Madie, You should get on cryptome. LOTS of material to ponder philosophically and an endless source of applied psychology fodder. Love, dad > On Sep 6, 2014, at 4:12 AM, doug <douglasrankine2001@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Lucas, > One of the problems with sorting out truth from lies...or disinformation...or > deception in its various and many forms...is the ability to know or work out > the truth. At the age of 69...I am still having a problem with it. The > trouble is...that there are so many truths..the older I get, the more truths > I find...and believing which one is true, is, in my opinion, a worthless > exercise...though not necessarily valueless. Truth is relative and has > different values to different people at different times. It is relative not > to lies, but to deception and misinformation. Lies can be truths > too...depends on whether one believes them or believes in them. Just as > love is not the opposite of hate...indifference is. > > One could write a book on it, but one of the best ways I gained a greater > understanding of the problem, was to read the 23 novels by Le carre. The > trouble is...that he can be and most often is, very abstruse...and one can > spend a long time trying to work out what he is getting at. It is only after > a while, that one realises that he is not getting at what you think he is > getting at. Also, his work, though classic, is becoming more dated as time > goes by and reflects a different era. > > One example is to read the "Smiley's People" series, though most of his > books are very good. One of his best ones, I have always felt, was "Absolute > Friends" which describes the privatisation and Americanisation of > intelligence, and how utopian values can be used to hide or disguise a > dystopian outcome. Intelligence is a multi-faceted weapon, and whilst we > all have our own individual intelligence, intellect, experience, beliefs and > so on, we are still subject to the normal urges, instincts, drives, learned > behaviour and belief systems which...as far as I know, every one else has. > Our own worst enemy is often our egos and our ids...if one follows that > aspect of psychology...though again, freud, or the behaviourists are not the > only theories as to why human beings act as they do...there are plenty of > others with equal value. > > Harlots Ghost by Norman Mailer, is well worth a read, though it is a long > book, you can start by looking at url: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harlot%27s_Ghost > > Wikipedia, I have found is a very good way of starting to research a subject, > one can look at the whole area or subject, then boil it down to those areas > which one finds most interesting. > > One doesn't quite know who Snowden is, where he got his information from, how > much it has been sifted, and the likes of us secret service buffs have very > little chance of finding out...because it takes access to classified > information...big time, to find out and even then... > > In the same way, you don't know who I am, as I don't know who you are...trust > is often misplaced and most of the time ends up in betrayal. The maxim, the > more one trusts, the more likely one is to be betrayed is a very powerful one. > > If you are really interested in the subject read Restless by William > Boyd...see url: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restless_%282011_film%29 > > Some of this information is also available via films or television...but I > find books and originals...where one can get them. are better, less subject > to doctoring or fantasies of television directors, less confusing one one's > perceptions and one can always read the passage again if one doesn't > understand it. I am always a sucker for a good story... :-) . > > Though I know it doesn't answer you question, I hope this helps... > "The foolish ask questions which the wise cannot answer" Oscar Wilde in > Philosophies for the Young... > Enjoy. > ATB > Dougie. > > > > >> On 05/09/14 19:24, Lucas Gonze wrote: >> How would disinformation be inserted in Snowden's downloads? Can you be more >> specific about the mechanism? >> >> >>> On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 6:28 AM, John Young <jya@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> It is still not clear, and may never be, how much of the Snowden >>> material is a deceptive ruse, and he may not know either. Nor >>> do the outlets to which he provided the material, none of which >>> had ror have the technical or espionage capability to evaluate, >>> test, judge what is legitimate, what is salted as disinfo, what is >>> illusory, what is sheer bluff -- all long-lived characteristics not >>> only of military affairs but specifically about comsec and >>> propaganda. The latter has always used the media for broadcasting >>> deception, willingly done so by media then discounted later, monetizing >>> the full spectrum of faith and infidelity. >>> >>> Official and private skeptics of Snowden assert a classic deception >>> operation is underway, canards of deception themselves: >>> >>> http://cryptome.org/2014/08/snowden-deception-question.htm >>> >>> To be sure, it is likely Snowden quietly distributed material to others >>> with capabilities lacking in journalists and polemicists, either beforehand >>> or afterwards. This would be conventional operational security to >>> not put all eggs in the omelets of journalism alone. >>> >>> There are hints in published accounts by Greenwald and Harding >>> that before Snowden gained Poitras' highly skeptical confidence >>> he was in contact with intermediaries who could vet his offerings >>> with technical and espionage skills -- none have come forward to >>> admit this prior Poitras-Greenwald-Gellman review but their names >>> are online awaiting disclosure. >>> >>> Moreover, there seems to be parallel assessment of the Snowden >>> caches, however many there are -- dozens of fragments have been >>> shared according to published reports. But the alleged bulk of the >>> material remains unreleased, ranging from 58,000 to 1.7 million >>> items (pages or files). Gellman has never stated the size of the >>> cache provided to him, except citing one example of examining >>> 200,000 pages to identify certain info. >>> >>> And it is noteworthy that all the reported holders of Snowden >>> material claim to have checked with authorities before publication. >>> >>> Smoke and mirrors, for sure of which Bamford is a master. >>> >>> But then, Zelda, are we not all capable of playing the Zelda ruse. >