Legend

[H2O Man]

“In the field of intelligence, a legend is an operational plan for a cover, or a cover itself, depending upon the mission.”
-- James J. Angleton; CIA chief of counterintelligence

“A legend is a false biography.”
-- Yuri I. Nosenko; KGB officer

“Everything is the exact opposite of what it really is.”
-- Harry Nilsson

“To attempt to place Edweird Snowden’s ‘career’ history in context based upon media reports is to let your mind get stuck on a gooey yellow fly strip. Do not focus on ‘who?’ or ‘how?’; the important question is ‘why?’.”
-- H2O Man

[Zorra]

1. Well done. Rec. nt

[H2O Man]

3. Thanks.

My last OP on DU:GD was about some of the history of domestic spying in the USA. I thought it was something that should be of interest to both those who support or oppose President Obama's role in the current events. Likewise, as I read the numerous posts regarding Snowden, I think that both sides should be considering the "why?"

Older forum members will recall that I have previously raised this same point in discussions of other controversies. "Who" was "Deep Throat," for example, became a game for many to play. When one person was later identified, many were satisfied -- although Mark Felt alone could not possibly answer the "how?" But the real question is why?

[reusrename]

9. Because Nixon was never going to become a member of the Carlyle group?

Great OP!

As for Snowden, I've always wanted to look at what's in the Matrix myself (at least since I've become aware of it) so this whole thing is sort of playing out exactly as one might expect. Isn't it?

[H2O Man]

11. It fits a pattern.

I don't think that the insurance industry would allow us to take out a policy on Edward's life right now.

[Aerows]

16. I wouldn't back one

He's going to have to watch his back for the rest of his life.

[Zorra]

17. Yes. Why, indeed. A difficult question to answer in this malignant plutonomy

in which marketing has been refined to an exact science.

[H2O Man]

20. Yeah, well said ....

"an exact science" is right. As much as I dislike it, they are good at the bad they do. Even reading some of the opinions on this forum -- no matter if one agrees in general or not -- we see that a significant number of people are buying the "product" (the issues being debated) the machine is peddling. And I'm not pretending that I have any great insight. I don't. But I've watched how the game is played, and have been an active participant in grass roots politics, etc. I've learned a few things along the way.

As always, thanks for your contributions.

[The Magistrate]

2. One Wonders Idly, Sir, If The Legend Were Put Together In Beijing....

This matter is beginning to look like a novel by Le Carre playing out in real time....

[H2O Man]

4. Right.

Another question could be, "Was this identity put together so badly on purpose?" Which brings us back to why?

[The Magistrate]

5. Wheels Within Wheels, Sir...

There really are not enough certain facts on which to operate.

[H2O Man]

10. I've been amused by

the debates on the news about if Snowden is a "hero" or "traitor." I think it is evident that he's now in, well over his head. Young men, especially those who think themselves quite intelligent, are most easily handled.

[Octafish]

6. Lee Harvey Snowden

Like Edweird Hidell, the guy's being used, by all sides.



IMFO, he's trying to do the right thing:

"Allowing the U.S. government to intimidate its people with threats of retaliation for revealing wrongdoing is contrary to the public interest.” -- Edward Snowden

Source: 27 Actual Snowden Quotes from a silver certificate fan.

As for all those siding with the national security state, ask yourselves what happened to the one TELCOM exec who didn't go along with one spy on your customers program, Joseph Nacchio?

[H2O Man]

12. I agree that he

thinks he is doing the right thing -- and that doesn't require one to share his views on what is right or wrong.

I suspect that, if not already, he will soon begin to question if his associates have had his best interests at heart.

[dixiegrrrrl]

13. "Lee Harvey Snowden".....Exactly what I have been thinking.

Parsing all the various stories is bound to give most people a headache.
Baffled with enough bullshit, people just stop trying to figure it out.

[H2O Man]

23. Right.

Quitting the effort to figure some of the bullshit out, or getting stuck waist-deep in it, both result in the same destination.

