|
||
|
31 January 2013. Add: Stealing Secrets Series: http://cryptome.org/steal-secrets.htm 22 January 2013. Cryptome: @BaLueBolivar @wikileaks If the film describes unaccountable official secrets abuse it will aid more unofficial opposition beyond WikiLeaks. 21 January 2013. WikiLeaks posted on Twitter: "We Steal Secrets": an unethical and biased title in the context of pending criminal trials. It is the prosecution's claim and it is false. Alex Gibney responded that the phrase is by Michael Hayden, CIA former head. In 2000, James Woolsey, an earlier CIA former head, used the phrase: http://cryptome.org/echelon-cia.htm 21 January 2013 We Steal Secrets-The Story of WikiLeaks
Jigsaw Productions is first showing its documentary "We Steal Secrets-The Story of WikiLeaks" by Alex Gibney at Sundance today at 5:15PM (Utah time). Cryptome provided emailed material to Jigsaw over several months beginning in May 2011 but declined to appear on camera, and after reading about Jigsaw's biased treatment of targets in previous documentaries, broke off relations at a final meeting with producer Alexis Bloom at Zuccotti Park in September 2011 which was taped in part by the Jigsaw videographer. In the five months before then we met once with Alexis Bloom and then had email exchanges primarily with her and a few with Alex Gibney, head of Jigsaw from May 19, 2011 to December 20, 2012:
From: Alexis Bloom <alexisbloom[at]gmail.com> Hi John, I'm a documentary film producer in New York, working on a film about WikiLeaks. Since this film will come out in a year or so, it's about much more than the Julian Assange story: we want to use WL as a springboard for exploring other issues, including the nature and possibility of transparency, and what a networked world really means. Digital revolution? Increased surveillance? A combination of both? There was definitely a "WikiLeaks moment" we need to understand, but it has greater significance when attached to a fuller landscape. I work with a director called Alex Gibney - he's directed films like "Enron," and Academy Award winning "Taxi to the Dark Side." We're doing this film for Universal Pictures, and it will get wide theatrical release in the US and in Europe: we're hoping it will be the WL film of historical record, so to speak. Our website should give you a sense of what we do: I've been reading material on Cryptome for months, and your perspective, when you air it, is always invaluable. Cryptome's been a great resource, and it's amazing that you do it. You seem like just the sort of person we should talk to. Was wondering if we could set up a time to talk? Or even meet for coffee, since we're in the same town? With many thanks and best regards, Alexis Bloom
Producer
May 19, 2001 Hi Alexis, Most impressive work by Jigsaw. It will be a pleasure to exchange views on the topics you mention when convenient. I would welcome learning more about your project. Best regards, John Young 212-873-8700
From: Alexis Bloom <alexisbloom[at]gmail.com> John, Good to talk to you on the phone. And I look forward to talking further. I have the strong sense you're going to be able to shed important light on both the matter of WikiLeaks, and the broader movement. I'd like to talk about cypherpunks too, if you don't mind - want to make sure I'm understanding the ideas right. This film is going to get very broad release, and we want it to be as insightful as possible. As I said on the phone, it's sometimes hard to separate out the truth from the slightly more manufactured message. So, let's meet on Wednesday 25th, at 2pm, at The Four Seasons Hotel, 57 West 57th Street, between Park and Madison. I'm about 5 ft 8, have blond hair in a ponytail. Think I know what you look like, so hopefully we'll find each other. With many thanks, and I look forward to meeting you, Best, Alexis
Producer
May 20, 2011 Alexis, Agreed, agreed, agreed. John
From: Alexis Bloom <alexisbloom[at]gmail.com> Dear John and Deborah, First of all, thank you very much for meeting me yesterday. I thoroughly enjoyed your energy and your laser sharp focus. Let's not make this project churnalism. That's what I came away thinking. Not that I hadn't thought it before, but somehow you impressed new urgency upon me, which was probably your intention. I'm going to put some of Alex Gibney's documentaries in the mail to you. Just a courtesy since it's nice to know what kind of outfit you're talking to (he collaborated with Seymour Hersh on one of them, "The Trials of Henry Kissinger." He's a truly independent voice, and not beholden to Universal. He retains final cut.) Do you mind if I ask you a few questions? - the cryptome archive is down, so I'm going to order your DVD archive. Wanted to check the cypherpunk list is included (please confirm.) - would love to speak to good cryptographer who can explain the technical aspects of both WL, and other sites like it. (How secure was WL? How secure can we ever be online?) If you can think of anyone technical who may be able to explore the issue of the Lady Gaga CD - whether exfiltration could indeed have happened the way it's been