28 August 2000: Link to original New York Times PDF files:
http://cryptome.org/iran-cia/cia-iran-pdf.htm
2 July 2000: Link to 1998
publication of names of coup participants.
25 June 2000: Link to full unedited report:
http://cryptome.org/cia-iran-all.htm
24 June 2000: Add exchange with New York Times. Add
link to second installment of the unedited report:
http://cryptome.org/cia-iran-all.htm#D
(now part of full report)
23 June 2000: Add messages.
22 June 2000: Add messages and Cryptome
response to critics.
21 June 2000: Link to first installment of the unedited report:
http://cryptome.org/cia-iran-all.htm#VII
(now part of full report)
21 June 2000: Add messages.
21 June 2000
On June 16, 2000, the New York Times published on its Web site PDF files
of a secret CIA report: "CLANDESTINE SERVICE HISTORY, OVERTHROW OF PREMIER
MOSSADEQ OF IRAN, November 1952-August 1953," an operation planned and executed
by the CIA and British SIS:
http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/041600iran-cia-index.html
The Times wrote in an introductory note that names of participants in
the overthrow were digitally edited from the report "after consultations
with historians who believed there might be serious risk that the families
of some of those named as foreign agents would face retribution in Iran."
Cryptome discovered during reading the report that edited portions could
be read by freezing the page during loading just before the digital overwrite
occurred (this was possible on a slow computer but not a fast one). We notified
the Times of this and another method was used to conceal the edited material.
The Times urged Cryptome not to reveal the information and we said we would
not (see messages below).
Since then Cryptome has learned from messages on Intelligence Forum and other
mail lists that other persons have been able to read material edited from
the report. Now that the edited information has become public Cryptome is
publishing the full unedited report to make it more widely available, in
particular to those named in it until now known by a few hostage holding
"historians."
Here are messages on the topic:
From: Jerry Ennis <jde1@att.net>
To: intelforum@his.com
Subject: Complete CIA history of 1953 Iranian coup posted by New York Times
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 17:21:26 -0400
Readers may recall that, in April, the New York Times published
portions of the CIA's Clandestine Service History report on the 1953
overthrow of Iran's Premier Mossadeq. Today, the New York Times has
now published the complete report with very minor deletions (made by
NYT editors).
The report starts at
http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/iran-cia-intro.pdf
Note that the report's table of contents appears on page 4 of this
file and the table of contents is linked to each section of the
report. Links to all sections are also posted at the end of each pdf
file at the NYT site.
*****************************************************
From: Jerry Ennis (jde1@att.net)
Intelligence Forum (http://www.intelforum.org) is sponsored by Intelligence
and National Security, a Frank Cass journal (http://www.frankcass.com/jnls/ins.htm)
Intelligence Forum (http://www.intelforum.org) is sponsored by Intelligence
and National Security, a Frank Cass journal (http://www.frankcass.com/jnls/ins.htm)
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 08:19:45 -0400
To: intelforum@his.com
From: John Young <jya@pipeline.com>
Subject: Re: Complete CIA history of 1953 Iranian coup posted by New
York Times
The digital means the NY Times used to black out names
of persons it was advised might be put at risk by publication
failed to do the job properly. All the deletions are readle.
The unredacted report shall be published shortly on
cryptome.org.
The unexpected consequences of digital security are worth
pondering.
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 08:49:57 -0400 (DST)
From: John Chambers <jchambers@cas.org>
Subject: Re: Complete CIA history of 1953 Iranian coup posted by New York Times
To: intelforum@his.com
Are you really this cavalier with other people's lives?
> The digital means the NY Times used to black out names
> of persons it was advised might be put at risk by publication
> failed to do the job properly. All the deletions are reable.
> The unredacted report shall be published shortly on
> cryptome.org.
>
> The unexpected consequences of digital security are worth
> pondering.
Date: 19 June 2000
From: jya@pipeline.com
To: meislin@nytimes.com
Subject: CIA Iran Report
Dear Mr. Meislin,
You may wish to know that it is possible to read the NYT-redacted
portions of the CIA report on the overthrow of Mossadeq.
