by Joseph P. Farrell, Giza Death Star:
This week has been one of those weeks where the choice of what to blog about has been so difficult, because there are so many important stories worthy of our signature “high octane speculation treatment.” Indeed, I am starting this week’s blogs by writing about a story that I fully intended to blog about within a few days of its emergence, but other stories crowded it out. It is nevertheless something that in my opinion deserves a little attention precisely because of the speculative implications that it raises. I am talking about the secret service raid on various apartment sites to the northwest of New York City that had been secretly converted and networked into warehouses for a massive – and apparently secretive – server farm that was allegedly designed to create massive “denial of service” attacks in the New York City metropolitan area during the United Nations General Assembly (story shared by many of you, but I am referencing this version of the story that P.T. and many others of you shared):
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
Secret Service Dismantles Weaponized SIM Farms Designed To “Shut Down” NYC Cell Networks
Note what the opening paragraphs of this story actually state:
Hours before President Donald Trump’s address to the United Nations General Assembly, the U.S. Secret Service announced that it had dismantled a massive, decentralized SIM farm network, just 35 miles from New York City, hidden inside five abandoned apartment buildings. The telecommunications stealth weapon was capable of paralyzing regional cell networks through denial-of-service attacks.
Key Details from the Secret Service Report:
Investigators seized 300 SIM servers and 100,000 SIM cards across multiple sites.
The devices enabled anonymous threats, encrypted communications, and could launch telecom attacks such as:
- Disabling cell towers
- Denial-of-service attacks
- Secure communication for criminal enterprises
Early analysis shows links between nation-state actors and known criminals.
CBS News described the seizure as the largest of its kind, noting the network was scattered across abandoned apartment buildings at more than five sites, roughly 35 miles from New York City. (Italicized emphasis added).
You’ll note that the article itself initiates the process of high octane speculation by citing the actual Secret Service report which in turn states that the parties behind the creation of these server networks were “nation-state actors” with “links” to “known criminals”, in other words, that the operation of constructing the server sites was done by a cooperation between intelligence services of state actors and organized crime. The second component initiating our high octane speculation is the conclusion drawn in that report that this network would have been capable of massive disruption of communications, while securing communications for its own activities. The timing of the raid – mere hours before Mr. Trump’s address to the UN General Assembly – suggests strongly that we are not being told what the ultimate plan or use of these servers may have been, but the implication may be drawn with a measure of certainty that whatever operation as might have been the purpose behind all this, it may have had something to do with the gathering of world leaders for the General Assembly meeting. In other words, the operation that was foiled – whatever it was – was massive in nature, and perhaps was designed to literally kidnap many leaders and hold them – and the world – hostage to whatever demands may have been made.
In other words, there is much more to this story than we are being told: (1) what was the real purpose of the operation? (2) How did the Secret Service come to learn of it?
The answer to the second question is implied by the very fact that the mission brief of the Secret Service is the protection of the President and certain government officials, and hence, we may reasonably infer that there was a palpable threat against them. This is true regardless if the Secret Service was informed by other intelligence and security agencies, or if it had developed its own sources of information, or some combination of the two. How was such an operation discovered? Was it merely through tracking purchases of the servers and noting their shipment to a concentrated area? Or was it by tracking the people who had to network them together? Or again, some combination of the two? Or was it by the “old-fashioned” method of someone within the operation ratting out the operation to the government? Again, we are told little, and probably for the very reason that being told the answers to these questions would reveal too much about domestic security and counter-intelligence operations.
