10 September 2010. Google Ads crave the word "Wikileaks," so use in every file to get top listing -- for an eyeball blink. Pump up with "Wikileaks rape," already "6 million."

Wikileaks Rape Pumped

Two journalists pumping the Wikileaks frenzy. More on Stefania Maurizi: http://cryptome.org/0002/wikileaks-bait.htm

Journalist 1 who pumps openly

Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 12:36:55 +0200
From: Stefania Maurizi <info[at]stefaniamaurizi.it>
To: alan taylor <alan.taylor[at]pgpboard.com>, John Young <jya[at]pipeline.com>
Subject: Italian journalist: last emails?

Alan,

I haven't seen the last emails I sent you, could you please publish them in your PGPBOARD?

Below you can find the emails I am referring to.

Thank you,

Stefania Maurizi

__________

1) email: 9/9/2010 from Stefania Maurizi to Alan Taylor:

Alan,

I disagree with the offensive words you use about Julian Assange. In my opinion, Julian and Wikileaks guys need to stay under the lights: they leak sensitive material so they are certainly at risk. In Italy we use the same technique when we want to protect people struggling against mafia: we give them extensive press coverage in order to protect them from being left alone. As soon as you are left alone, you are going to be killed by mafia...

Regards,

Stefania Maurizi

__________

2) email: 9/9/2010 from Stefania Maurizi to Alan Taylor

Alan, just one last note: as a journalist, I think we all should spend more time in discussing the leaks by WIKILEAKS, rather than poisonous comments about Julian Assange: what WL has revelead is a huge amount of important documents about Afghanistan that without WL it would have been impossible to get.

stefania

__________

3) email 9/9/2010 from Stefania Maurizi to Alan Taylor

Thank you Alan,

No one should be allowed to publish anonymous accusations against Julian Assange or against any other person with no evidence at all supporting that criticism.

Let me tell you that, in my opinion, we definitely needed a sort of global "mechanism" for anonymous whistleblowing: it is extremely healthy both for democracy and even more for regimes.

In Europe, we Italians are an outstanding example of this: with no Freedom of Information Act at all being in place in Italy, with no advocacy groups against Italian government secrecy, with no laws in place protecting whistleblowing, our counrty sank into mafia and uncontrolled corruption. Indeed a tragedy...

Regards,

Stefania

Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010
To: Stefania Maurizi <info[at]stefaniamaurizi.it>
From: John Young <jya[at]pipeline.com>
Subject: Italian journalist: last emails?

Stefania,

It may be obvious now who is forging the "Wikileaks insiders" messages.

You must know that "Insider" is an ancient deception, never believeable. It is used all too much by the media and spies and other authoritative con artists as a means to illusion authentication.

However, with sufficient examples from the imposter the identity can be back-tracked to the source, also a common technique used by media, spies and authoritatives. Which we amateurs have done to establish identity in this case, and so can you.

None of us can be verified no matter how strongly we present our credentials or hide them. A cynic might say, the stronger the presentation or attempt to hide them the more likely a fraud. This is a commonplace view of security experts.

This most definitely applies to Wikileaks which brags far too much to be believable, especially about its promise of identity protection for contributors. Have you seen a recent comment by a Wikileaks advisor, security expert Ben Laurie, that there can be no online anonymity?

You might want to contact Mr. Laurie for more on this. It would be a good story. He is quite prominent in the security field.

Begin here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Laurie

He is a highly legitimate insider of all sorts of interesting groups. And can perhaps put you in touch with many more who have been uncharacteristically quite about Wikileaks showmanship.

Regards,

John

Journalist 2 who pumps covertly

From: Deleted
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 00:24:39 +0200
Subject: Re: Why Cryptome is necessary
To: John Young <jya[at]pipeline.com>

Mr. Young,

[Deleted] again, from [deleted] and [deleted]. Thank you for publishing my letter about WikiLeaks. But look, I know right now your website and operation, which has been at this effort much longer than WikiLeaks and, indeed, is of the old vanguard, is getting overshadowed a lot by the "new kids on the block". So I just wanted to say that Cryptome itself, by its own contributions to journalism and maintaining the historical record, deserves a serious and overdue "Fuck yeah".

Fuck yeah.

[Deleted]

Deleted,

Thanks for the comments. We've never expected the kind of attention Wikileaks is getting -- and may now be rueing. at least in the current gossipy configuration.

I admired Julian bragging about 6 million hits under the rape rubric, pretending to be aggrieved at the Hollywood grade of money in the bank. As an old vanguard I suspect this was the intention of the rape stunt -- a favorite of publicists and spies and politicians to avow innocence of deliberate sluttery.

Wikileaks does not do what Cryptome does, so not an overshadow. Leaks are not very reliable or long-lived. Give the initiative another ten years then it will be a serious successor.

Much too humorless, it is. About itself especially.

We admit proudly to being jackasses.

John

From: Deleted
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 10:54:54 +0200
Subject: Re: Why Cryptome is necessary
To: John Young <jya[at]pipeline.com>

Mr. Young,

I hope you don't mind, because these e-mails are off the record, but I had to recite your remarks to one of my colleagues. And it's also profoundly true what you say about not only leaks in general, but WikiLeaks' own humorlessness at the moment. In my own e-mail correspondence with them (I won't say who), it's clear that the scrutiny and celebrity, whether initially sought after by them or not, is already taking an emotional toll. My prayers are with them, though, I hope they call pull through and joke about it all eventually. But, as you say, time will tell.

By the way, in the future, if you want to make any off the record remarks or on the record comments regarding, well, whatever, feel free to shoot an e-mail at this address. Both [deleted] and [deleted] have a very large audience in the post-Communist and Islamic worlds, and it's been our experience that there's a real hunger out there to understand the history, perspective, and capacities of efforts and organizations like yours, if not replicate them back home. So, unabashedly exploit me! Between these two venues, I can always find a home for most of what you might have to say. ;-)

Saluting your jackassness,

Deleted