Sometimes I think it is kind of like looking at the sun: you shouldn't stare straight at it with your naked eyes, and do better with some type of protective gear. When the media etc shine too bright a light on some issues, it can blind you.

[Savannahmann]

7. My favorite legend of all time

Was the cover for Project Azorian. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Azorian

The cover was that the Hughes Corporation was developing undersea mining to recover manganese nodules from the sea floor. That the cost of recovering the nodules would far outstrip any value they had was obvious to geologists, and led to the various nations around the world surging forward with claims of exclusive mining rights on the oceans around their nations.

To my knowledge, as far as mining goes, there is only one successful operation, and that is diamonds off the coast of Africa on a ship operated by the De Beers mining company. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_in_Africa_(ship)

The Legend of that debacle has had as many far reaching problems as the effort to steal the submarine had.

[H2O Man]

14. Thanks for that.

The media coverage of the current situation reminds me of something that is related; though not a legend, it explains the way the media can be used.

In August of 2006, while at a picnic, I sat down with some gentlemen who were retired after long careers in law enforcement and intelligence. To start a casual conversation, I asked if they thought that John Mark Karr, the guy in custody out west, had actually murdered the little Ramsey girl? A former FBI official laughed, and said no -- that this circus was merely something set up to distract attention from a serious operation.

Though it shouldn't have, that answer surprised me. I asked if he thought the media was purposely distracting the public's attention? He said no, that anything important is known to as few people as possible. That there are individuals the public believes are legendary journalists, who are working for other interests. But that the very nature of the media is to entertain, rather than inform, and that the combination of the tiny girl's murder, and a repulsive suspect, would distract the media as well as the general public. He said that in a week, the suspect would be cleared, and the media would swarm about the next entertaining story.

[hootinholler]

8. There is also what

I doubt we have seen the whole of that as well.

The legend in this case is pretty fantastical, but while we are studying that 'reality' another is being created.

Why indeed. Does the answer to that lie along the Cui Bono trail?

And I don't mean Cue Bono


Unless he has some answers, which I find unlikely.

[H2O Man]

15. I doubt that

we will ever get good answers to the most important questions about this fellow's history. It is unlikely, in my opinion, that he could answer those questions accurately, even if he wanted to.

[reusrename]

18. The guy seems to be fearless so I doubt he is hiding much, if anything.

How he ended up where he's at? I bet he had a lot more control over that than we give him credit for. He was obviously very instrumental in setting up this situation for himself. If he's been handled throughout this whole affair then they are getting way too good at this.

[hootinholler]

19. Being a grey bearded programmer

The chap's background that I've heard so far appears to be a curious series of fortunate events. From what I know of gubmint IT contracting, I would expect better vetting by old Booze Allen.

I'm surprised a junior sysadmin had access across compartments, that after all is why classified projects are compartmentalized. I suppose it could be an artifact of the virtual server, but I would be honestly shocked were that the case, it's such an obvious vulnerability from a systems point of view.



Is it too much to hope for that Sanders is a name that will appear on a list with Pike and Church? I would trust him to get to the bottom of this. I would trust his assessment of the scope and infringement of the programs.

[H2O Man]

21. I remember meeting

and talking with Sanders, many years ago, before he was elected in higher offices. I just had the feeling then that he was very different from the average (or "normal&quot politician. Very intelligent, and definitely honest and open-minded.

It is hard for a person like that to not get marginalized in DC. There's been a past history of honest politicians, selected to head congressional investigative committees, being knee-capped .... and usually by those in their own party. (I'm thinking specifically of when the committee was looking into the King assassination. A person doesn't have to believe there was a conspiracy there, to understand that there was organized resistence to the committee exploring certain issues. In fact, some members spoke of being intimidated, and said that they were not able to discuss some of the things they learned.)

Still, it's a good idea. We need to consider how to best try to advocate for that. There are a handful of decent people in DC that we might do well to suggest this to. The place to start, I think, would be with some aides in DC. Though it might come to nothing, I will make a couple phone calls this weekend.

