Assange Journalism

[juan]

On Mon, 26 Nov 2018 17:48:22 -0500
Steve Kinney <admin at pilobilus.net> wrote:


> 
> >>
> >> How was Snowden's choice of Greenwald assured, and was his life in
> >> danger up to the moment he chose the right non-journalist to pass his
> >> docs off to? 
> > 
> > 	he gave copies to different journos apart from greenwald I believe? 
> 
> If so, neither he nor anyone else has ever said so.  The Snowden Saga,
> if at all factual, leaves no room for that to have happened.


	hm I must be misremembering. - I'll search for the 'official story' later. 
	

> 
> >> How long did it take him to realize he had been played -
> >> or has he even figured that out yet?  
> > 	
> > 	played how? snowden constantly parrots that journos have the divine right to filter whatever information reaches the serfs.
> 
> 
> Played how?  Spotted early by the fairly massive Insider Threat programs
> at NSA, initiated in response to Chelsea Manning's work.  They may have
> fed him specific documents, kept away from others, transferred him from
> job to job as necessary to facilitate that process.  He may have also
> been monitored and/or manipulated through his girlfriend, who has joined
> him in exile - which makes little sense, unless she had something to
> hide, and/or run from, here in the U.S.


	well, according to snowden, his girlfriend moved to russia because "she loves him". That claim can be doubted on purely human grounds, but it can also be taken at face value without assuming that his girlfriend is an agent or somesuch. Maybe she has enough moral integrity to choose snowden over life in good old amerikkka.

	Anyway, yes, what you describe is materially possible, so I should have asked "played, why?". What would the 'leaders' of the NSA gain by having snowden leak some stuff they previously selected/curated? Obviously they would not allow the leak of anything 'really top secret'. And coincidentally snowden's stuff simply confirmed what people with half a brain suspected. Massive surveillance. Wait, not even suspected but knew about it before snowden (like ATT fiber taps)

	One scenario I can think off the top of my head is that they allowed snowden to get hold of some not-really-secret stuff to justify 'tighter security' inside the NSA? 

	But as a bigger political game, I'm not sure what their motives could be. But more below.


> 
> I figure Snowden far too dumb to 'leak correctly,' but too smart not to
> play along once he became an object of property physically passed around
> between ruling class factions.

	Hmm. Snoden doesn't strike me as dumb. At least not so dumb that he was unable to publish stuff anonymously if he wanted. Especially considering that his job description was pretty much to track 'enemies of the state'. 


> 
> >> A funny thing happened to the allegedly thousands of documents Ed handed
> >> to Glenn for publication:  After promising Snowden he would release all
> >> the docs within ten days of breaking the first big story, 
> > 
> > 
> > 	did he promise that? That doesn't sound realistic given the fact that snowden supports censorship-by-journo. 
> 
> So at least one article published within days of the Prism release said.
>  Over the next week the reported number of documents given to Greenwald
> rose very fast, as Greenwald's story changed.  I kept very close track
> of available information during that time frame; this article I wrote
> back then be of some historical interest:
> 
> http://www.globalresearch.ca/nsa-deception-operation-questions-surround-leaked-prism-documents-authenticity


	well the fact that google, facebook and all the rest of 'silicon valley' scum are just spies on the payroll of uncle sam isn't controversial, and that's what the prism slides illustrated, regardless of them being 'authentic top-secret' or some watered down version for people with a 'lower clearence' or whatever the pertinent jargon is. 

	so although I agree that the snowden stuff isn't really 'top secret' that doesn't mean it's fake - it's quite possible that snowden himself chose stuff that didn't really 'harm' his bosses since he believes the american nazi state is a legitimate murdering organization and  american 'national security' a legitimate aim, etc. 


	

> 
> 
> "By his own account, Snowden often discussed perceived Agency wrongdoing
> with his co-workers, which suggests that he should have been profiled
> and flagged as a potential leaker by the NSA’s internal surveillance
> process."


	Maybe...not? I assume that people working in such criminal organizations are a 'tight knit' mafia. They don't really suspect each other. They are all american heroes fulliling their divine role : making the world safe for goldman sachs and raytheon. 