This is the portion of page 54 which can be read by interrupting
the page load before the digital redaction occurs:
Acting Minister of Court Abul Ghassem Amini
Colonel Novzari, Commander of 2nd Armored Brigade
Colonel Zand-Karimi, Chief of Staff of 2nd Mountain
Brigade
Commander Poulad Daj of the Police
Colonel Nematollah Nasiri, Commander of Imperial
Guards
Lt. Colonel Azamudeh, Reg. CO 1st Mountain Brigade
Colonel Parvaresh, head of the Officers' Club
1st Lieutenant Niahi
Mr. Perron, Swiss subject
General Nadr Batmangelich, retired
Colonel Hadi Karayi, Commander of Imperial Guards
at Namsar
General Shaybani, retired
Rahim Hirad, Chief of Shah's private secretariat
Soleiman Behbudi, Chief of Shah's household
Lt. Colonel Hamidi, Asst. Director of Police visa section
Colonel Mansurpur, Squadron Leader (cavalry)
Colonel Rowhani, Chief of Staff of 3rd Mountain Brigade
Captain Baladi
1st Lieutenant Naraghi
Captain Shaghaghi
Captain Salimi
1st Lieutenant Eskandari
1st Lieutenant Jafarbey
Mr. Ashtari
Mr. Mohammed Jehandari
1st Lieutenant Rauhani
Dr. Mozaffar Baqai
-----
Similarly, all other redactions are readable with the same
method.
We are in the process of converting the PDF to HTML and
intend to publish on the Web the unredacted report.
Regards,
John Young
cryptome.org
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 23:13:10 -0400
To: intelforum@his.com
From: John Young <jya@pipeline.com>
Subject: The NYT CIA Report
We read the CIA report on the overthrow of Mossadeq from
the New York Times site on a slow computer. When page 54
loaded we saw a block of text an instant before it was blacked
out. We backed up and loaded it again, with the same result:
a flash of the redacted text.
We then commenced successive reloading the page and
interrupting loading a split second before the text was blacked
out. After a few tries we were able to freeze loading so that the text
was perfectly readable: a list of some two dozen names of alleged
participants in the overthrow.
We then used the method on other redactions with the same
result that all the redacted text in the report and its appendices
was readable.
We tried the method on fast computers and found the pages
loaded too fast to see the flash of text and too fast for us to interrupt
the loading before blackout occurred.
A curious breach that would be missed by fast computers such
as the NY Times must have to process its digital files, and perhaps
the supercomps at select agencies as well.
We've sent the Times a note about it.
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 23:26:31 -0400
From: Dave Emery <die@die.com>
To: intelforum@his.com
Subject: Re: The NYT CIA Report
On Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 11:13:10PM -0400, John Young wrote:
> We read the CIA report on the overthrow of Mossadeq from
> the New York Times site on a slow computer. When page 54
> loaded we saw a block of text an instant before it was blacked
> out. We backed up and loaded it again, with the same result:
> a flash of the redacted text.
>
That is extremely stupid. The fact you saw the text means that
anyone using a html capture utility to query the site and record the
html source of the page to a file should trivially be able to remove the
redactions with an ordinary text editor or no doubt many kinds of html
specific editors. The text of the redacted stuff must perforce be
included in the clear as plain old marked up ascii as it could not have
been momentarily displayed as something readible otherwise.
Someone was either trying to leak material to the world
deliberately or was completely incompetant. And I mean completely...
--
Dave Emery N1PRE, die@die.com DIE Consulting, Weston, Mass.
PGP fingerprint = 2047/4D7B08D1 DE 6E E1 CC 1F 1D 96 E2 5D 27 BD B0 24 88 C3 18
From: "Jitze Couperus" <jitze.couperus@syntegra.com>
To: <intelforum@his.com>
Subject: Re: The NYT CIA Report
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:51:01 -0700
Dave Emery wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 11:13:10PM -0400, John Young wrote:
> > We read the CIA report on the overthrow of Mossadeq from
> > the New York Times site on a slow computer. When page 54
> > loaded we saw a block of text an instant before it was blacked
> > out. We backed up and loaded it again, with the same result:
> > a flash of the redacted text.
> >
> That is extremely stupid. The fact you saw the text means that
> anyone using a html capture utility to query the site and record the
> html source of the page to a file should trivially be able to remove the
> redactions with an ordinary text editor or no doubt many kinds of html
> specific editors. The text of the redacted stuff must perforce be
> included in the clear as plain old marked up ascii as it could not have
> been momentarily displayed as something readible otherwise.
>
Not quite as simple as that - the original report appears to be an
image (processed by Photoshop at some point) and (I'm guessing
here based on what I see in the file) a subsequent snippet of postscript
to overlay sensitive spots in the image with a blodge. All of this is then
encapsulated in an Adobe PDF file. But in essence you are correct -
moderately skillfull wielding with an editor to remove the bits of script
that inserted the blodges would result in the original image being rendered
without redactions.