repeated in the media - that would be great. (Perhaps the cryptographer could answer this too. There are obviously a few technical questions that need answering in this terrain.) I'm going to reach out to Bruce Schneier. Anyone else you think is particularly good, please do feel free to recommend. Who else are we interviewing? Cindy Cohn at the EFF. Steven Aftergood. James Bamford. And to be honest, we'd love to get you on camera. You're the hot air busters we need. Would be happy to film you more actively if you hate "talking head." This is obviously your call, but something I'm happy to discuss - we are flexible on how we film, and would try to find a way that suited you. And regardless of your participation with this film, wanted to say I admire your work - thank you for making it available to all of us. With many thanks and best wishes, Alexis
Producer
May 26, 2011 Dear Alexis, >- the cryptome archive is down, so I'm going to order your DVD archive. Wanted to check the cypherpunk list is included (please confirm.) If that is all you want, the cypherpunk mail list archive is here: http://cryptome.org/cpunk/cpunks-92-98.zip (83MB)
>- would love to speak to good cryptographer who can explain the technical
aspects of both WL, and other sites like it. (How secure was WL? How secure
can we ever be online?) Any of these world-class communications security experts could do it (don't overlook that they may be helping WL and others like it and thus a bit reluctant to spill secrets -- they are consulted by govs, too, as all -- repeat, all -- security experts are): Ben Laurie Bruce Schneier, Chief Security Officer for BT. Professor Ross Anderson: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/ >And to be honest, we'd love to get you on camera. You're the hot air busters we need. We are consummate hams so be careful what you ask. We have in mind a reclusive spot on a Greek island. Nearby a highly photogenic major communications interception station for all that goes on in North Africa, the Middle East, South Asia and Africa. Best regards, John and Deborah
From: Alexis Bloom <alexisbloom[at]gmail.com> Sorry for the bother -- do you have a doorman, or somebody a messenger could leave the films with? thanks, alexis
May 26, 2011 Hi Alexis, Thanks very much most stimulating discussion and lunch. Here is the list of disclosure initiatives I mentioned: http://cryptome.org/0002/siss.htm Several scholars at the National Security Archive Steven Aftergood, Secrecy News Selected cryptographers and security pros: Whitfield Diffie: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitfield_Diffie Selected names of spies and sources who could tell you more about running disinformation initiatives under various front organizations: 2619 CIA sources: http://cryptome.org/cia-2619.htm These are only representative, far from complete. More discussion and leads available when you want them. Regards, John and Deborah
May 31, 2011 Doorman, yes. Looking forward to the films. Will respond to your inquiries shortly. Regards, John and Deborah
From: Alexis Bloom <alexisbloom[at]gmail.com> Hi John (and Deborah? Apologies, not sure if she's at this same email address.) Wondering if you got the DVDs that I sent you. And would be great to touch base about your ideas for cryptographers / people we can talk to. It's clear you think the mainstream media is utterly lame. Since we're an independent outfit, perhaps you could be part of helping us raise the bar. I hope you're well, with best wishes, Alexis
June 1, 2011 Hi Alexis, No DVDs yet. I sent you a message about cryptographers/people. As well as thanks for the lunch discussion. And sent copies of them yesterday. Have you received any of them? Regards, John
June 2, 2011 Dear Alexis, The DVDs have arrived. Thank you very much. We look forward to viewing them. We hope this email reaches you, two earlier ones appear not to have done so. We remain at your command for participation in the project. Best regards,
John and Deborah
From: Alexis Bloom <alexisbloom[at]gmail.com> Ohmygoodness...for some reason your emails to me got deep spammed. Which is really most perplexing, since the first time we corresponded, your message came through just fine (and since my Spam filter is not strong at all.) I do apologize for utter lack of reply. How awful - you must have thought me rude. And I thought you were totally uninterested in replying at all...was about to turn up at your apartment with a mariachi band to catch your attention. Will look at your emails now...I see you've written a lot of interesting names down, and there's mention of a greek island, which sounds pitch perfect for a summer location... best...and technological apologies, once again, Alexis
