[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Cryptome?s searing critique of Snowden Inc.

Hash: SHA1

On 02/14/2016 07:17 AM, Georgi Guninski wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 05:48:14AM -0500, John Young wrote:
>> Cryptome's searing critique of Snowden Inc.
>> http://timshorrock.com/?p=2354 
>> https://soundcloud.com/rebootfm/interview-with-cryptome-2016-02-0
> Me would prefer Snowden to release the whole cache too.
> On the other hand, I partially understand him.
> He applied for asylum in about 20 countries and all but except
> lastly the russians ditched him.
> If he released all the cache, he wouldn't have anything to
> trade for asylum (this raises many other questions).

Accoring to Snowden, Greenwald, et al, Snowden has nothing to
trade for asylum:  Everyone in a position to know says that he
gave the whole works to Greenwald & co., to use as he sees fit.
That does not make their assertion true, but as far as I know, no
evidence contradicts it.

> As an earth human, he wasn't bold and/or crazy enough to get
> back to hamerica by releasing the cache.
> AFAICT Cryptome doesn't criticize him for false docs, right?

Other than Cryptome's blanket warning that /all/ leaked documents
should be treated as disinformation, limited hangouts, etc. until
or unless proven otherwise.

> In addition, both of us might be wrong and a conspiracy theory
> to explain things better.
> Say, the oligarchs of the world to just make a show/psyop for
> the sheeple ;)

Whether Snowden intended to do that, or was conned into doing so
by his press contacts, remains an open question.

Calling evidence based analysis of the Snowden Affair "conspiracy
theory" does not make it go away.  Least of all, when the audience
understands that propagandists created the Conspiracy Theory meme
for 'name calling' purposes, to stain inconvenient information as
delusional nonsense.

Greenwald converted the Snowden documents from State secrets owned
by the U.S. government, to commercial trade secrets owned by
billionaire Pierre Omidyar.  Their new owners have published a
fraction of those documents for financial profit and, of course,
political propaganda.  I do not expect anything in those documents
that would have an unfavorable impact on billionaires in general
or Omidyar in particular to be published.

When is a leak not a leak?  I'm not sure, but the Snowden Affair
looks like an example.


Version: GnuPG v1