Slowing the rendering machine down and/or stopping it in its
tracks - after the image is displayed but before the blodges
are inserted - has the same effect and is even easier for those
with accerss to a megahertz deprived machine.
To bring this back on topic - the latter demonstrates the irony
that those deprived of the latest technology, are sometimes in a better
position to harvest information than those with the fastest Cray.
Jitze Couperus
From: Jerry Ennis <jde1@att.net>
To: intelforum@his.com
Subject: Re: Complete CIA history of 1953 Iranian coup posted by New York Times
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 05:53:52 -0400
On Mon, 19 Jun 2000 08:19:45 -0400, John Young wrote:
>
>The unredacted report shall be published shortly on
>cryptome.org.
>
Just because a person can behave irresponsibly does not mean he should
behave irresponsibly.
>The unexpected consequences of digital security are worth
>pondering.
>
Mr. Young should ponder the expected consequences of his proposed
action.
*****************************************************
From: Jerry Ennis (jde1@att.net)
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 07:02:03 -0400
To: intelforum@his.com
From: John Young <jya@pipeline.com>
Subject: Re: Complete CIA history of 1953 Iranian coup posted by New
York Times
The report tells a shameful story of murderous US policy, however
much its author and its leaker aim to crow or confess, and we don't
want help hide that by giving a diversionary.
So we are holding up putting the unredacted material on the
Web until we hear from the NY Times on what will be done
to better secure the "threat to agents" we hear so much about
from those who threaten others as a matter of policy -- even
here.
Still, more more information about carefully manipulated
leaks, rather redacted "history," is worth providing.
For now we will publish, as here earlier today, what can
be gleaned from the report with careful attention to what
it contains just beneath its patently transparent cloak.
Names of agents and officers inartfully concealed is from the
payback manual, no?
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 07:12:17 -0400 (DST)
From: John Chambers <jchambers@cas.org>
Subject: Re: Complete CIA history of 1953 Iranian coup posted by New York Times
To: intelforum@his.com
> Names of agents and officers inartfully concealed is from the
> payback manual, no?
Could be an honest mistake, no?
Alec
The Ural was getting too mainstream - so we bought the Dnepr.
**********************************************************************
*Alec Chambers (jchambers@cas.org) *My employer and I *
*Senior Scientific Information Analyst *speak to one another *
*Chemical Abstracts Service *but we do not speak *
*Phone: (614)-447-3600 ext. 3533 *for one another. *
*********************************************************************.
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 11:04:29 -0400
To: John Young <jya@pipeline.com>
From: Rich Meislin <meislin@nytimes.com>
Subject: Re: CIA Iran Report
Dear Mr. Young,
Thank you for informing us about the problem with this document. We
are removing it from our site until we can delete the names in a more
secure fashion.
The names were obscured because of our concern for possible
retribution against the families of the people named in this report,
and we would strongly urge you to respect that judgment.
Sincerely,
Rich Meislin
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:15:23 -0400
To: intelforum@his.com
From: John Young <jya@pipeline.com>
Subject: Re: The NYT CIA Report
The NY Times has written that the CIA report is
being withdrawn until a secure method assures
that the redactions are not readable.
The paper urged us not to disclose ineptly redacted
information, to respect its decision to not publish it.
But that may be a goad to publish, huh? A redacted
page from the Pentagon Papers manual on defying
prior restraint, yes?
Date: 20 June 2000
To: Rich Meislin <meislin@nytimes.com>
From: jya@pipeline.com
Subject: CIA Iran Report
Dear Mr. Meislin,
We shall not publish names in the CIA report. We have
not disclosed the names from p. 54 sent to you.
Thanks for making the report public.
Regards,
John Young
cryptome.org
From: "Alan Simpson" <news@comlinks.com>
To: <intelforum@his.com>
Subject: RE: Complete CIA history of 1953 Iranian coup posted by New York Times
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 13:03:32 -0400
For Agencies that excel in clever misinformation, lies and deception, even
to their Masters, methinks the "leaks", together with the "tantalizing"
deletion of names, are just too convenient.
We all know the CIA was totally out of control during that period, and many
employees, and ex-employees should be doing long prison sentences, but let
the buyer beware.
Like the MI6 list, let us ask "Why", and take a good look around for what
else is going on, whilst everyone's attention is focused on the obvious.
(Same for Los Alamos, Elian etc.) I did a hour long radio talk show on
Thursday, on information security and government incompetence. Interesting
was the number of "Urgent Talking Points" Faxed for me from right wing
organizations with "Leaks" and very detailed chronology of failures under
Clinton, and other Democratic Presidents. Also interesting were the number
of "call-ins" with details of embarrassing anecdotes.
