[cryptome] Re: Ask Zelda

  • From: Todd Judge <toddbob@xxxxxxx>
  • To: "cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2014 21:35:43 +0900

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.
> 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.

Other related posts: