GUILTY Turkey - Sarai Sierra, 33, NY woman murdered, Istanbul, 21 Jan 2013 - #6

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
I remember reading such in Turkish articles, I'll go through that angle and provide sources. Hopefully, ThinkHard will not start to scheme as to how it would be convenient to end my life. :)

Haha no scheme against your life alp :)

I just have a healthy dose of sckepticism in regards to your supposed knowledge of secret opps. It's my belief that anyone who was truly privy to top secret knowledge would not be blabbing about how these organization function on such a public forum.

Inless of course they were intentionally throwing misleading information out there to maintain secrecy :what:
 
Haha no scheme against your life alp :)

I just have a healthy dose of sckepticism in regards to your supposed knowledge of secret opps. It's my belief that anyone who was truly privy to top secret knowledge would not be blabbing about how these organization function on such a public forum.

Inless of course they were intentionally throwing misleading information out there to maintain secrecy :what:

Everything I've divulged regarding covert operations and covert action is very much public and is out there already. I didn't provide any information that is not public.

"...and ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free." John 8:32
 
My educated guess is that "Hatay otogar" is actually Antakya otogar. Stick it into google maps and see marker A.

Correct. In every province, there's a major bus terminal in the center city of the province and there are several minor ones located in counties.

Long distance bus routes almost always end up in major terminals, and from there, if you want to go to counties, you catch local short distance bus services.

Thank you both. This is what I, too, had surmised but was uncertain of. This would call into question the report that Ziya was seen walking toward Reyhanlı, wouldn't it? Given the distance involved, assumedly he would take a local bus there and then walk to the border (which perhaps is what was meant).

The info. about him walking is sort of tacked on at the end of this Turkish-language article:
http://m.haberturk.com/icerik.aspx?CID=1&ID=822183
and is said to have come from his brother (I think). How reliable it is, I have no idea.
 
Everything I've divulged regarding covert operations and covert action is very much public and is out there already. I didn't provide any information that is not public.

"...and ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free." John 8:32

Fair but I highly doubt true top secret stuff is public info.

Again I do not know what happened to Sarai, in no way am I saying with certainty what did. Things just do not stack up for me in this case, and I was seeing/exploring how the peices we know or have heard could fit into another scenario.
 
Fair but I highly doubt true top secret stuff is public info.

Again I do not know what happened to Sarai, in no way am I saying with certainty what did. Things just do not stack up for me in this case, and I was seeing/exploring how the peices we know or have heard could fit into another scenario.

This is a very common experience in discussing information. I had the same sort of impression at the beginning when I wondered why she'd go to Amsterdam for a day. It just didn't make sense to me.

However this is a logical fallacy called "argument from incredulity or ignorance.

The argument from incredulity is a logical fallacy that essentially relies on a lack of imagination in the audience.

The general form of the argument is as follows.

Minor premise: One can't imagine (or has not imagined) how P could be so.
Major premise (unstated): If P, then one could imagine (or would have imagined) how P could be so.


Conclusion: Not-P.


As a syllogism this is valid. The fallacy lies in the unstated major premise. If a state of affairs is impossible to imagine, it doesn't follow that it is false; it may only mean that imagination is limited. Moreover, if no one has yet managed to imagine how a state of affairs is possible, it doesn't follow that no one will ever be able to.


Many things alpmighty has been saying are common knowledge if you are interested in these topics. That's why I appreciate his input so much and others like Yashim and Blackysdress (:please: don't go!)

link to rational wiki that explains more about the logical fallacy below. Not understanding something isn't an excuse to make up theories we "do understand."

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity
 
Ok you can be of that opinion. But I'm of the one top secret info is not public knowledge.

May I say it's not merely my own opinion that certain Confidential and TS level information ends up in public hands; rather it is a solid fact, a reality that can be proven, just as the fact that the Earth is not flat?

I'd be happy to cite many examples if you'd like.
 
May I say it's not merely my own opinion that certain Confidential and TS level information ends up in public hands; rather it is a solid fact, a reality that can be proven, just as the fact that the Earth is not flat?

I can cite many examples if you'd like.

<modsnip>

Top secret information isn't always handled by robot drones that don't open their mouths or accidentally misplace a document.


WikiLeaks - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
May I say it's not merely my own opinion that certain Confidential and TS level information ends up in public hands; rather it is a solid fact?

I can cite many examples if you'd like.

Alp I'm not arguing that information that is meant to be secret can't end up in public knowledge. I just think its impractical to assume the public is privy to all things that are considered top secret.

I'm sure there is plenty that goes on in measures of high security and his secrecy that the public has absolutely no knowledge of, by design.
 
Alp I'm not arguing that information that is meant to be secret can't end up in public knowledge. I just think its impractical to assume the public is privy to all things that are considered top secret.

I'm sure there is plenty that goes on in measures of high security and his secrecy that the public has absolutely no knowledge of, by design.

<modsnip> Ex. if alpmighty and others know some top secret information then it is obviously quite possible for it be known by the public.