From: Alexis Bloom <alexisbloom[at]gmail.com> Dear John and Deborah, Just wanted to briefly touch base again since I know it is, in fact, just fine for me to write to you. Will in future check my over-zealous spam folder for your replies. I'm going through your earlier two emails - a lot of contacts there, and frankly, a lot of good reading needs to be done. Thank you very much for the thought you put into this. So I'm reading. Calling people. Sending out emails. Have spoken to Bruce Schneier (bloody smart) Ben Laurie (ages ago, in fact, will prob want to go back to him) and going to DC on Monday to interview Aftergood, PJ Crowley and somebody else in DC from the deep, deep hacker past. Ross Anderson looks also great. Have also spoken to James Bamford since we last met - he was fascinating. Particularly about the govt ginning up support for the "cyber war" in order to build the big business of cyber security. Even when the threat to it, as in the case of WL, was not that great (since WL didn't publish top secret documents.) Paper tigers can usefully scare the public, it seems. I don't want to bother you again until I have a) done more reading b) formulated useful questions. And since I'm shooting from Monday - Thursday next week, so I'm going to be engaged in the equipment lugging, location securing, filming side of the spectrum for a little while. But I'm fully engaging with your last emails. And I'm reading material on Cryptome. And on the side, I'm thinking of beautiful spaces where we could film with you, that you'd actually find pleasing yourselves. Won't bother you for a little while, but have a good week-end, and thank you for an abundance of great ideas. With best wishes, Alexis
June 4, 2011 Dear Alexis, Impressive progress. I should have mentioned the following persons who are giant precursors for many of us who provided and still provide inspiration and knowledge about the disclosure of sensitive information to combat abusive official secrecy: David Kahn, author of "The Codebreakers," (1967) the ur-cryptology book which covers the history of the diabolical art and science. He is a stellar researcher, journalist and speaker who is admired by officials as well as dissidents. He could link you to those within the spy community willing to share openly or covertly. He is based on Long Island, NY. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Kahn_%28writer%29 Duncan Campbell, a British investigative journalist, educated as a nuclear physicist, who was prosecuted in his teens, mind you, for disclosing sensitive information but escaped conviction and went on to become a huge thorn in the side of the UK, US, CA, AU and NZ for their joint Echelon global spying program. A list of his reports over a dozen years: http://cryptome.org/jya/echelon-dc.htm Nicky Hager, New Zealander author of "Secret Power: New Zealand's Role In the International Spy Network," (1996). Steve Wright, Omega Foundation, British researcher who oversaw the seminal "An appraisal of technologies for political control," (1998): http://cryptome.org/stoa-atpc.htm There are others, a lot of them, to which you will be directed by interviewee. We chuckled at Bill Keller's essay on conspiracy theorists in the Times Magazine for tomorrow. He notes the correlation between diminished belief in authorities to the rise of alternatives. Duh. Best regards, John and Deborah
From: Alexis Bloom <alexisbloom[at]gmail.com> Hi John and Deborah, Just wanted to check in with you to say hello. We've been shooting a lot...just got back from the West Coast. And hitting the road for three weeks in July. I guess this is an email to say that although I haven't been in touch, you're very much on my mind. It's funny how things that you said during a brief lunch are being echoed in all sorts of things we're discovering. Are you around in August? If I can persuade you to have another lunch, I'd be hugely appreciative. At some point I'm going to try and persuade you to be interviewed - full disclosure there! And I know that it would have to be a beautiful interview. You guys have style. And to be honest, what fun to kick the film aesthetic up a notch. I hope you're well, With best wishes as always, Alexis
June 23, 2011 Hi Alexis, Good to hear you are on the move. Since we last exchanged emails an interview of Deborah and John has been published, one of the few we have done jointly, and which turned out not too badly, we think. It may interest you: http://www.domusweb.it/en/interview/open-source-design-01-the-architects-of-information/ That positive experience encourages us to imagine an interview with you would be most fruitful, even beautiful and stylish. Pencil us in for August. Best regards, Deborah and John
From: Alexis Bloom <alexisbloom[at]gmail.com> Dear John, Just got back to New York after a month away -- we've been shooting in Australia, and all over Europe. Returned to the unbelievable heat...my god, the city's sweltering. But it's good to be back, and to be reading the interesting news...did you read the Times' piece about J William Leonard filing a complaint against the NSA today? Pretty amazing. And I was taken aback to read: "...officials classified nearly 77 million documents last year, a 40 percent increase in one year..." A 40% increase in classification in ONE YEAR?? Why on earth is that? Mind boggling. On a more practical note, wanted to touch base with you about your interview. Are you and Deborah around on August 23rd? Would you be available for an