WHY make a fake GCHQ slide?

Shelley shelley at misanthropia.org
Mon Oct 12 08:14:26 PDT 2015



On October 12, 2015 8:00:55 AM Travis Biehn <tbiehn at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm not accusing Mike of misrepresenting his 'findings.' I think that's a
> clear misread on his part.
>
> -Travis

Really?

 > >> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 10:02 AM, Travis Biehn <tbiehn at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Mike,
> >> > You haven't proven that they were fake. Being able to counterfeit a
> >> dollar
> >> > bill does not all dollar bills counterfeit make. It's been one giant
> >> navel
> >> > gazing exercise.

You're contradicting yourself.

What's frustrating is that I know you're not ignorant nor are you a troll 
(which can't be said for everyone inexplicably belaboring this issue.)

*IF* this slide ends up being a fake, you really don't think that is 
significant?  You don't think it's a worthwhile pursuit to investigate 
whether the press is using slides attributed to Snowden without properly 
vetting them, or if there is intentional disinfo and FUD going on?

>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Shelley <shelley at misanthropia.org> wrote:
>
> > I don't recall Mike ever saying the words, "this slide is a fake."
> >
> > What is being put forth for discussion and review is the following:
> >
> > With the log files that were included in the Cryptome archive,
> >
> > *anyone* with access to those files could have made that slide,
> >
> > because the data in the log files are from the same time period referred
> > to in the slide.
> >
> > Why is this so hard to comprehend?  I feel like this list has branched off
> > into some alternate timeline where logic and critical thinking do not exist!
> >
> > -S
> >
> >
> > On October 12, 2015 7:21:16 AM Michael Best <themikebest at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I never said I proved the slide is fake, Travis. In fact, I've said several
> >> times that I've all done is prove that it could be fake. I said it in the
> >> mailing list and in the original posts on my site.
> >>
> >> *Please* try to read what you're criticizing/arguing/responding to. I know
> >>
> >> it can be hard, or boring, or frustrating, but it's essential to a
> >> dialogue
> >> that you respond to what the other person/side/position said and not
> >> confabulate something (as is human nature) or worse yet, build a strawman.
> >>
> >> Forcing your targets to *ahem* 'go dark' by instilling paranoia is exactly
> >> > the opposite of what 'an IA / TLA' wants.
> >>
> >>
> >> So categorical, monolithic and single minded! One might even say "overly
> >> so" lol
> >>
> >> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 10:02 AM, Travis Biehn <tbiehn at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Mike,
> >> > You haven't proven that they were fake. Being able to counterfeit a
> >> dollar
> >> > bill does not all dollar bills counterfeit make. It's been one giant
> >> navel
> >> > gazing exercise.
> >> >
> >> > These disclosures only serve to further confirm opsec procedures long
> >> > recommended and employed. This slide is an advertisement for Tor (which
> >> > some hold to be a government honeypot, I do not.)
> >> >
> >> > Forcing your targets to *ahem* 'go dark' by instilling paranoia is
> >> exactly
> >> > the opposite of what 'an IA / TLA' wants.
> >> >
> >> > -Travis
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 9:55 AM, Michael Best <themikebest at gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I think Snowden has become such a folk hero that some people may leap
> >> to
> >> >> defend what seems like an attack on him without taking as much time to
> >> look
> >> >> at the data/posts as they would otherwise.
> >> >>
> >> >> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Shelley <shelley at misanthropia.org>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> On October 12, 2015 6:20:46 AM Michael Best <themikebest at gmail.com>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I tried to list their motives under the GCHQ/UK motives, who would be
> >> >>>> more
> >> >>>> likely to fake the slide anyway and are the ones alleged of having
> >> >>>> leaked
> >> >>>> documents to the Independent on behalf of JTRIG, are a fairly likely
> >> >>>> candidate.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Yes, you did list a number of possibilities.  It sometimes seems as
> >> >>> though the same few people do not read and/or comprehend responses
> >> before
> >> >>> replying to them.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Faking a slide like this would be a good way to inspire paranoia
> >> >>>> and divide a community, no? It got Cryptome to post a notice on their
> >> >>>> site
> >> >>>> for a week or two, alerting people to the possibility that they'd
> >> been
> >> >>>> targeted by GCHQ by visiting Cryptome. Sounds like JTRIG-ish
> >> paranoia,
> >> >>>> no?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Agreed.  It could be an effective way to deter visitors to Cryptome,
> >> >>> possibly to divert attention away from something posted there around
> >> the
> >> >>> time this all began.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> -S
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Georgi Guninski <
> >> guninski at guninski.com
> >> >>>> >
> >> >>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> >
> >> >>>> >
> >> >>>>
