Eugene Furst, because those have digital signatures, that - when verified - are UNDENIABLE proof.

Logarock
reply to post by voyger2

 

Yea they always talk about secret US operations over G-Mail or yahoo. Oh sure.

I take your point, but you should keep in mind that people are often lax. They get comfortable and careless, especially over the internet.

In short, people who should know better, often can't keep their mouths shut or are too stupid to realise that little tidbit they just told their girlfriend can be added to the jigsaw to show the entire picture.

You're a Human being...you know how this sort of thing goes.