Thursday, November 21, 2019

Fraudulent Email for Analysis

How many indicators of sensitivity can you spot in order to indicate deception? 





Hi,

I am writing you this email in good faith but considering the content, I know you will be apprehensive and worried but I am assuring you that, it is made in good faith.

I am Maj. Sethia DAIGRE, female Army officer with the USA Military and currently in Baghdad with the Combat Support Squad, US Base Camp, Speicher - Baghdad, Iraq. I need you to help receive some funds in 2 trunk boxes that's awaiting shipment proceedings with a diplomatic cargo delivery company here in Baghdad.

Kindly review the below links as proof of source of funds:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/feb/08/usa.iraq1
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7444083.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2988455.stm

I do hope you are going to give me your trust in carrying out this project which will be of mutual benefit to both of us.

I will provide you with more details upon receipt of this email on how we'll realize the safe shipment of these boxes via a Prioritized Private Delivery channel without the breach of the law. It's 100% risk free venture. I'm not soliciting for money whatsoever, I do not need your money, rather, I will handle all necessary shipment cost from here for a safe delivery to your location as would be designated by you.

I look forward to hear from you at your convenience.

Maj. Sethia DAIGRE
Baghdad, Iraq.

10 comments:

  1. trying to replace the Nigerian Prince scam.

    well done.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Comments in the negative are sensitive.

    I'm not soliciting for money whatsoever, I do not need your money

    He is soliciting for money and does need his/her money.


    On Tinder, if I see a man write in his bio that's he's not looking for a ONS, then I assume he's looking for a quick hookup.... but I assume that of every man anyway so it doesn't really matter.


    .

    ReplyDelete
  3. This is written by a male whose first language is not English. He himself calls attention to the fraudulent nature of the letter, saying he knows the reader will feel doubt and fear. The entire first paragraph is an effort to persuade the reader. "Good faith" is repeated. I wonder what he means by good faith. As opposed to bad faith?

    ReplyDelete
  4. There are six instances which, in total, indicate an extreme need to persuade that the solicitation is on the up and up.

    "I am writing you this email in good faith, but..."
    "...I am assuring you that, it is made in good faith."
    "...proof of source of funds:"
    "...give me your trust..."
    "...without the breach of the law." (this is illegal)
    "...100% risk free venture." (this is risky)



    "I'm not soliciting for money"
    "I do not need your money"

    Twice stated in the negative - the author wants the recipients money.



    There also is a change of language.

    "...diplomatic cargo delivery company..."
    becomes
    "...Prioritized Private Delivery channel..."

    Diplomatic becomes private, and company becomes channel.

    The delivery company ceases to exist.

    ReplyDelete
  5. “how [we'll] realize the [safe] shipment of these boxes”

    “[I] will handle all [necessary] shipment cost [from here] for a [safe] delivery”

    The word “safe” is included x2 in the email regarding delivery/shipment which shows it is sensitive to the speaker. The word is not needed as the sentences will still have meaning without it.

    In the first quote the speaker uses “we’ll” which seeks to convey unity with the recipient. They seek to from a bond with the recipient.

    In the second quote we see there are extra/unnecessary words used by the sender.

    “[I] will handle all [necessary] shipment cost [from here] for a [safe] delivery”

    The simplest sentence would read:

    “I will handle all shipment cost for delivery”

    We see the extra words in the original quote to be – “necessary”, “from here” and “safe”. We know additional words give additional meaning so we question why they are there. We know from the use of “safe” x2 it is sensitive to the speaker. The speaker has a need to convince the recipient that delivery will be safe. Why wouldn’t it be? Remember these words are the mind of the speaker, they are sensitive to them.

    We question why the speaker feels the need to include the words “from here” in the statement. Even though they have already indicated they are in Iraq they feel the need to mention their location. In their mind it is important that the recipient believe they are in Iraq and are far away. This tells me that the person is not far away in Iraq but has a need to convince the recipient they are.

    When looking at the full email there are a lot of extra words which when analysed show a need to convince. They are there to build a story and a false reality which the speaker hopes the recipient will buy into.

    Adrian.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This e-mail seems legit to me.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "They are there to build a story and a false reality which the speaker hopes the recipient will buy into."




    No sale.

    ReplyDelete
  8. In brief:

    part 1


    "Hi,

    I am writing you this email in good faith but considering the content, I know you will be apprehensive and worried but I am assuring you that, it is made in good faith."

    Starts with pronoun “I,” psychologically placing the subject into the statement. The subject proceeds to use the pronoun "I" two more time in the opening sentence showing strong psychological presence.