With the advent of internet it is also extremely easy to pass that information around very quickly. On web forums that discuss said issues, the information will be picked up and considered common knowledge to those people.

<modsnip>

:twocents:
 
<modsnip>

<modsnip>


I'm curious how we know the CIA is involved at all, if the CIA is top secret and there was a misidentified spy issue at hand, you'd think that there'd be no way in the world that the public would know the CIA is involved?

To me they are just using this story as an excuse to go poking around in Turkey or Syria.

In fact the story about Ziya going to Syria, doesn't seem to make a lot of sense but does give the CIA an excuse to go investigate at the border.

Alpmighty, you'd know more about that than most of us, does this seem weird to you or a real possibility?

Saying the homeless man disappeared over the border of a country he'd never been to before doesn't make a lot of sense to me?

I suppose though, comparatively in the US if someone committed a capital murder in the US they might flee to Canada to avoid extradition to a state that has the death penalty. I'm pretty sure Canada won't send them back.

And even just to go on the run, many Americans would have the idea of escaping over the border to Mexico. It's happened many times.
 
Where did alpmighty say this? :waitasec:


I'm curious how we know the CIA is involved at all, if the CIA is top secret and there was a misidentified spy issue at hand, you'd think that there'd be no way in the world that the public would know the CIA is involved?

To me they are just using this story as an excuse to go poking around in Turkey or Syria.

In fact the story about Ziya going to Syria, doesn't seem to make a lot of sense but does give the CIA an excuse to go investigate at the border.

Alpmighty, you'd know more about that than most of us, does this seem weird to you or a real possibility?

Saying the homeless man disappeared over the border of a country he'd never been to before doesn't make a lot of sense to me?

I suppose though, comparatively in the US if someone committed a capital murder in the US they might flee to Canada to avoid extradition to a state that has the death penalty. I'm pretty sure Canada won't send them back.

And even just to go on the run, many Americans would have the idea of escaping over the border to Mexico. It's happened many times.

CIA already is in Syria, has been for some time.

Shift to sophisticated tactics and the advanced command and control of the rebels in contrast to the beginning of the uprising combined with sophisticated US weaponry ending up in their hands and Libyan caches that were overtaken after Qaddafi's fall ending up in Syrian rebel hands are all indicators of this.

The United States government currently has the incentive to maintain a deniable existence in Syria as not to disturb the delicate balance of power vis-a-vis Russia, the single most powerful Assad ally.

The United States government wants Assad regime to end. Moreover, it is the principal interest of the United States as to ensure the power in post-Assad Syria does not fall into centers of power that might be antagonistic to the United States.

Finally, covert action is singularly under CIA jurisdiction. While USSOCOM units are perfectly capable of direct-action type covert operations, most of such units are not specialized in maintaining plausible deniability in prolonged operations. Operation Neptune's Spear for instance, the killing of Osama Bin Laden was conducted by USN Seal Team 6. However, since it was a covert action, planning and responsibility was CIA's, in particular, the Special Activities Division.

Those who currently assist, arm and help Syrian rebels are Special Activities Division officers.

Now, since Chewy asked specifically whether CIA can use SS murder and the manhunt for Ziya as a pretext for nosing around Turkey, I'll elaborate on that.

The United States government would not need to use CIA for nosing around Turkey. There's already increased US military presence in Turkey, in areas very close to Syrian border. Add to that the fact that CIA operations in Turkey are already official, known and in cooperation with Turkish government and there is little to no reason for CIA to use SS murder to nose around Turkey.

US Embassy in Ankara, which also hosts the CIA station in Turkey is the United States' powerhouse and the principal center of presence in the region. Take a look at the diplomatic cables that were leaked from SIPRnet before, numerically, most correspondence there either originates from or addressed to US Embassy in Ankara.

Turkey and the United States are very much in the same business, ladies and gentleman, and are on the same side.
 
Thanks for the information. I'm still curious if the CIA is definitely investigating this. Do you have any ideas why they would be doing so? Isn't it outside of their jurisdiction?
 
Thanks for the information. I'm still curious if the CIA is definitely investigating this. Do you have any ideas why they would be doing so? Isn't it outside of their jurisdiction?

You are most certainly welcome.

CIA has jurisdiction in covert action and intelligence gathering abroad the United States. That is why FBI is tasked with domestic counter-intelligence operations instead of FBI.

Moreover, FBI isn't known for deploying assets in 'hot' zones or countries that are hostile to the United States.

SS murder is fully under FBI jurisdiction.

However, CIA will be obliged to assist if Ziya is in Syria, as the current principal US presence in there belongs to CIA. State Department doesn't have anything in there, there are no formal relations, so FBI can't just send a bunch of agents and US military most likely wouldn't have permanent presence in Syria. That would solely be CIA. Hence, CIA is bound to be involved.
 
