protocol for high-profile dissenters to leak without being deaded/murdered/killed/eliminated/shot/heart-attacked etc

[juan]

On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 15:25:15 -0400
Steve Kinney <admin at pilobilus.net> wrote:

> 
> 
> On 07/23/2017 02:13 PM, Razer wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On 07/23/2017 11:07 AM, Marina Brown wrote:
> > 
> >> I don't think the gov even needed to compromise networks or sites
> >> to catch her.
> > 
> > I agree with  that. I thought the government figured her out due to
> > a steganographic watermark in the dox along with the short list of
> > people who had accessed them, but I wasn't following carefully.
> > 
> > Rr
> 
> Yes, that.  First, Reality Winner outed herself by printing documents
> destined for leaking at the very office where she found them, unaware
> that digital printers watermark documents with a time stamp, the
> machine's serial number, etc.  Then, The Intercept outed Reality
> Winner by publishing images including the said watermarks.
> 
> Technically ignorant source > incompetent or malicious publisher > bad
> outcome.
> 
> The Reality Winner affair reinforces my estimate that The Intercept
> was capitalized and promoted to fill the role of a controlled
> opposition propaganda outlet: 



	The intercept is a mildly entertaining joke. What I find most
	entertaining about it is how greenwald once in a while
	publishes a decent article denouncing 'fake news' while his
	employees publish a ton of fake news per week (current topic :
	soviet invation of the Free America). It's mildly entertaining,
	and completely crazy of course. 

	Yes, the intercept is nothing but a propaganda outlet
	pwned by the paypal-ebay-US govt corporation. Or perhaps more
	accurately the intercept is a 'liberal' outlet, carrying
	something like 80% of left wing, fascist american propaganda
	and sometimes publishing stuff that deserves to be called
	liberal in the orinal sense of the word : defending personal
	rights against the govt.



> A well funded shop whose claim to fame
> is publishing leaked documents has NO excuse for failing to sanitize
> watermarked documents before public release.
> 
> Staff at the Intercept do not just hand off submitted docs to all
> comers
> - they select pages to publish, redact whatever bits of them they deem
> unfit for public consumption, and write articles telling their readers
> what they want them to believe.  If one believes a word Glenn
> Greenwald says, The Intercept has denied the public access to
> something like 90% of the documents Ed Snowden handed off.

> The most
> important leaks attributed to Snowden by mainstream journalists
> apparently originated in Germany; they were handed to Spiegel for
> publication, not "Intercepted" by Greenwald's outfit.
> 
> When I looked into the background of the Reality Winner story, it
> seemed that she was an unlikely candidate for State Security
> employment.  Her apparently routine clearance and job placement made
> the most sense in the context of an entrapment exercise.
> 
> The practical realities of the Information Age present problems to
> Secret Keepers that they can partly solve by creating their own
> leakers and high profile market outlets to publish "leaked"
> documents.  

> This enables them to counter-balance the destructive
> impact of leaks by promoting their own faux-dissident narratives, and
> sweeping up many incautious would-be leakers and their documents.
> 
> If State sponsored black propaganda outlets publishing "leaked"
> documents do not already exist, it will be necessary to create them:
> By definition this shall be done in plain sight of the whole world -
> that's what "propaganda" means.
> 
> The Intercept has locked down leaked documents and outed leakers in
> plain sight.  On the covert side, we have no idea how many people who
> have contacted The Intercept in an effort to hand off dangerous
> documents are presently detained at CIA black sites.  Maybe none at
> all.
> 
> :o/
> 
>