    The first thing (priority) the subject wants us to know is that she/he is “writing you this email in good faith” showing a need to persuade when one shouldn’t be necessary. Despite claiming the email is written in “good faith,” the subject them qualifies this by refuting/minimizing what she just said with “but”.

    We mustn't interpret. The subject is not telling us that what she is claiming is honest or true (content), she is telling us that she is writing an email in “good faith” (repeated showing sensitivity): that the email is written sincerely and honestly. We must submit to the language and believe what is being said; she/he ("I") is writing the email sincerely and honestly: she is sincere in obtaining help for her objectives, and it was her that honestly wrote it and no one else.

    The subject tells us we will be “apprehensive and worried” so then we should be. If it enters her language, then we should take note.

    “in good faith” is repeated and “I am assuring you” represent a strong need to persuade (NTP). This NTP shows that the subject is drawing our attention to the integrity of the email. The NTP is so strong that it sounds desperate as it comes from a position of weakness and lack of conviction in one's own words.


    "I am Maj. Sethia DAIGRE, female Army officer with the USA Military and currently in Baghdad with the Combat Support Squad, US Base Camp, Speicher - Baghdad, Iraq."

    The NTP continues with providing detailed information about her/his alleged identity and location. It’s like the subject is saying, “Hey, I must be telling the truth because I am providing detailed information about myself that I wouldn’t do if I was lying.”
    t NTP by allaying the recipient’s concerns.

    ReplyDelete
  9. part 2



    "I need you to help receive some funds in 2 trunk boxes that's awaiting shipment proceedings with a diplomatic cargo delivery company here in Baghdad."

    The subject is not asking for the recipient to receive “some funds” but “to help receive some funds,” leaving unsaid what “help” means or defining what “some funds” are.


    Kindly review the below links as proof of source of funds:

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/feb/08/usa.iraq1
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7444083.stm
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2988455.stm


    The subject is attempting to ingratiate towards the recipient by asking to “Kindly review.” The NTP continues further with providing links as “proof of the source of funds.” The subject doesn’t explain how this is “proof” of the funds.


    "I do hope you are going to give me your trust in carrying out this project which will be of mutual benefit to both of us."

    The subject is asking for the recipient’s “trust” and not claiming to tell the truth. The reason why trust should be given is because “mutual benefit to the both of us.” (Hina clause). The meaning of “benefit” is left unstated. The meaning is for the recipient to interpret it to be a financial one, without having stating so. This is the language of bribery and not expected in an email claiming to be in “good faith”.

    The subject seems to be unaware of the contradiction in her/his own words. First, we are told, the links above provide “proof of source of funds” and then is asking for “trust.” If the links provide the “proof,” as claimed, then why the need for “trust”?


    "I will provide you with more details upon receipt of this email on how we'll realize the safe shipment of these boxes via a Prioritized Private Delivery channel without the breach of the law. It's 100% risk free venture."

    Change of language:
    1) diplomatic cargo delivery company – to Prioritized Private Delivery channel.
    2) trunk boxes – to these boxes
    3) project – to 100% risk free venture
    4) funds – later to money

    No justification can be discerned for the change of language, indicating that the subject is not working from experiential memory and thus likely there are no concrete plans in place for this “project/venture.”

    If there are no concrete plans in place, then there must be an alternative motive for the email. We look to see if the subject provides this with his/her words.

    “safe shipment”
    “without the breach of the law”
    “100% risk free”

    NTP continues with emphasis with attempting to allay any concerns the recipient may have; once again drawing out attention to the questionable nature of the email.


    "I'm not soliciting for money whatsoever, I do not need your money, rather, I will handle all necessary shipment cost from here for a safe delivery to your location as would be designated by you."


    We don’t have to wait long before the motive for the email and cause for the change of language.

    What is said in the negative is always more important than said in the positive; it is very sensitive. Negation often draws our attention to what the subject doesn’t want us to think or hear.

    The subject repeats the already sensitive negation:

    "I'm not soliciting for money whatsoever"
    "I do not need your money"

    With this repeated negation, the subject is giving a strong indication that he/she is after the recipient’s money (not “funds”).

    “for money” changes to “your money”
    “whatsoever” is an unnecessary extra word (but not for the subject) used to bolster the subject’s claim, continuing the strong theme of NTP.

    “safe delivery” is a further attempt a

    ReplyDelete
  10. You’d have to be an idiot to fall for this stuff.

    ReplyDelete