	Also, if somebody inside the NSA says "we must protect the Privacy of Americans", he can't be 'flagged' based on that, because that sort of bullshit is basic 'patriotic' propaganda. In other words, all or most NSA criminals could  say that sort of bullshit while still being 100% 'loyal' to uncle sam.

	You say they have 'insider threat' programs but who knows how they actually run them. Although in 1984 world it seemed as if anybody could be suspected, in reality the party members mostly have to 'cooperate' and 'trust' each other. 



> 
> > 	Regardless, I believe/would assume that snowden gave the docs to different redundant  parties because 'trusting' a single guy like greenwald is pretty stupid, and snowden is anything but stupid. 
> > 
> 
> To date, no "missing" Snowden docs have turned up anywhere.  Considering
> their cash value to any reporter who has an "exclusive" on any of them,
> that seems very unlikely if any did exist.


	I assume the documents were given to a few selected 'organizations' which are as corrupt as greenwald. Like the graudian and der spiegel. But I need to look into that again, maybe I'm just making stuff up.



> 
> >  
> >> All I know for sure about the Snoweden Affair is that once the dust
> >> settled, the U.S. intelligence community got everything it wanted: 
> > 
> > 	yeah. Not sure if snowden contributed to that or it's just that his leak was useless in the grand scheme of things. 
> 
> Anything but useless:  Whether or not Snowden was in on the game, the
> Snowden Affair accomplished important IC objectives, solidifying their
> power as an autocratic branch of government answerable to no one but
> themselves.


	Not sure how the snowden affair accomplished that. If anything it was a half hearted attempt on the part of snowden and greenwald to do something against mass surveillance but since they are after all loyal statists, they failed. 

	I guess one can see snowden and greenwald as controlled opposition. They are allowed to criticize uncle sam because their criticism is not a real threat, and the govt can brag about its 'tolerance' for 'dissent'. Well, except that snowden is exiled, such tolerance. But the jew lawyer and millionaire greenwald is doing well I believe. So to what degree they are sincere opposition and to what degree they are controlled opposition isn't completely clear. 

	So...maybe they acted as a decoy. The media was kinda critical of mass surveillance, but in the end govcorp got away with it. But I still don't see a too direct link between those two things. 



> 
> 
> >> 1)  Use an extraordinary physical security protocol to upload an
> >> encrypted archive of your docs to the I2P torrent network.  Clues:  You
> >> need a "clean" laptop from a flea market, a home made high gain antenna,
> >> and a conveniently located open WiFi hot spot.  Don't forget to scramble
> >> your MAC address before plugging in the antenna.  Include one or more
> >> "medium value" docs in the clear, to assure interest in your uploaded
> >> archive.  In your description of the torrent, promise the key will be
> >> published under the same user name within a given time frame.
> >>
> >> 2)  A few days later, use the same security protocol, from a location at
> >> least hundreds of miles away from your first upload site, to post the
> >> key (a pass phrase, see diceware.com) on the same torrent tracker site
> >> in I2P space.
> > 
> > 
> > 	Not sure what the point of publishing the key later is, especially if you first published some stuff in the clear? When you publish stuff in the clear you are marking yourself as a target? 
> > 
> > 	The two steps process is to avoid getting caught while uploading the bulk of the data? 
> 
> Mostly to create extra interest in the archive's contents:  Woo, big
> mystery!



	Oh I thought it was something opsec related. OK.




> 
> The leaker can passively observe activity on the tracker(s) and in
> related forums, and release the key when it appears that the docs have
> spread too far to hunt down and eradicate.  In a case where the content
> of the archive would constitute a "national emergency" in the eyes of
> our intelligence services, best to avoid starting that firestorm until
> they are in at least dozens of hands, scattered around the world, to
> light that fire.
> 
> Anyone clever enough to do any of the above, will find ways to improve
> on it:  For instance nested encrypted archives, where peeling each layer
> open yields more valuable documents than the layer before.  What new
> wonders will the next key reveal?!
> 
> One could even SELL the last key for a healthy chunk of BTC, although
> (nyah ha) maybe that last zip.gpg archive only has PDFs of some old MAD
> Magazines, as a gesture of contempt for anyone willing to pay big money
> for an "exclusive."  It may be possible to sell /several/ copies of the
> same key to competing bidders.  Nobody in a position to pay would be in
> a big hurry to tell the world they got chumped.
> 
> :o)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>