Assange Journalism

John Young jya at pipeline.com
Sun Dec 9 08:56:22 PST 2018


Very little from Snowden's many years as CIA 
employee prior to short-term as NSA contractor 
has been revealed. Turf battles between the two 
agencies are legendary, including planting their 
spies in each other's innards. CIA favors human agents, NSA technology.

This suggests Snowden was a CIA implant to out 
(selective) NSA technology. If so, it certainly 
worked, at least for a while until NSA used the 
operation to beef up funding for new and possibly 
stronger technology. Just look at its vast 
construction of MD tech temples and recruiting at universities.

To be sure all the 9/11-fattened spies benefited 
from Snowden's operation, and in that his op is 
hardly new, the spies have been running breaches 
for decades to enhance funding and deepening 
secrecy. They all work in concert at this, 
exchanging tips and perks with foreign spies.

Leaks, aka unauthorized disclosures, have been 
part of this from day one of spying, not just 
modern, but also ancient, even neanderthal. Spies 
beget spies, secrecy begets secrecy, ostensible 
betrayals beget ostensible betrayals. Favored 
journalists beget favored journalists. Outlaw mavericks beget the same.

The sanctimonious name "national security" is a 
relatively new moniker, circa 1947 in he US, but 
so are nations rather than royalties and 
theocracies. One way to tell who runs the shows 
is by looking at their self-vaunting monuments. 
In the case of CIA and NSA, look at their 
infrastructure for humans and technology, respectively.

Digital technology is an NSA operation, for 
example, journalism and academia run by CIA. 
Division between the two established by the 
National Security Act of 1947. CIA remained 
ostentatously above board, NSA hiding behind No Such Agency.

I assume Snowden is still working for CIA, bound 
by a secrecy agreement until he dies, not the 
secrecy-porous for NSA contractors. Presumbably 
Moscow assesses him this way, and will 
persistently suck his mind and blood as they run 
his worldwide recruiting operation in cahoots 
with CIA, NSA hot on their heels but winded by obesity.

Greenwald is a vain, useful idiot in this charade. So too Assange.

Mammon bless their Oscar-winning entertaining 
foolhardiness, aka "influence." Both tailoring 
bespoke regalia for Trump's royalist "L'├ętat, c'est moi."

At 08:27 PM 12/8/2018, juan wrote:
>On Sat, 8 Dec 2018 19:26:46 -0500
>Steve Kinney <admin at pilobilus.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On 12/8/18 3:41 PM, juan wrote:
> > > On Sat, 8 Dec 2018 13:44:22 -0500
> > > Steve Kinney <admin at pilobilus.net> wrote:
> >
> > >> Greenwald distributed the PRISM documents to several press outlets, at
> > >> least one of which edited them before release per side by side
> > >> comparison of published versions.  (Or, more than one version was
> > >> distributed by Greenwald for whatever reason.)
> > >>
> > >> So it seems likely that Snowden got his information about how and where
> > >> the documents were forwarded to news outlets from Greenwald himself.
> > >
> > >     I didn't see evidence for that.
> >
> > Because Snowden's tale includes how he failed to find a journalist, any
> > journalist, who was interested in his materials /and/ capable of
> > communicating via an encrypted channel.
>
>
>         Yes but that doesn't add up.
>
>
> > So he had to settle for film
> > maker Poitras, and attorney & partisan political talking head Greenwald
> > - just because Poitras was willing/able to use TOR and/or GPG.
>
>
>         The story I remember is that he wanted 
> to contact greenwald and that greenwald was too 
> retarded to know how to use pgpg.
>
>
>
> >
> > Before delivering docs to Greenwald, nobody in the news biz would talk
> > to Snowden, at least not on his terms.  After, he had no opportunity to
> > do any more handoffs.
> >
> > Snowden's tale of how "journalists" should decide what to release
> > strikes me as a cover story, explaining away his failure to send the
> > docs to Wikileaks
>
>
>         by 'failure' you mean he just didn't 
> want to send them to wikileaks because 
> wilileaks would actually publish the stuff?
>
>         I guess in the end it doesn't matter if 
> he gave the docs only to greenwald or to a 
> couple more journos. But granted, if only 
> greenwald got them in the first place then yes, that's even more suspect.
>
>
>
> > and have done with them, vs. throwing away his entire
> > life, more or less, via contrived-looking cloak and dagger bullshit.
> >
>
>         You mean he could have leaked the docs 
> without being detected? Maybe, I guess.
>
>
> > :o/
> >
> >
> >
> >





More information about the cypherpunks mailing list