interview on that day in NYC? (Alex Gibney is in Maine until then -- his daughter's getting married, and he's escaped to some remote island where none of us can reach him. I'm not even kidding - Fedex doesn't go there, there isn't a post office or cell phone reception.) Perhaps we can settle on a date, and then we can discuss the kind of thing we'd film. I'd love to talk about what we could do - you'd mentioned in passing that you do tours of New York sites? Sites that are "off limits" or high security? But not sure whether this was in NYC or in DC. I wanted to respond to your wish to be filmed in a way that was dynamic, but obviously this all has to make sense in the context of the film. Am also hoping to get a location that's architecturally interesting for a sit-down interview, if you'd do it? Happy to talk on the phone, or meet you in person to discuss -- whatever you prefer. I'm the city and available pretty much anytime. But in theory, would Tuesday 23rd suit you and Deborah? With best wishes and many thanks, Alexis
Producer
Subject: Re: Jigsaw hello Ah, so glad you've had at least one marginally good media experience! Thanks for sending. I liked the piece too. To be honest, I hold off on telling people about you -- I have good friends at Cabinet Magazine (do you know it? It's a quarterly that I really like) and also at Icon Magazine in the UK http://www.cabinetmagazine.org/ And I've always thought you'd be exactly the sort of people they should feature. But out of respect for your privacy, I've never said anything to them. But if you ever decide you wouldn't mind, or it would be vaguely useful for Cryptome or Cartome, do let me know. But I'm thrilled you're giving us a pencil...great news! best, Alexis
June 24, 2011 Your telling about us would be most welcome, an important filter to avoid the snarling, obsessed demands for comments about WL and JA. Perhaps not totally avoidable but might be transformed into more informative accounts, as you aspire with your project. Before the WL furor we were not so cranky about interviews. Indeed, considered them to be in accord with Cryptome's public outreach. Happy to participate and perform to music and song. Regards, Deborah and John
August 4, 2011 Dear Alexis, From the Jigsaw title the "Unnamed Wikileaks Project," the project appears to have retreated into a narrow-focussed commercial theme, perhaps unavoidable in buzzy-headline Media World. The Jigsaw project title is revolting trite-brand marketing. What has come of our discussion about the many substantial contributors to breaking down of the information control hegemon obscured by the hyperbolic Wikileaks promotional frenzy? Repulsed, John and Deborah
Subject: Re: August 23rd / Jigsaw John and Deborah, The title "Unnamed WikiLeaks Project" is simply a placeholder. It's like calling the project "Unnamed Computer Project" or "Information Project," (which it's also sometimes called in the office.) It's a blank title. Basically, the film has no title yet, so it gets given a placeholder that means pretty much nothing at all -- I presume you saw it on the website. (The Lance Armstrong film was called "Bike Film," and every other documentary gets given a generic placeholder like that until somewhere near the end of the editing process, where the actual work of choosing a title begins.) Our discussions remain the same, and we're not retreating into a narrow focussed commercial theme. In fact, I'm going to DC on Thursday to interview Thomas Drake, who's case is particularly interesting to us. His prosecution reveals government policy in a very unsettling way. As I said to you, WL is indeed part of our film - there's no point in saying we're not going to discuss it. But we certainly do not intend to contribute to a hyperbolic WikiLeaks promotional frenzy - quite the opposite. I think we share similar views as far as all of that goes. There's been a lot of incredibly bad (hyped, slathering, incorrect) reporting about WL. Maybe it's not such a bad thing if we correct that. And once a more accurate story is told, we take it further to look at the big picture -- secrecy, transparency, the battle over information, and civil rights in America today. Those are our big themes. If you'd like to talk over the phone, I'd be happy to. But the title on the website is in lieu of putting "Blank Project Because We Haven't Decided What to Call the Project Yet." best, Alexis
Subject: Re: August 23rd / Jigsaw Did you get my last email? Hope so. Am happy to meet / talk again if you want to clarify that we haven't totally lost our way...I don't think we have! best, Alexis