We know there is a Regime of Arrogance, and disdain for democratic process
and oversight, in these government agencies, but let us not blindly accept,
and distribute every "leaked document" we have presented. Clean up the
dirty, smelly bathwater problem, but save the Baby!
Alan Simpson
news@wbrief.com
> The report tells a shameful story of murderous US policy, however
> much its author and its leaker aim to crow or confess, and we don't
> want help hide that by giving a diversionary.
>
> So we are holding up putting the unredacted material on the
> Web until we hear from the NY Times on what will be done
> to better secure the "threat to agents" we hear so much about
> from those who threaten others as a matter of policy -- even
> here.
>
> Still, more more information about carefully manipulated
> leaks, rather redacted "history," is worth providing.
>
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 13:27:07 -0400 (DST)
From: John Chambers <jchambers@cas.org>
Subject: RE: Complete CIA history of 1953 Iranian coup posted by New York Times
To: intelforum@his.com
>For Agencies that excel in clever misinformation, lies and deception,
>even to their Masters, methinks the "leaks", together with the
>"tantalizing" deletion of names, are just too convenient.
You do, of course, realize that in trying not to fall prey to a
CIA disinformation plot, that you have lengthened the life of the real
disinformation operation.
Alec
The Ural was getting too mainstream - so we bought the Dnepr.
**********************************************************************
*Alec Chambers (jchambers@cas.org) *My employer and I *
*Senior Scientific Information Analyst *speak to one another *
*Chemical Abstracts Service *but we do not speak *
*Phone: (614)-447-3600 ext. 3533 *for one another. *
*********************************************************************.
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 12:34:24 -0500
To: intelforum@his.com
From: "Anthony D' Amato" <a-damato@northwestern.edu>
Subject: RE: Complete CIA history of 1953 Iranian coup posted by New
York Times
At 01:03 PM 6/20/00 -0400, Alan Simpson wrote:
>I did a hour long radio talk show on
>Thursday, on information security and government incompetence. Interesting
>was the number of "Urgent Talking Points" Faxed for me from right wing
>organizations with "Leaks" and very detailed chronology of failures under
>Clinton, and other Democratic Presidents. Also interesting were the number
>of "call-ins" with details of embarrassing anecdotes.
>
>We know there is a Regime of Arrogance, and disdain for democratic process
>and oversight, in these government agencies, but let us not blindly accept,
>and distribute every "leaked document" we have presented. Clean up the
>dirty, smelly bathwater problem, but save the Baby!
--------------
QUERY: I'm unclear what point Alan is making. If he is suggesting that
the right-wing organizations are criticizing intelligence failures under
Democratic Presidents, surely they are smart enough to know that by
the same token they have to accept intelligence failures under Republican
Presidents, and therefore their criticisms tend to cast doubt upon the
entire intelligence apparatus. Yet I thought (perhaps mistakenly) that
it's the right wing, rather than the left wing, that generally supports
a strong intelligence-security program for government (even as they
downsize the government in other areas).
-----
Anthony D'Amato
Leighton Professor of Law
Northwestern University
("Life isn't everything." -- Neil Simon)
From: "Alan Simpson" <news@comlinks.com>
To: <intelforum@his.com>
Subject: RE: Complete CIA history of 1953 Iranian coup posted by New York Times
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 15:27:47 -0400
Yes, Prof. D'Amato you are generally correct. About 2-3 years ago we noticed
a shift in persuasive tactics by right wing pressure groups. You don't
really notice these patterns, until you adopt computer technologies to
concentrate news feeds, "Talking Points", opinion statements, and all the BS
that comes into a news operation. We had a problem, akin to the whole
intelligence process, of information overload. (Keep in mind we develop news
networks, so do not have the luxury of a huge staff or armies of interns.)
No, fortunately, most vocal groups are not smart enough. They adopt
emotional "Hot Buttons" and usually by constant repetition, by multiple
channels, try and influence public opinion. (If you stop, dissect, and
analyze, huge flaws appear.) Many dream of the return to the Reagan days,
and desperately need an enemy to HATE, be it Cuba, North Korea or Socialized
Medicine!
Being objective, the right wing propaganda looks amateurish, like Moscow
Radio in the 1960's and '70's. By comparison the flood of material I get
from the from the White House, has the hallmarks of Dick Morris, Hollywood
and Madison Avenue. Full of lies, but well presented for the masses! Most of
the voting audience don't remember Lenin, Marx or know, or care what a
neo-Marxist is.
Finally Prof. D'Amato,how
|
