Britamgate

(See footnote)

I did not have to look through more than three pages of search engine results to confirm my suspicion: This matter is blacked out of American news. A British defense contractor, Britam, was hacked on January 22nd. Hacking is about the only real source of news left to us anymore.

Among the files uncovered was this, an email from the company’s business development director David Goulding to another director, Phillip Doughty, a former British Special Air Services officer:

mail-britam-34012

It reads:

Phil

We’ve got a new offer. It’s about Syria again. Qataris propose an attractive deal and swear that the idea is approved by Washington.

We’ll have to deliver a CW to Homs, a Soviet origin g-shell from Libya similar to those that Assad should have.

They want us to deploy our Ukrainian personnel that should speak Russian and make a video record.

Frankly, I don’t think it’s a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous. Your opinion?

Kind regards David

“Quataris” are residents of that US-backed emirate. “CW” is chemical weapon. A ‘g-shell’ is a bomb consisting of an explosive projectile filled with toxic gas. They want to make it appear as though the Russians are behind it, using Ukrainian soldiers who speak that language and Russian ordnance. The actual filming of the event would be done in Turkey, or as with alleged Libyan atrocities prior to the bombing of that country, Qatar itself.

By exposing this false-flag attack, hackers may have prevented its happening and saved thousands of innocent lives. But the event not happening also discredits the leak as being false.

Can’t win.

But it does appear that the U.S. is determined to attack Syria, and the chemical weapon ruse, successful in Iraq, is the pivot. It ain’t over yet.
______________
Footnote: Worth noting here that release of the Britamgate hacked material via Prison Planet makes it suspect as well. Alex Jones is just too well connected to inside sources to be a true outside source. This could be intended to mislead. Prison Planet is only one of many sources however. Britam admits its file were hacked, but claims that the emails uncovered were spurious, that is, the hacking was real, but that the hacker then made up the emails out of whole cloth. They also imply that Iran is behind this seedy affair, the seediness being hacking of their files, and not the contents.

Reddit has dozens of links on this matter, many duplicates. Among them, one linking to a Daily Mail story, the only mainstream link available, and dead. Scotland Yard is on it, apparently, wanting to uncover and prosecute the hacker. Britam’s security was incredibly shoddy, and the hole was found in a Malaysian site.

From a Reddit source:

After looking at the email headers (see below), I have to admit that the email does indeed look genuine.
The email was sent from “81.156.163.12″ which is a BT Wholesale ADSL IP address.
From there it was then relayed via “smtp.clients.netdns.net [202.157.148.149]“
Finally it was delivered to a local mailbox on that server.
I hate to admit it, but all these facts check out. So with Mythbusters objectivity I have to call this one plausible.

This much is sure: The UN is now claiming that 70,000 Syrians have been killed in this operation, and 875,000 have fled their homes. It has the earmarks of a massive and well-financed attack. Syria was one of seven nations targeted after 9/11, according to Wesley Clark, and Rumsfeld took special pains to rattle his sabers at Syria after the Iraq invasion during the early days before the US was forced to withdraw.

Also for sure: if real, it won’t happen now that it is exposed, if false it wasn’t going to happen anyway. And there’s always the possibility that the Russians are behind the whole thing, as they are very good an intel and chess.

2 thoughts on “Britamgate

    1. One piece of information by itself is never enough to stand. Does it fit with others? In this case I understand that the US, by whatever means wants to bring down the Syrian regime. I also know that the US does false-flag attacks, has no concern for civilians, and has used chemical weapons. So I give this bit of info a high degree of likelihood.

      There are intentional leaks – Assange was long warned that the agencies would begin to use Wikileaks for their own purposes. There’s always that.

      I also know when a “leak” is not a leak, as when the White House leaks its internal memo on assassinations.

      Like

Leave a comment