I'm curious what others here think? (Hint: you might make a good OP from your idea!)

[reusrename]

33. I hope Franken is auditioning for that role.

That would restore my faith in the universe.

It would not only get to the meat of the issues, it would explain his recent statements on the brouhaha.

[Autumn]

22. Why indeed.

Recommended and thank you.

[H2O Man]

24. Thank you, Friend Autumn!

It's funny: I learned to think of "why," rather than "how," many, many years ago ..... as a teenaged, amateur boxer, I was discussing the sport with Rubin "Hurricane" Carter. He told me that he who understands "why" will always master he who knows "how."

About two months ago, when my son was discussing boxing strategy with me, I re-visited this way of viewing boxing. It's not like we hadn't discussed it numerous times before, but on this afternoon, it really clicked with him.

Over the next three days, he would call me repeatedly, applying that logic to both his own experiences, and that of the great fighters in the sport's history. I liked that. During one of the conversations, he said, "Now I get it -- you won all those fights because you were smarter than the guys you fought." I said that I wasn't necessarily any smarter, but that I was focused on the more important aspect -- why, rather than how.

It applies outside of the ring pretty well, too.

[Monkie]

25. could you clarify something

To attempt to place Edweird Snowden’s ‘career’ history in context based upon media reports is to let your mind get stuck on a gooey yellow fly strip. Do not focus on ‘who?’ or ‘how?’; the important question is ‘why?’.”

does anyone have a accurate timeline of his career history for us to judge the context, because from what i see most mainstream news organisations seem to be attempting to discredit or minimize the possibility of taking his statements on his career seriously, yet when officials are asked directly they seem to confirm his accounts.
how do you explain his online activity going back over 10 years? i frequent a tech site where he appears to have been a active member of their forum under a assumed name, since he was 17, with pictures. that is quite some legend.

i would not dare to say i am a expert in tradecraft, but i do like to believe i have some understanding of where you are going with this.
so my other question is, not why, but what is the benefit, the goal, the prize.
what is to be gained by this, considering the costs, and the costs, the price to pay is going to be a high one.

[H2O Man]

26. Good questions.

With the exception of Snowden, I suspect that those who may know an accurate timeline won't say; and those who say, don't know.

The question of who benefits is always the most important one to ask after considering the "why?" At this point, there are several interests that may get the most gain out of the current controversy.

[Monkie]

27. but you agree about the cost?

i remember your posts from my previous life here, i respect you, i have little time for crazy conspiracies when there are open secrets that everyone ignores, i remember you as different.
from where i sit, i just dont see how removing or discrediting obama would in any way give anyone more power or control, lets be honest here, even if you give obama all the credit he is due and a little more, he has hardly stood in the way of any ´man behind the curtain´, hypothetical or not.
i would like you to be more specific though, unless you fear for your life i dont understand the need for ´nudge nudge wink wink´.
who are these interests you suspect, why would they be willing to pay this price if you agree that it is a heavy one, especially considering the international aspect, where my interest lays?

[H2O Man]

29. One thing I am

reminded of was when Ike was preparing to meet his Soviet counterpart, a meeting that was disrupted when Gary Powers dropped in the USSR. An expensive incident. But when something is costly, it suggests that while one individual/group is paying the price, another benefits.

In this case, I would tend to look at what combined government-business interests might benefit from the potential damage done to this administration's on-going relationship with China. Because the domestic part of the story is getting lots of attention, but there are other factors that may benefit from the high-profile nature of that domestic division in support and trust of the President.

While corporate interests often feign patriotism -- especially in commercials -- the large ones are not tied to any single nation -- much in the sense that "the terrorists" are not state-sponsored entities: both may have economic relationships with segments of specific governments, but they are not restricted by geographical borders.

