16 votes

U.S. Intelligence Agencies Allegedly Involved in Chemical Attack in Syria - Telegraph.co.uk

August 31, 2013 - The situation in Syria is still in the focus of world media. Experts predict another U.S. aggression for “human rights”. Washington regularly declares its readiness to attack Syria. The official version – to punish al-Assad and Syrian army for the use of chemical weapons against the civilian population.

Meanwhile, the media has spread new proofs of the U.S. intelligence involvement to chemical attack near Damascus. Hacker got access to U.S. intelligence correspondence and published U.S. Army Col. ANTHONY J. MACDONALD’s mail. Macdonald is General Staff Director, Operations and Plans Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence the Army Staff. It’s about chemical attack in Syria.

In the message August 22 Eugene Furst congratulates Col. on successful operation and refers him to Wasington Post publication about chemical attack in Syria. From the Anthony’s wife dialog with her friend it’s clear the video with the children killed in the chemical attack near Damascus was staged by U.S. Intelligence.

Read more: http://my.telegraph.co.uk/debatableopinion/debatableopinion/...

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

The highlighted portions

Of those emails are worded in a way that is completely different from the rest of the conversation that is taking place...

Those parts appear to be written by someone who does not speak English as their primary language.

Don't get me wrong on this, I absolutely believe that the CIA has ties to this chemical weapons attack, but this is not our proof and circulating it as fact is likely to damage our credibility.

Mods, please read the entire body of the emails and see if you do not think it is a different person who wrote the highlight of portions. If you do, please remove this thread from the front page.

Ron Paul convert from the Heart of Dixie

Authentic? Extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof!

There's little in that "debatable opinion" author's 10-day Telegraph account history to persuade me of any news-vetting credibility:


And the "hacker's" post:


seems quite fit to be assumed a fabrication with no reason to think otherwise.

I'd put this claim in the same category as Kerry's proof of a regime attack: smelly.

Linda Cross's picture

Need more evidence? See this video::

If you see something, say something, the government is listening.
Silence isn't golden, it's yellow.

The Britam Emails are fake...

Please see here:


The original creator of the video StormCloudsGathering has now taken it down and uploaded this explanation:


That is not what the video says.

The maker of the original Stormclouds video has arrived at the conclusion that the emails based upon the Britam documents are fake and therefore somehow that the documents themselves are fake.

He did this because he believes that the emails are too perfect and that the time the emails were sent on the two dates in October and December was identical.

I am not technically skilled enough to challenge this assessment on technical grounds but if the information dovetails with other indications that these events took place as described then the mere fact that the emails were sent at the same time on different dates and that the emails were too perfect when all they were was well written, seems to me to be somewhat anal retentive.

Either that or there has emerged an almost pathological commitment to deny the validity of any evidence that cannot be absolutely pinpointed as true. There have been other situations where the debunking has been along the lines of the imperfection of the spelling or punctuation so to say that this time it is suspect because it is too perfect stretches the credibility of the originator.

My own position is to accept all the evidence as presented, assess its validity and truth as best one can and then make a judgement on the balance of probabilities rather than on the grounds of beyond a reasonable doubt. On that basis I would personally accept the emails and Britam documents as being evidence that chemical warfare events were being planned as false flags since there seems to be no good reason why anyone would forge such evidence and make it available.

This also fits with other evidence from other sources so on the balance of probabilities it seems that there has been a plan to stage a false flag chemical event in Syria and this fits with the setting of the "red line" by Obama that such an event would give NATO the justification to intervene in the conflict under the R2P protocol.

"Jesus answered them: 'Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.'" (John 8:34-36)

Did you not visit the links in my above comment?

I am sorry that you think I am "anally retentive" but unfortunately it is undeniable that the emails are fake.

Stormclouds assessment concentrates only on the times and none of the other - more damning - evidence of tampering but has decided not to use the Britam emails in his presentations because of their questionable status.

The hack was real enough, and the files were downloaded from Britam, this has been admitted by a representative of Britam Defence who also said the emails were not originals and proved this with the help of an expert who examined the email headers (link below):


The emails ARE fake and must have been tampered with by the hacker, this is not a "pathological commitment to deny" anything. I downloaded the hackers file dump when they first became available and have subsequently checked the headers on the emails myself, they have exactly the same Message-ID field, this is not possible unless one email is a direct copy of the other, it is a clear sign that they are fake.

Britam Defence email header 2
To see the above screenshot in high resolution click the link below:

Using message id headers to determine if an email has been forged:

But don't take my word for it, lets take a look at what the Internet Official Protocol Standards (RFC2822) are for a Message-ID field:

"The 'Message-ID:' field provides a unique message identifier that refers to a particular version of a particular message. The uniqueness of the message identifier is guaranteed by the host that generates it (see below). This message identifier is intended to be machine readable and not necessarily meaningful to humans. A message identifier pertains to exactly one instantiation of a particular message; subsequent revisions to the message each receive new message identifiers.