From: Alex Gibney <pag[at]jigsawprods.com> Dear John: Please say it ain't so. I just returned from a vacation in Maine where I staged-managed my daughter's wedding on an island without electricity. Having been really off the grid, I didn't catch up to this until now. I don't really know what to say. I was so looking forward to doing the interview with you and Deborah and delighted to think about it in an unconventional way that you had suggested. But I return to discover that you are "repulsed" by the title "Unnamed WikiLeaks Project." Really? What does it matter? It's a temporary decal on a mailbox - with absolutely no meaning and absolutely relevance to the final film. It's a coat on a seat to be occupied at a later date. So many people we have spoken to seem to expect me to know exactly what I want to say before I have said it. "What's your angle?" everyone keeps asking. The fact is: I'm just not that smart that I can imagine what I'm supposed to know before I know it. Like Columbo, I just bumble forward until I find something interesting. I can guarantee you that I'm not press agenting for anyone nor am I recyling some tired old line. That isn't what I do. My past work is the only guarantee I can give about the future. But I think the record is good. Hope you do too. Happy to meet to discuss further if you're willing. I've discovered interesting things. And by the way, I am very interested in the information control hegemon. Yes, I am. All the best, alex Begin forwarded message:
Alex Gibney
August 24, 2011 Dear Alex [Gibney], We're averse to participating further in the Wikileaks exploit. Our suggestions and documents provided to Alexis were intended to provide more substantial sources long involved in disclosures to avoid the narrow focus which has evolved in milking the Wikileaks-centric story. We urge Wikileaks to be seen at best only as a starting point into a much broader investigation of why and how secrecy has corrupted democracy and open societies. WL cannot be the main focus or that will contribute to trivializing a much broader and long-lived effort of thousands of uncelebrated people exploited by a few notables working the disclosure territory -- not least in public interest documentaries over-dramatizing for appeal in the WL manner. Exploitation of the Wikileaks brand on Jigsaw was unexpected trivialization. A sure sign of what you intend to do. And not what Alexis led us to foolishly believe was possible. Regards, John and Deborah
August 25, 2011 Alex, Alexis, For a scholarly assessment of the open source-secrecy conflict Steven Aftergood of Secrecy News comments on a new book: http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2011/08/institution_osint.html "No More Secrets: Open Source Information and the Reshaping of U.S. Intelligence" by Hamilton Bean Bean sounds like an informative candidate for your research. Regards, John
From: Alexis Bloom <alexisbloom[at]gmail.com> Dear John, Thanks for this -- and we'd noted the book. We've interviewed Steven Aftergood, remain in touch with him, and we're on his mailing list. This looks like an interesting book, and we're reaching out to Bean. With best wishes, Alexis
August 26, 2011 Yes, indeed, I saw that wretched account, one among many. I'm reviewing an even more disturbing new book, "Top Secret America: The Rise of the New American Security State," by Dana Priest and William Arkin, which is an expansion of their Washington Post series by the same name. This by the far the most comprehensive look at what has happened to override democracy in the US since 9/11 through vast expansion of excessive classification of government operations and denial of public knowledge about it. The Washington Post and the book's publisher refused to publish much of what Priest and Arkin found but they provide ample evidence to uncover what would not be published. Their series and now the book have not received the attention they deserve, not least because of the high-level opposition to their disclosures, including by the current administration which promised otherwise. And timing, the Post series came out just when Wikileaks unleashed its most celebrated pr campaign. I have repeatedly pointed to the series as being far superior investigation and more deeply informative to what Wikileaks, ahem, leaked. They describe what verges on being a putsch by the military-intelligence-industry complex exploiting the usual fear, uncertainty and doubt initiated by and now sustained by the 9/11 dramatization of terrorism. There are a dozen or more books, films and documentaries coming out in connection with the 9/11 dramatization, with snarling among those who cannot believe they not only escaped accountability by starting two wars and continuing to rob the treasury but can also cash in on vainglorious misrepresentation. John
Subject: Re: No More Secrets / book John: I trust you saw the Times article about Ali Soufan's book. The CIA managed to classify public hearings before congress. quite a trick. Alex On Aug 26, 2011, at 7:45 AM, Alexis Bloom wrote:
Alex Gibney
Subject: Re: No More Secrets / book There's a good film coming out in September 6, "Top Secret America," on Frontline. Co-produced with Dana Priest. It's a re-run from July 2010 show. So Frontline obviously thinks it was lost in the WL madness too -- great that they're re-running the show as their fall kick-off. (It's a higher viewership slot.) I think this is going to gather momentum, and I agree, William and Dana did absolutely ground-breaking, amazing work. The photographs the WaPo took as part of the series are insane. A.