> >> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joint_Threat_Research_Intelligence_Group&oldid=670966374
> >> >>>> >
> >> >>>> > Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group
> >> >>>> >
> >> >>>> > In June 2015, NSA files published by Glenn Greenwald revealed new
> >> >>>> > details about JTRIG's work at covertly manipulating online
> >> >>>> > communities.[6]
> >> >>>> >
> >> >>>> >
> >> >>>> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 08:58:33AM -0400, Michael Best wrote:
> >> >>>> > > >
> >> >>>> > > > So assuming Snowden "borrowed" the slide from the NSA and he
> >> >>>> didn't get
> >> >>>> > >
> >> >>>> > > owned, the slide is _REAL_.
> >> >>>> > >
> >> >>>> > >
> >> >>>> > > I don't think I understand your mean, if we assuming it's real,
> >> it
> >> >>>> > follows
> >> >>>> > > that it's real? I think I walked into a language barrier.
> >> >>>> > >
> >> >>>> > >
> >> >>>> > > > Having in mind Snowden likely have large pile of slides, if he
> >> got
> >> >>>> > > > owned, likely all/the majority of them would likely be fake.
> >> >>>> > > > Is this plausible?
> >> >>>> > >
> >> >>>> > >
> >> >>>> > > Not necessarily, that's not how disinfo works a lot of the time.
> >> >>>> > >
> >> >>>> > > And did you missed the us-natsec trolling about the eu appearing
> >> to
> >> >>>> > > > trust Snowden's slides (though sometimes they can't prove it)?
> >> >>>> > >
> >> >>>> > >
> >> >>>> > > No, there just wasn't much to respond to.
> >> >>>> > >
> >> >>>> > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Georgi Guninski <
> >> >>>> guninski at guninski.com>
> >> >>>> > > wrote:
> >> >>>> > >
> >> >>>> > > > So assuming Snowden "borrowed" the slide from the NSA and he
> >> >>>> didn't get
> >> >>>> > > > owned, the slide is _REAL_.
> >> >>>> > > >
> >> >>>> > > > Having in mind Snowden likely have large pile of slides, if he
> >> got
> >> >>>> > > > owned, likely all/the majority of them would likely be fake.
> >> >>>> > > >
> >> >>>> > > > Is this plausible?
> >> >>>> > > >
> >> >>>> > > > And did you missed the us-natsec trolling about the eu
> >> appearing
> >> >>>> to
> >> >>>> > > > trust Snowden's slides (though sometimes they can't prove it)?
> >> >>>> > > >
> >> >>>> > > >
> >> >>>> > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 08:22:37AM -0400, Michael Best wrote:
> >> >>>> > > > > No but as I and others have noted, he didn't look at all of
> >> the
> >> >>>> > materials
> >> >>>> > > > > he handed over to journalists and couldn't possibly be
> >> expected
> >> >>>> to
> >> >>>> > > > remember
> >> >>>> > > > > all the ones he did see well enough to possibly be able to ID
> >> >>>> this
> >> >>>> > one as
> >> >>>> > > > > altered or forged. He was only able to argue against the
> >> other
> >> >>>> > documents
> >> >>>> > > > > because he had never been in touch with the outlet releasing
> >> >>>> them,
> >> >>>> > > > contrary
> >> >>>> > > > > to their apparent belief.
> >> >>>> > > > >
> >> >>>> > > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Georgi Guninski <
> >> >>>> > guninski at guninski.com>
> >> >>>> > > > > wrote:
> >> >>>> > > > >
> >> >>>> > > > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 07:50:14AM -0400, Michael Best
> >> wrote:
> >> >>>> > > > > > > As I think I said in the other thread, less specific
> >> >>>> charges that
> >> >>>> > > > require
> >> >>>> > > > > > > more specific proof and almost never leveled before a
> >> trial
> >> >>>> is
> >> >>>> > set,
> >> >>>> > > > > > because
> >> >>>> > > > > > > it forces the issue to be tried in the court of public
> >> >>>> opinion,
> >> >>>> > > > where a
> >> >>>> > > > > > lot
> >> >>>> > > > > > > of information can't be released lest it spoil an
> >> >>>> investigation
> >> >>>> > or
> >> >>>> > > > > > > potential trial. There's also the fact that there'd be
> >> >>>> little to
> >> >>>> > > > gain at
> >> >>>> > > > > > > this point by alleging that the slides are fake since
> >> there
> >> >>>> > would be
> >> >>>> > > > few
> >> >>>> > > > > > > people to believe it,
> >> >>>> > > > > > >
> >> >>>> > > > > > > "NSA hasn't said it's fake" doesn't seem like a strong
> >> >>>> argument -
> >> >>>> > > > > > > especially for a non-NSA slide. And again - *Snowden
> >> >>>> himself* has
> >> >>>> > > > accused
> >> >>>> > > > > > > outlets of releasing slides attributed to him that *he
> >> says
> >> >>>> he
> >> >>>> > did
> >> >>>> > > > not
> >> >>>> > > > > > > provide*.
> >> >>>> > > > > > >
> >> >>>> > > > > > Likely the NSA would distribute fake slides just to
> >> discredit
> >> >>>> > Snowden.
> >> >>>> > > > > >
> >> >>>> > > > > > Does Snowden deny the authencity of this slide?
> >> >>>> > > > > >
> >> >>>> > > > > > This slide appeared in _too many_ news AFAICT to get
> >> >>>> unnoticed.
> >> >>>> > > > > >
> >> >>>> > > >
> >> >>>> >
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Twitter <https://twitter.com/tbiehn> | LinkedIn
> >> > <http://www.linkedin.com/in/travisbiehn> | GitHub
> >> > <http://github.com/tbiehn> | TravisBiehn.com <
> >> http://www.travisbiehn.com> |
> >> > Google Plus <https://plus.google.com/+TravisBiehn>
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Twitter <https://twitter.com/tbiehn> | LinkedIn
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/travisbiehn> | GitHub <http://github.com/tbiehn>
> | TravisBiehn.com <http://www.travisbiehn.com> | Google Plus
> <https://plus.google.com/+TravisBiehn>





More information about the cypherpunks mailing list