Note: There are many instances when messages are "changed", but those changes do not constitute a new instantiation of that message, and therefore the message would not get a new message identifier."


But, as you are not technically minded I will help you to understand in a very simple way that the headers in the Britam emails were tampered with and cannot be the originals.

Take a look at the date in the header of the "Iranian Issue" email, you can either go to the video made by StormCloudsGathering linked here and pause it at 1:17 and take a look at the date (one above the Message-ID), or you can take a look at the screenshot (below) of the one on my computer.

You will see that the date field reads:

Date: "Thu, 16 Oct 2012 15:57:16 -0000".

Now go to a calender and look up that date to see what you find...


To see the above screenshot in high resolution click the link below:

When you have checked for yourself what day the 16th October 2012 actually was, please explain to me how a computer could have made the mistake of generating the wrong day for the date when the user clicked send.

It is all about credibility, all I can do is take the time to present you with the facts. You are free to keep passing this off as "evidence" if you wish, but I would recommend that you stick to all the other evidence out there.

I'm sorry if this disappoints you but the important thing to remember is that there has been no evidence provided by anyone that shows Assad's regime was the one responsible for the use of chemical weapons.

There is on the other hand (like before) a very strong suggestion that they were used by the rebels and the evidence is growing by the day:

Evidence: Syrian Rebels used Chemical Weapons (not Assad):


I watched the video from Stormclouds and it was in that connection that I made mention of anal retentiveness. That had nothing to do with you unless you are Stormclouds. This is quite a common characteristic amongst technically talented people. It is part of their personality profile and is not pejorative.

I have noticed a recent tendency to be super careful about believing evidence presented here of the false flag chemical event in Syria. Why? This is not the first time the elites have used this form of attack and it will not be the last. They demonstrate a willingness to use the same methods over and over again. They worked well in the past when media were more controlled. They are much less effective in the internet era and this is causing them problems.

Personally I have no difficulty believing that this has occurred. Even Kerry's recent assertion that Assad planned something like this last summer tells me that they are the ones who planned such a thing. They always blame the opposition for things they themselves are guilty of. Again, this is just their programmed behaviour, they can't help themselves, they are either clinically insane or demon possessed. You choose. Once you know this then they lose any power to convince you of anything and they always give themselves away.

"Jesus answered them: 'Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.'" (John 8:34-36)


I agree, the propaganda about the chemical weapon attacks is in full force.

I am, like you, convinced that it's another false flag by the very same power structure that spread the bu11$#it about WMDs.

I am with you on that, but you seem to be ignoring everything I have shown you about the fake emails.


If you read this thread again you will notice that I did not offer the video by Stormclouds as evidence of fake emails, I merely offered it to show the explanation that he gave for removing the video (the evidence was in the first link).

Are you even reading my comments or looking at what I have found?

I have shown the emails to be completely fake from my own analysis of the headers and not just presented you with information that I have been given.

Yet you still seem to think that it is me who is in denial.

Do you think that I am somehow undermining the argument against those who are instigating the aggression toward the Syrian regime?

Should I pretend that the emails are real now that I know they are not?

Not once have you mentioned the indisputable evidence I have posted that shows them to be fake.

I am not being super careful about believing the contents of emails I have proven to be as dodgy as the dodgy dossier when it comes to making your case!

By all means, ask somebody who is a little more tech savvy and willing to take the time to go over what I have presented and tell me where I am wrong.

But use the Britam Defence files as evidence at your own peril.

Tell me, do you still think the emails are real?

If so...


No I don't think you are in denial.

I accept that you are absolutely convinced that the emails are fake. Personally I do not have the necessary technical knowledge to judge your contribution one way or the other. I did find the Stormclouds rebuttal unconvincing for the reason I mentioned but other than that I did not read or view anything else.

In any event this entire line of discussion is for me of little consequence. There has been other evidence of a false flag, sufficient to convince me at least that it was. The frenetic claims of the politicians and the corporate media should be enough to raise a large red flag for any reasonable person.

There is a huge body of evidence regarding the aims and motivations of all the main players in this action and they are behaving exactly as expected. What more need be said? The emails relating to the Britam documents may or may not be fake. For me they are an insignificant peripheral action that have little bearing on the main body of evidence and may well be being used as a distraction.

My advice for what it is worth is to forget about the emails and the documents. So they were fake. No doubt there will be many claims and counter claims before this is over. They are not important. For most people their minds have been made up on this issue. Certainly mine has and I am not about to change it because some emails are proved to be fake.