Subject: Re: No More Secrets / book I'm really looking forward to reading Dana's book. (Though I'm sure it will infuriate me.) I've only met her once but she's a pal of my friend Jane Mayer, who put us on to Thomas Drake and others. I'm currently going through a FOIA process on an FBI/DOJ investigation (you can probably guess) and the redactions are astounding. Unbelievable. CREW is suing the DOJ on my behalf to get more documents on another corrupt act that directly hid malfeasance I discovered on my Abramoff film. What did you think of Bamford's last book? Alex
Subject: Re: No More Secrets / book My friend, Lawrence Wright on the Ali Soufan scuffle with the CIA: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2011/08/the-cia-ali-soufan.html
In response to phones message: September 8, 2011 [Alexis] You and Jigsaw are in reconsideration. Regards, John _____ A precipitating event is needed to avoid a banal staged interview. Something will turn up with live action potential -- for participants behind and in front of the camera. No stunt acting and producing. John
September 9, 2011 [Alexis] Missing from coverage of Cryptome is the crypt aspect, that is undercover, subterranean, hard to see, not easily available, no profile, back of background, ungrounded, black. This is the work of the architect side of the scholar-architect description of Cryptome which pays the bills. A current architectural project is an example for reconsideration by JigSaw for a somewhat risky video shoot. This is work on a crypt located in the sur-tony Lower East Side verily adjacent to the superduper-slick, extremely above ground and flaunting it, The New Museum on Bowery. Bowery, which is under aggressive real estate-cum-art culture marketing as the "next High Line." Bowery which is under hyper aggressive study by the City of New York for "pedestrianization," that is clean up the neighborhood of bums for crypto-yuppies wanting a bit of dirt but sanitized dirt, that is redacted of undesirables. Our project is on behalf of those undersirables, to prevent their extreme redaction, erasure, instead to valorize them as far more valuable than the best of the best art instituions. Our client is the Bowery Mission, a century and a half servant of hungry undesirables. A Old Mission which has been rebuffed by its neighbor New Museum by offensively in chic architectural design and by refusing to exchange ideas of mutual support in fund-raising and serving ostensibly mutual clientele: hungry artists and their indistinguishable cohorts, the hungry unemployed. The New Museum has no use for either detritus while the Old Mission feeds them daily, along with thousands around the United States. We think it might be a pretty good place to do a shoot of Cryptome in architectural crypt action, below the sidewalks of New York where there is a bit of excitement in the dilapidated condition of the Mission's caverns, now propped from collapse by steel poles and prayers. We think a bit of attention to the Mission being shit on by The New Museum would be a feather in Jigsaw's cap. We will arrange entry for you as we assay and repair the Mission's crypts beneath the noses of the assholes who adore high chic of High Line pretentiousness. You risk rodent bite and gagging smells, maybe a tad of crumbling stone, concrete, unmentionables and indescribables which constitute our architectural palette of cryptology no cryptographer would know what to do with except run for safety online. Take a visit to Bowery Mission on your own, 227-229 Bowery, around lunch time, say hello to our publics, even grab a free lunch. Maybe saunter next door for museum-grade contempt and gaze upon the long list of donors right by the entrance. Some likely yours and Alex's good buddies who could be persuaded to join the shoot if not contribute to the construction cost of the crypt repair for name recognition inscribed on a less dishonorable tablet. Big donors could get a visit to the crypt project while it is still thrillingly and aesthetically hazardous original art, thus high risk, not yet tamed into cretinism like the High Line's New High Line. This is not a dig at Wikileaks descent into puerility. John and Deborah [Alexis visited Bowery Mission and met with the staff.]
