Wednesday, October 3, 2012

Bank Hacking a False Flag Hoax

"VIRTUAL 9-11: Will Israel Hack The US Banking System Computers and Falsely Blame It On Iran?

Netanyahu didn't get any traction at the UN today. Indeed his bomb chart has become an object of ridicule in the alternative media. By now he is throwing a huge tantrum. He wants his war and Netanyahu is a man used to always getting what he wants.

There are only three things Netanyahu can do now to get the war with Iran going before the Israeli elections next month.

The first is to simply go ahead and attack Iran, expecting that the United States will protect Israel from the counter-attack even if Israel struck the first blow.

The second option is a false-flag attack somewhere in the world to be blamed on Iran, but that is a very chancy option given the video of WIMEA lobbyist Clawson actually selling the idea that a false flag to start the war with Iran is a great idea.

The third and final option, and the one I am starting to think is the most likely, relates to the sudden flurry of media stories and statements by people like Joseph Lieberman about how Iranian hackers are attacking the US financial system computers. (Senator Lieberman has also been pressuring Obama to sign an executive order to take over the internet.) Of course, the common sense approach still applies. Why would Iran, which wishes to avoid a war, do something that provocative.

But we know that the US and Israel are behind the cyber-weapons like STUXNET, DUQU, FLAME, etc., that these cyber-weapons were directed against Iran, and that one variant specifically targeted banks in Lebanon and Iran. We also know that the US financial system is stretched to the breaking point, and we know that if the government of either Greece of Spain is driven from office by angry protests, credit default swaps sold by Wall Street against those debts come due, and there is no money to pay the claims. The Euro might even collapse, and that would trigger even more Credit Default Swaps. So the final option, one that strikes me as very likely, is that Israel will take down the US financial computers, and blame it on Iran. This also gets Wall Street and Washington DC off the hook, because now the financial melt-down is an act of war, rather than the result of decades of Wall Street crime and corruption and the predations of Private Central Banks. US banks have already been hit with cyber attacks over the last two weeks, to set the stage. And this would also explain why the US corporate media has paid scant attention to the riots in Spain and Greece so that Americans still dependent on ABCNNBBCBS will remain oblivious to the fact that the Euro is falling apart.

This scenario also explains the testing of means to interfere with DNS to silence websites that may offer opposing interpretations of events (this too will be blamed on Iran).

Such a cyber false-flag also gives the US Government the excuse to take total control of the internet so that those pesky truth-seeking bloggers don't give the slaves uppity ideas that this is just another war-starting hoax like the attack on the USS Liberty or 9-11.

PLEASE REPOST THIS THEORY TO YOUR SOCIAL NETWORKS. If we can make them doubt that the official story of a financial system computer crash will be believed by the public, we can get them to call it off! If the bank computers and alternative media do crash, the US/Israel did it!

Between the possibility of a false-flag hack attack, or the collapse of the Eurozone, or just the continuing fraud by the US financial system, you should only have as much money in the banks as is needed to cover your outstanding obligations, and you should have the rest of your money under your own personal control in case those bank doors do not open and the ATMs stop working." 


"Six big banks targeted in online attacks; Group claims credit, cites anger over Islam video" by Nicole Perlroth  |  New York Times, October 01, 2012

NEW YORK — Six major US banks were hit in a wave of computer attacks last week, by a group claiming Middle Eastern ties, that caused Internet blackouts and delays in online banking.

Excuse me while I go get my waders on. The bulls*** is bound to be thick. 

Frustrated customers of Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, US Bank, Wells Fargo, and PNC, who could not get access to their accounts or pay bills online, were upset because the banks had not explained clearly what was going on.

‘‘It was probably the least impressive corporate presentation of bad news I’ve ever seen,’’ said Paul Downs, a small-business owner in Bridgeport, Pa. ‘‘This is extremely disconcerting.’’

The banks suffered denial-of-service attacks, in which hackers barrage a website with traffic until it is overwhelmed and shuts down. Such attacks, while a nuisance, are not technically sophisticated and do not affect a company’s computer network — or, in this case, funds or customer bank accounts. But they are enough to upset customers.

A hacker group calling itself Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Cyber Fighters — a reference to Izz ad-Din al-Qassam, a Muslim holy man who fought European forces and Jewish settlers in the Middle East in the 1920s and 1930s — took credit for the attacks in online posts. 


The group said it had attacked the banks in retaliation for an anti-Islam video that mocks the prophet Muhammad. 

Proving ONCE AGAIN that that piece of propaganda was an INTELLIGENCE AGENCY CREATION. 

It also pledged to continue to attack US credit and financial institutions daily, and possibly institutions in France, Israel, and Britain, until the video is taken offline. The New York Stock Exchange and Nasdaq were also targeted....

Security researchers said the attack methods were too basic to have taken so many US bank sites offline. The hackers appeared to be enlisting volunteers for the attacks with messages on various sites.

On one blog, they called on people to visit two Web addresses that would cause their computers to flood banks with hundreds of data requests a second. They asked volunteers to attack banks according to a timetable: Wells Fargo on Tuesday, US Bancorp on Wednesday, and PNC on Thursday.

But experts said it seemed implausible that this method would create an attack of this scale.

‘‘The number of users you need to break those targets is very high,’’ said Jaime Blasco, a security researcher at AlienVault who has been investigating the attacks. ‘‘They must have had help from other sources.’’

Those sources, Blasco said, would have to be a group with money, like a nation, or botnets — networks of infected computers that do the bidding of criminals. Botnets can be rented through black-market schemes that are common in the Internet underground, or lent out by criminals or governments.

Once you have read the AmeriKan media long enough you recognize the codespeak.

Six Zionist Companies Own 96% of the World's Media

Declassified: Massive Israeli manipulation of US media exposed

Operation Mockingbird

Why Am I No Longer Reading the Newspaper? 

Any wonder why I'm sick of them?

Last week, Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Independent of Connecticut and chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, said in an interview on C-SPAN that he believed Iran’s government had sponsored the attacks in retaliation for Western economic sanctions. 

I'm so glad he is leaving the Senate (only reason being he couldn't steal another election).

The hacker group rejected that claim. In an online post, it said that the attacks had not been sponsored by a country and that its members ‘‘strongly reject the American officials’ insidious attempts to deceive public opinion.’’

James A. Lewis, a computer security expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said that in this case, the attack methods used were ‘‘pretty basic’’ to have been state-sponsored.

But he added that even if the attacks were not the work of Iran’s government, the state would be aware of them because Iran monitors its networks extensively....


RelatedWhite House says it thwarted a cyberattack

Blaming China for it (pfft). 

Also see: The Two Worst Countries in the World

Make that three. 

And why would a "friend" be spying on us anyway?