I have been following these wars for years and have absorbed large amounts of data both good and bad, true and false. The underlying theme however has never changed and it is being played out day by day, week by week, month by month, year by year. I and others are watching for the collapse of the entire world system that started in mid-2007 with the sub-prime crisis. WWIII started on 9/11/2001 and has been expanding ever since. It will end with the destruction of Jerusalem.

The powers who are engineering these events are in the last days of their existence and are desperately trying to complete their plan for world domination. They will not succeed because the spiritual powers arrayed against them are the highest in the universe. The outcome of it all will be much much better than most people are expecting. We are not among those looking for Armageddon. Armageddon is already underway and has been for many years. We are looking for the consummation of the Age and the restoration of all things.

"Jesus answered them: 'Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.'" (John 8:34-36)


I don't buy that and call BS!


You are SUCH a stance for the respect of the truth. Damn, it's late, but your persona is wonderful here.

Take good care of your chickens.

Thanks base

Chickens are cared for.

Dead in the Water

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ujoc1DYjuPE explain that one buddy!

░░░░░███████ ]▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ----------------O

Allrighty then buddy!

The USS Liberty was a spy ship, a big ear, floating just outside Israel in international waters. Why the crew chose this place to sunbath and enjoy the Meditrannian weather, the US Navy is not telling.. but there USS Liberty was, right in the middle of a war zone.. Israel and Egypt were struggling through a peace plan (which they achieved no thanks to the USA).

Israel flew over. Anyone who jknows anything about Israel knows that Israel has taken a stringent line of defense, and attacks anything seen as a threat. Every military on Earth knows, Israel will shoot to kill forst and ask questions later because it's recent creation has been perpetual wars, started against them.

Israel took out the USS Liberty because the USS Liberty had no business being close enough to spy on Israel, international waters or not, and Israel is correct, which is why the USA nevr paid the USS Liberty the respect her crew deserved. They were only doing what they were told to do, and whoever told them to do that, put them in harm's way and they were killed in vain. No one knew until a few years ago.. now it's used as a anti-Jew story, but it's not Israel who was wring for the USS Liberty. It was the USA who let us down. Israel was just Israel. We should all be like Israel.

Cognitive dissonance have anything to do with it ?

History is loaded with examples of false flag operations to start wars.
This goes back to the days of Rome...

We might have no proof that the posts above are true...but also we don't have any proof that this is UN-true.

So how can you claim to know the truth, and label it as BS when you don't know for a fact and nobody else does either...

Its just as plausible for there to be a false flag event...
Especially when you look at historical president, and the money to be made from war profiteers in starting another God dam War.

Did you learn one lesson at all from the vietnam war...are you clueless about war profiteering, or how much money was made from dragging on that conflict?

This rumor of chemical weapons use in Syria has been kicked around for the last year....


"Take hold of the future or the future will take hold of you." -- Patrick Dixon

Since I began studying Israel

I have come to understand many things that those who are stuck on zionists and religion and the palestine lie can't see through to pick up on.

Why is it OK for Russia to profit and not the US?

So let me see if I get this

So let me see if I get this strait; President Obama wants to loan Al-Qaeda in Syria the US Navy and Air Force to bomb their enemy President Bashar al-Assad. Did I get that right? What the hell is going on here?

wtf gtfoh

This can't be real -too over the top

Government is supposed to protect our freedom, our property, our privacy, not invade it. Ron Paul 2007

Truth cant be real ?

How do we know that....

After-all there was never a conspiracy to kill JFK. or for elements in our own government to bring down the twin towers ....right ?
Maybe that was just too over-the-top ?

Truth is sometimes stranger than fiction.. many times throughout history, this has been the case.

But lets step back and ask ourselves.... what do we know ?

Truth is always the first casualty of WAR.

Who benefits...the most ?


"Take hold of the future or the future will take hold of you." -- Patrick Dixon

Is this a credible source?

Is this a credible source? The writing left much to be desired. It read like it was written by someone who uses English as a second language eh?

That is an interesting comment.

In the comment above by Swifty you will find a link to a video from Stormclouds that withdraws its support for the emails and documents from Britam published in its previous video.

One of the reasons given for its withdrawal is that the emails are "too perfect" and that the writer is obviously an English native speaker...the exact opposite reasons for your incredulity regarding the article in the Telegraph. This is precisely the case I have pointed out in my response to Swifty's comment.

So, whether it is the one or the other we are now supposed to discard all evidence for opposite reasons.

"Jesus answered them: 'Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.'" (John 8:34-36)

it looks like an open blog

it's my.telegraph.co.uk and it says 'debatable opinion'