[Alexis] That's Step 1 of the crypt-architecture of Cryptome. Step 2.1 is to repeat with your team participating our confrontations at physical sites covered in Cryptome's Eyeball Series, begun after 9/11 -- three of which occurred in the DC area: The National Security Agency HQ, CIA HQ and a CIA-State Dept global communications site near Warrenton, VA. In these instances we gawking citizens were held for background checks and personal data logging before release. In the last case our camera and video memory chips were confiscated with a promise to return them upon request to the CIA, a request to which there was no reponse. Step 2.2 in NYC, to repeat with your team as participants photographing and video taping national security sensitive infrastructure which handles global and financial communications -- and those linked by accusations of terrorism, central bank terrorism, governmental debt terrorism, police terrorism and juror terrorism. Easy to visit and see, within walking distance of the downtown Civic Center, aka The Ring of Steel. Step 2.3, in NYC, ditto for the mass transit system upon which I worked as an architectural consultant recently and learned of its appalling insecurity -- which has also been superficially reported, honest coverage denied for alleged security concerns, aka security by obscurity. Step 3: Well, that will be provided to our patriotic email spies when we have established secure communications. Consider use of PGP as a baby step. Until we have reliable means our emails to you and Jigsaw should be seen as peurile bullshit lifted from the media as we understand yours and WL's. Nothing wrong with that as Comedy Central fluff. John and Deborah
September 16, 2011 [Occupy Wall Street coming tomorrow] [Alexis] Well, congrats, and god be with and protect you. We have not mentioned you to the Mission, but expect they are quite used to being solicited and likely welcome it in return for their own. We had a meet with the Mission yesterday. Noticed a lot of celebrity photos on their conference room wall of humble Nobodies wearing red aprons pretending to be wait people -- Couric, Diane Sawyer, Rudy Guiliani, movie stars, preening preachers, financial poobahs, even a US president, not recent: Taft. Nobody photographed in the crypt -- some of which was once used for cadaver processing for a coffin maker above, the inhabitant shortly before the Mission built its outpost to loft cadavers upward. Haven't met any disciples, but was thrilled at seeing those hanging on the wall. We're at a tight moment right now with the Mission, designing and developing cost figures due in a couple of weeks. Field meeting with cost estimators this coming Monday. No construction scheduled until next year unles a Sugar Booger is found, so if anything is arranged for you it will be to show existing conditions, which are more visually, rocky horrifying, than fixing things up, bleh. Regards, John and Deborah
September 24, 2011 [Alexis] It is impressive that you have engaged top officials like Hayden and Leonard, ex-officials never really ex- due to lifetime secrecy vows, unbound after officeholding to doublespeak official shutmouth about spying on meddlers while mushrooming the vast secrets compendium. Nobody who has had access to secrets can be expected to tell the truth about them, lying and dissimulation forever is a condition of access as well as for giving up access. Once in no way out. Thus required in all secrecy agreements. We will never know what they know and they know that and are enslaved to obey the terms of privilege. Is there a way to end this except having the secretkeepers and their irresistable liquor disappear? Likely not. Dispensers of the secrecy liquor are manifold, not least by opportunistic opponents fond of the drink's persuasive magic. You should video Anthony Haden-Guest, a fellow ex-pat not at all ex-NYC bartender who masterpieces the art of loosening tongues with generous pours of flattery. Then double-crosses. John and Deborah
September 30, 2012 [Alexis] Let's do something at OccupyWallStreet. Cryptome has been covering it for two weeks with photos and video and tweets. Over the 9/11 decade Deborah and I have done several graphic and eyeball pieces on Wall Street, WTC, Police Headquarters and its over-hyped "Ring of Steel," the Federal Courts, Detention Centers, Public Monuments, the NY Federal Reserve Bank, Global Communications Hubs in the area, the whole cartel of gov-priv deals fostered by secrets, terror, finance, law enforcement, fearmongering, intimidation, titillation and bribery of the MSM and fringe media. This is good precipitating event to highlight in situ the range of Cryptome's interests and will help contextualize (spit) the more theatricalized WL showboating. In the open, no confidential deals and ear licks. Bring in bystanders, ruckus make. Be terrorists. We will be there this afternoon for the march on Police HQ and whatever happily unfolds over the coming months. This could be a big booster to your launching platform John and Deborah
Penultimately: On September 30, 2011, we met Alexis and a Jigsaw videographer (sorry, don't remember his name) at Zuccotti Park, stated that we had read accounts in law suits about Gibney's biased treatment of targets -- flattering them to take part in interviews then betraying their trust with attacks of highly selective quotes and clips for maximum drama and entertainment. Based on that we said we wanted nothing more to do with Jigsaw, that Gibney was a double-crossing son of a bitch like most documentarians and journalists. We asked the videographer if he recorded that. He said yes. We went off to video OWS and they followed behind videoing our videoing.
Latest:
Subject: Re: Review of We Steal Secrets Not finished yet, despite the NYT preview. It will premiere at Sundance and debut thereafter. You will certainly have a chance to review. Alex On Dec 20, 2012, at 4:23 PM, John Young wrote:
> I would like to review the film when suitable.
Alex Gibney
|