False-flag attack? Syria to be invaded?

[Dark Sage]

Uhm, a flash drive?

Maybe you've heard of these things? You can buy them at a Radio Shack for fifteen bucks. And they're small enough to clip onto a keychain.

That's how Osama Bin Laden kept in contact with Al Qaida while he was holed up in that place where the SEALS found him. His computer had no access to the internet so that no-one could trace him and find out where he was.. So he downloaded everything onto a flash drive, then gave it to someone who worked for him, who took it to an internet cafe, and and sent whatever message he wanted to send.

[Blademaster]

Finally, we're making some progress.

Now, as you might be aware, a flash drive typically plugs into a USB port.

Now - and this is a tough one, so take a minute to think it over - what ELSE can be plugged into a USB port...?

[Dark Sage]

Don't insult my intelligence Blade, I know that you're talking about a modem.

But not if the owner doesn't want to.

And they don't. So they do not. Their main computers have no modems. Thus they have no connection to the internet.

You think I'm stupid, but I'm not.

[Blademaster]

No, Dark Sage, I'm not referring to your obsolete dial-up machine.

My point was simply that flash drives aren't the only things that can connect to USB ports. Remember, 'USB' is short for 'Universal Serial Bus.' The keyword here is Universal. Flash drives, modems, USB cables, phone lines, Ethernet, Bluetooth, printers, scanners, readers... The point that I was trying to make is that there are many ways to connect things to a computer.

And in terms of Internet/internet access, the USB port needn't be involved at all. Ever heard of a router? A network adapter? Wi-Fi?

Unlike you, I'm not TRYING to be insulting. However, I honestly do not know how to make this clearer:

Everything you have claimed so far that I've responded to, I've disproven.

You claimed that corporate and government computers don't utilize LAN's, as many PC games do. I debunked that claim by showing you that networks such as SIPRNet and JWICS (used by the Departments of Justice and Defense, by the by) use LAN.
You claimed that nobody (later edited into 'nobody of merit') would bother to discuss what this thread was initially about, despite Britam itself making a statement yesterday to the VOR about the issue. Another claim debunked.
And now you're claiming that a "computer owned by the FBI or a similar agency that has confidential information cannot be hacked into by an outside source because it has no modem, and NO connection to the Internet at all."

That is absolute rubbish. That exact scenario has happened before.

The computer in question was "owned by the FBI," and it contained "confidential information." And yet it was hacked.

Now, I personally do not know if this laptop had a modem built in, or if it was connected to the Internet at the time.

But what I do know is this:

If the answer is "No.," then your claim that such computers cannot be hacked has been contradicted.
If the answer is "Yes.," then your claim that such computers have no Internet connectivity has been contradicted.

And if you don't feel that the identities of millions of people are confidential enough to put on secure databases supercomputers, then perhaps you should provide a more specific example in your counterargument. Just be forewarned: I'm already aware that hackers have, in the past, successfully infiltrated government affairs up to and including the Pentagon.

Twice.

[Roy Karrde]

May I ask, what the hell does this have to do with the original topic? Now I know how a outsider felt looking at the Presidential thread

[Dark Sage]

Blade is trying to tell me that the FBI and CIA have computers that could be hacked, and that the conspiracy theory he dug up could be true because that's where someone got it from.

My arguement is that the theory is BS, seeing as no attention is being paid to it, no-one in any government seems concerned, and no media outlet with any revelence is reporting it. (Except The Daily Mail which, as you said, retracted it. Why to media outlets do that? Usually because a story is fake and they don't want to be sued for slander.)

I'm trying to tell him, in simple terms, that the reason they can't is because they simply aren't connected to the internet, but it doesn't sink in. This trick worked for Osama Bin Laden for years. His computer in that place he was hiding out at was un-hackable and untouchable, and the information on it was completely safe. Why? No internet connection, that's why. It's one of the reasons it took so long to find him.

But we eventually did find him, so I would say that our government is smarter than he is. So I think it's safe to say that our government agencies (who are headquartered in buildings with much better facilities than THAT place) use an even better variant of the same trick in order to keep their databases safe.

[Heald]

I have a feeling I might need to lock this thread due to the sheer amount of stupidity and ignorance that it is revealing. If either of you need a crash course in how computers actually work, take it to the Binary Forum. Wasn't this originally about Syria?

[Dark Sage]

Yes, Heald, he claimed he had "uncovered" a rumor about Great Britain invading Syria and starting World War III, and believed that his life may be in danger because he was posting it on this website, of all places.

