The man who leaked ISIS records is named! Something doesnt add up!

There is an article tonight about the man who leaked the ISIS records to the media. In the article he is named!

www.express.co.uk...

Something didnt feel right about this when I saw it last night on Sky News it seemed too orchestrated but now he has been named something definitely doesnt seem right! Surely if this man has supposedly been part of ISIS abd has handed over all this information that could bring them down intelligence and the authorities would do everything in their power to hide his identity because of fear of repercussions. Afterall he would be the most wanted man in the world by terrorists.

I dont believe any of this now and I am wondering what purpose it serves. What do other ATS members think is the purpose of this.

a reply to: anxiouswens

What i see from the pics that those documents were very well kept, if you have ever worked in an office you know documents get aged and pigmented, gets wrinkled etc. These are totally white and considering that these were " written" in a warzone and area where dust storms are so common.. i smell fishy.
Name doesn´t say anything there are hundreds with that name Abu and Hamed.

The guy didn't even have a beard.

We hacked them.

Dude in picture is probably already dead.

Probably hacked his IPhone.

Hamed's revelation suggests the depraved extremist network - also known by its Arabic acronym Daesh - is hemorrhaging ideologically driven militants who joined a group espousing fundamental Islamic principles but which is now more concerned with making land grabs in Iraq and Syria.

FWIW, due to the Russians intervening on the Syrian side and the imminent defeat of the insurgency in Syria, there is talk of dividing the country along geographical boundaries. Just like they did in Korea and Vietnam. Thats an old tactic, if you can't win outright, stall for time until you can. That way the caliphate can have its NATO cake and eat it, too.

Kerry's Plan 'B'

I do know they were on a memory stick so I think they will have been printed out by authorities.a reply to: dollukka

edit on 10-3-2016 by Motorhead because: (no reason given)

Sorry you lose me sometime LOL. Do you mean you think NATO are behind this? Sorry if I am being a bit dim but I am new to all these conspiracy theories!a reply to: intrptr

a reply to: anxiouswens

If they didn't name a source, they'd be accused of making stuff up, if they name a source then "Something doesn't add up"

Have I missed something ?

a reply to: anxiouswens

Makes you wonder why those people on the list are not getting the front doors kicked in and the familys carted of to Gitmo
for some questioning .

Well all is fair in love and war they say

a reply to: anxiouswens
Every time the US Intervenes (invades) a country they fabricate an (enemy) to justify their aims for conquest. Anyone who shoots back is the enemy, labeled as terrorist 'xyz' group to blame. And to use to defeat whatever legitimate government remains or tries to rise up.

In Afghanistan it was Taliban, in Iraq, Al Qaeda, In Syria, ISIS. This strategy makes it easier to justify further mal treatment of the population and to punish the same if they try to resist. Both blame and justification are derived in the case of war crimes and the ongoing endless nature of occupation and resistance.

Create the problem, then fix it.

a reply to: anxiouswens

I posted the original Sky News release on this story, and one thing popped out at me during the formatting of the thread. If the data contained on the sticks was so sensitive in nature, and contained actionable information, why wasn't it encrypted? The discovery and content seemed to fall into Sky News hands so conveniently.

a reply to: dollukka

My wife worked in an office setting while stationed in Iraq for a year--the records that she brought back with her (and there were quite a few--she was a court reporter in the Army) looked perfectly fine and in great shape. It's not about where the records are created, it's about how they were kept. And it takes decades for paper to age to a point that you seem to be describing.

And like Anxiouswens replied to you, these probably are not the original documents anyhow.

I don't mean to nitpick your comment, I just wanted you to know that just because documents are created in a desert war zone doesn't mean that they will not survive in good shape.

a reply to: Boscowashisnamo

The whole thing is probably just a cover story so that the west can start acting on all sorts of intelligence that they have obtained via a myriad of other ways without blowing the cover of too many of their operatives, my 2c guess FWIW

a reply to: anxiouswens

The minute I see anything associated with Rupert Murdoch it doesn't feel right, the topic is irrelevant.

a reply to: Boscowashisnamo

Having been in the military and currently working a federal job where I work with sensitive information that needs encrypted at all times, you'd be surprised (or maybe not) how many people don't take encryption seriously.

Hell, not to change the subject or start a derailment, but look at the example that Hilary Clinton and Gen. Petraeus set for properly keeping classified (and other) information encrypted properly.

It's an imperfect system.

One word.....propaganda!

Maybe it is genuine, maybe they have all the documents because they had them all along?

It just goes to show though, that whether they name the source or not, some people find it suspicious. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

originally posted by: Boscowashisnamo
a reply to: anxiouswens

I posted the original Sky News release on this story, and one thing popped out at me during the formatting of the thread. If the data contained on the sticks was so sensitive in nature, and contained actionable information, why wasn't it encrypted? The discovery and content seemed to fall into Sky News hands so conveniently.

Who owns Sky? A full Bona Fide, unashamed Zionist.

But, we shouldn't let a thing like that cloud our critical thinking.

originally posted by: SLAYER69
a reply to: anxiouswens

If they didn't name a source, they'd be accused of making stuff up, if they name a source then "Something doesn't add up"

Have I missed something ?

It's a neat way of putting everything they acquired using surveillance and internet monitoring out in the open. Wouldn't these forms have been sent in electronically if they were on a memory stick? But if you say everything was found on a memory stick, then it can put out in the open.

a reply to: anxiouswens

why would they print all this info for everyone to see? That's what doesn't make sense. If you were intel and you came across this info you should keep it secret so the isis jihadists in this case wouldn't change their names, addresses and phone numbers.