10 July 2011
Nothing Too Threatening to Publish
Cryptome responds to an inquiry:
Have a seat, here is a follow-up to the oft-asked question, "is there any
threatening information Cryptome would not publish," and Cryptome's answer,
"no, there is nothing we would not publish," may be understood that nothing
truly threatening to persons, institutions and nations will be sent to Cryptome.
Nor to the media, nor any other public interest outlet, Wikileaks and the
rest. Claims of receiving this kind of material are bogus or based on stupidity
and ignorance, all too often lying to conceal being deceived.
The reason is simple, such information is too valuable to give away for free,
patriotic rationales notwithstanding (patriots are all too often misinformed
due to the myopia patriotism fosters).
This kind of information is worth much more on the black market, under the
negotiating table, in drop boxes, to spies, to nations, to extorionists,
to blackmailers, and the full range of cheaters for profit.
Fake threatening material is amply distributed, some given away freely to
promote a source, there is perhaps more of that than the genuine material,
especially from those who ignorantly believe the fake material is genuine
-- the insiders conceit.
Redactions of so-called threatening material is similarly bogus, a technique
for exaggerating the importance of the material and more importantly, to
enhance value of the redactor.
In the case of national threats, it should be understood that such threats
are never conveniently assembled as tranferrable packages. Only fools think
that. Instead national protections are diversely distributed in order to
prevent their theft or corruption, and are booby-trapped with markers and
tracers that can track the entire path of meddling, access and transfer.
That is why it takes sophisticated, prolonged analysis to constitute diverse
sources of information into a credible account and weed out the false and
misleading -- again in particular the false and misleading believed by a
source to be genuine who is most likely being exploited as an unwitting dupe.
It is no accident, for example, that Daniel Ellsberg withheld material from
the New York Times in the Pentagon Papers affair -- withholding is enhancement
of value. And no accident that the Times and Ellsberg cannot give up touting
their role as instances of higher responsiblity. Disclosure of tiny selections
from a vast official literature on the war like this requires commensurate
exaggeration of significance by editorial masquerade.
Masquerade, entertainment, is what brings in the profits , never the undoctored
material which is nearly always tedious and demanding and incomplete. A blazingly
effective disclosure is always bogus, and for that it is to be enjoyed and
celebrated as fictional output like intelligence briefs and investigative
journalism exposes.
To be sure, it can be argued that all "information," a fabricated neologism,
a kissing cousin to vanity-driven "intelligence," and as bogus as "news"
or "gospel" or "disclosures."
Not to overlook that official secrets are the greatest threat to democracy
no matter who is coerced or duped into protecting them by being seduced with
insider privileges.
In opposition to secrets and their complicit dramatic disclosure, democracy
requires patient trial and error, study and understanding of how to make
it work against those who desire to asymmetrically dominate its openness
whether by government, commerce, education or belief distortion of what is
publicly known of authoritative deception.
To level the playing field of information exaggeration, it would be fair
to ask Cryptome and its kissing cousins whether they would sell truly threatening
information underhandedly rather than publish free samples to build a market
for the rest. The answer will always be a lie wrapped in indignation. Followed
by a confidential come hither note like this.
As we see in the forever breaking and threatening news world of porcine spies
and pig kissing "public interest" barbecuers.
If nothing else, disbelieve Cryptome. Think for yourself.
|