Now, honestly, seeing as you live in Great Britain, and likely know about their government better than he or I do, can you tell me what your take on this is and what the chances are of it being true?

[Roy Karrde]

Alright I did a check and I believe I can bring this to a end.

The Voice of Russia did some check into these emails, first the Voice of Russia is a Russian Government sponsored newspaper as such they have a interest in protecting Syria.

Now, BritAM WAS hacked, this has been confirmed by BritAM itself, many emails in the release ARE genuine.

The hacker however ALSO placed some fake emails in there about chemical weapons and a false flag. Now, the hacker went to great length to make them appear genuine, including getting to the point that the only way to prove the email IDs are false, is for BritAM to release their complete server records.

http://english.ruvr.ru/2013_01_31/Sy...ritam-Defense/

THAT being said, Dark Sage you should be ashamed of yourself, just looking at your last post I can tell you that Blademaster never said his life was indanger, nor did he say that he uncovered the emails. He said found them posted on 4chan, something which many people saw them and it spread like wildfire across the net. Your previous post shows how you can wildly make up things people say in a attempt to discredit them.

At the end of the day, that seems more embarrassing than ANYTHING Blademaster has posted.

[Blademaster]

My arguement is that the theory is BS

Again, this is a possibility I've acknowledged since my earliest posts.

seeing as no attention is being paid to it

If no attention was being paid to it, this thread and multiple articles wouldn't exist. Question their reputability until you're blue in the face; what exists, exists. What doesn't, doesn't. You shaking your head at fact doesn't make it untrue.

I'm trying to tell him, in simple terms, that the reason they can't is because they simply aren't connected to the internet, but it doesn't sink in.

And I'm trying to tell you, in simple terms, that our government uses a slightly more modern and intuitive information database than some sand jockey with a camera and a reputation of being unmatched at hide-and-seek.

Again, I don't claim to know how to hack. Yes, a computer that's totally isolated from any other computer or any connectible device obviously doesn't have an Internet connection. You can't connect without a connection. It baffles me that this needs to be explained to you.

However, if you honestly think every computer with a classified file on it in the U.S. government is hidden in a separate cave off the grid and secrecy is maintained by having a pony express of IT guys running flash drives and CD's (which, again, can be and have been stolen regardless) around the country/world to everyone who needs them, then I don't know how to respond to that.

As for you, Heald, you let the election thread live. I demand this thread be allowed to stay on the grounds that it's been far less derailed and in a far less aggressive manner than that thread was. Hell it even got awards for that.

[Dark Sage]

Why would the U.S. Government take risks when they don't have to?

I know they take them all the time in the movies, but in real life, they don't.

[Blademaster]

...What does risk-taking have to do with this? What are you even arguing right now?

That bin Laden's computer security is better than the entire U.S. government's because he kept it hidden in a hole on the other side of the planet for ten years?
That bin Laden inspired the government to disband their entire network and implement an identical 'security system' to his own because of said evasion?

You've lost me. I don't even know what argument I'm responding to right now.


Also in case you skipped Roy's post, the e-mail I linked in the OP was false. Feel free to "laugh at my face bad(ly)." I can't help but feel that my precautionary claim is/was one of the less embarrassing things posted in this thread so far, even by me.

Just a hunch.

[Dark Sage]

Don't worry, Blade, I've seen LOTS of conspiracy theories in the past year alone that were more pathetic than that one.

The one that Orly Taitz suggested about the Sandy Hook shooter being drugged and brainwashed by the Obama Administration didn't even get as much attention as yours did.

[Blademaster]

OH SHIT!

[Heald]

I like how killing 93000 people with conventional weapons is not an atrocity but killing 200 people with gas is.

[RedStarWarrior]

I like how killing 93000 people with conventional weapons is not an atrocity but killing 200 people with gas is.

Chemical and biological weapons are frowned upon globally, meaning less backlash from helping. We are looking at buying then weapons now anyway, since the government forces are fighting alongside radical Islamic terrorists.

I think our largest reason for holding back was that we didn't want it to end up like Afghanistan did. We help them free themselves and then the people we helped turn against us.

[Heald]

Chemical and biological weapons are frowned upon globally, meaning less backlash from helping. We are looking at buying then weapons now anyway, since the government forces are fighting alongside radical Islamic terrorists.

No shit, but if someone asked me if I'd rather have 1 family member gassed or 10 shot to death, I know which one I'd prefer over the other.

In what sense isn't the reaction that leads to a metal slug being explosively projected from a tube not chemical anyway?