Here is the original Turkish article: http://www.sabah.com.tr/Gundem/2013/02/20/yastiktaki-sac-teli-katili-ele-verdi

And this is what Hasan B. gave as his statement: "Kan örne&#287;i al&#305;nan evsizlerden Hasan B. (34) "Sierra surlarda dola&#351;&#305;yordu. Telefonuyla foto&#287;raflar&#305;m&#305;z&#305; çekti. Yan&#305;m&#305;zdan ayr&#305;ld&#305;. 10 dakika sonra ba&#287;&#305;rd&#305;&#287;&#305;n&#305; duyduk" diye ifade verdi."

As you can notice the words 'telephone' and 'photograph' in bold in Turkish, Hasan B. never said that SS took their pictures with a camera. He said "SS took our pictures with her phone".

There is no camera, my fellow sleuthers. The word camera appearing in the English translation of the article is an oversight on the part of the translator.

This is not the first translation mistake I've noticed that lead sleuthers here wrong. For the same reason, I always insist to theorize and analyze on credible information.

Otherwise, we are bound to go on repetitive wild goose chases.

Be wary of the media reports, for they can be based on faulty translation, or sheer speculation.


Alp, thank you for clarifying. So many things do get lost in translation.

I believe a tourist is a guest in a country and should be respectful of the customs and the inhabitants. A tourist taking singular photos of people (as opposed to being included in a crowded place)that they don't know, and without their permission, especially if they are living in situations of poverty, homelessness, despair, in the personal privacy of a holy place, or simply going about their private life can be considered exploitative and insensitive, in my opinion. Everyone has the right to their dignity.

I interpreted the article as saying the men saw her photographing them, as opposed to "we let her take our pictures".

I was once told by a local of a country that the reason an old man was furious at two women photographing him was because there people believed a photo steals a piece of their soul. The women started laughing.

At any rate, I still doubt SS took their picture, if only because she could have been texting with a phone. I thinks it's more likely they know something more about the situation and are involved. Again, my opinion.
 
You are most certainly welcome.

CIA has jurisdiction in covert action and intelligence gathering abroad the United States. That is why FBI is tasked with domestic counter-intelligence operations instead of FBI.

Moreover, FBI isn't known for deploying assets in 'hot' zones or countries that are hostile to the United States.

SS murder is fully under FBI jurisdiction.

However, CIA will be obliged to assist if Ziya is in Syria, as the current principal US presence in there belongs to CIA. State Department doesn't have anything in there, there are no formal relations, so FBI can't just send a bunch of agents and US military most likely wouldn't have permanent presence in Syria. That would solely be CIA. Hence, CIA is bound to be involved.



Ahhh, so are you saying that the only reason the CIA got involved is because they said Ziya fled to Syria? Is that it? If so now it all makes sense.
 
Alp, thank you for clarifying. So many things do get lost in translation.

I believe a tourist is a guest in a country and should be respectful of the customs and the inhabitants. A tourist taking singular photos of people (as opposed to being included in a crowded place)that they don't know, and without their permission, especially if they are living in situations of poverty, homelessness, despair, in the personal privacy of a holy place, or simply going about their private life can be considered exploitative and insensitive, in my opinion. Everyone has the right to their dignity.

I interpreted the article as saying the men saw her photographing them, as opposed to "we let her take our pictures".

I was once told by a local of a country that the reason an old man was furious at two women photographing him was because there people believed a photo steals a piece of their soul. The women started laughing.

At any rate, I still doubt SS took their picture, if only because she could have been texting with a phone. I thinks it's more likely they know something more about the situation and are involved. Again, my opinion.


When I was in Egypt I wanted to take a photograph of a Bedouin woman in the valley beneath Sinai, what a great picture that would be.

I would imagine though, that Sarai had to know that taking pictures of women could be seen as disrespectful if they were wearing a hijab. But maybe she didn't really understand that men would take it the same way.


It may have been that she was taking pictures of scenery that didn't make sense to the guy, ex, she liked odd subjects, so perhaps he simply assumed she was taking pictures of them.

She didn't seem to use people as subjects, here in NYC it would not go over very well at all.

At the same time, recently there was a great deal of attention given to the film "The Wasteland" The subject of the film was garbage pickers.


Perhaps this may have influenced her and caused her to try to take pictures of the men. I'd like to see if she mentioned it anywhere on Instagram.


http://www.wastelandmovie.com/


ETA Thanks once again alpmighty for correcting the translation.
 
Ahhh, so are you saying that the only reason the CIA got involved is because they said Ziya fled to Syria? Is that it? If so now it all makes sense.

Exactly. There is no jurisdiction or need for CIA per this case within the borders of Turkey. FBI already cooperates with Turkish National Police.
 
I don't think those homeless scavengers would be offended by getting their pictures taken. Also, the tone of Hasan's statement does not show any indication of offense in getting his pictures taken.
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
137
Guests online
1,575
Total visitors
1,712

Forum statistics

Threads
606,393
Messages
18,203,036
Members
233,838
Latest member
jstuff
Back
Top