Obvious, both the governments of the USA and China know very well that the other is spying on them. No secret there. More, corporate interests tied to each nation know their counterparts are spying on them. It's part of the economic competition. So, if I were to venture a guess, I'd say that it is possible, if not likely, that the Snowden scandal is part of a larger operation that is rooted in economic competition between the US and China; I think it may be that a relatively small group of unelected government employees, with close ties to the energy corporations, made use of an intelligent, self-righteous, and ignorant young man named Edward Snowden.

[Monkie]

30. the real damage is being done in europe not china

why do you think china cares about this spying, it could be quite damaging to the chinese state, because surveillance in china is heavy, and with the newspapers publishing the fact that someone dares to challenge the US security state this gives people in china hope, and could be destabilizing.
china is also very dependent on the US, it holds a lot of currency, does a lot of trade with the US.

but in europe, where the closest allies of the US are, this is where real damage is being done, it is one thing for people and states to suspect, but to know.
"trust me" when i say that this has legs in europe, the companies exposed will pay a heavy price, the person that negotiated with the US over the implications of FISA with the US is now VP of the EU. she is furious, so this "intelligence" gathering will be affected.
and when i say companies will pay the price, i dont just mean the billion dollar fines, i mean the loss of business, and i dont just mean loss of business from paranoid people, i mean loss of business due to data protection laws, no company or state will store data with these companies or in the US when this has run its course, because it will leave them liable to these same huge fines, no company with sensitive information, or intellectual property or trade secrets to protect will deal with these companies, or host data in the cloud in the US. and cloud storage is whats being pushed, and receiving heavy investment in the US.

so to return to this idea of a legend, and a op, the only thing i could imagine that would warrant these costs is if it was decided that the americans are not scared enough of the state that it was felt that the "panopticon" needed to be rolled out as a mechanism of internal control in the US. this would suggest that it is expected that there will be a unpopular war soon. or other event that needed total control of your population through fear.
in that case the external "costs" would be worth pay for the "internal" control.

i hope you understand why i also think it is more likely that this is just what it is, one of those "once in 20 year" exposures that happens when someone gets so sick of the lies they are living. although since 2001 this has been happening a bit more than the "once in 20 years".

as for terrorists, if we are on the subject of terrorists, i dont believe they exists, or dont believe they exists except for state sponsored, or false flag, or paid informer scaremongering, whats left are a few deluded "freedom fighters" without modern weapons, and sick criminals, hardly a reason for me to lose my freedom or sleep over.

[HiPointDem]

31. except that US, European & Japanese corporations financed the Chinese 'miracle' & are highly

integrated with Chinese business in various ways.

So even the China v. US thing may be a mirage.

[Monkie]

32. china cant be the enemy AND the go to guy for megacorps to manufacture our goods

it makes no sense does it.
some politicians pretend for public consumption, but the votes they cast and the paychecks their campaigns receive would suggest otherwise.
and all these people that claim that china is the enemy while buying goods manufactured there, are they then the real traitors?
because the damage done to the US by exporting jobs to countries with less pay and worse labour conditions far exceeds the damage a leak of a secret or two could possibly do to the people of the US.

[HiPointDem]

35. no, it doesn't make sense. there's a huge paper trail showing US gov't enablement of the

Chinese offshore manufacturing platform, as well as corporate joint ventures, wholly-owned ventures, technology sharing (transfer), etc. -- such that the majority of 'chinese' electronics imports to the us, for example, aren't 'chinese' at all, but wholly owned by foreign corps -- or were last time i checked.

So who is the 'enemy' here?

[Monkie]

36. good point about tech transfers

with all the talk of china's spying to obtain US tech i think its fair to say that the outsourcing has caused far more damage than a couple of hacks did.

[DevonRex]

28. Another legend is not quite right. First Code Talkers were Choctaw.

http://www.choctawnation.com/history/people/code-talkers/code-talkers-of-wwi/

Choctaw Indian Code Talkers of World War I
By Phillip Allen

In 1917, Choctaw Indians were not citizens of the United States. The language the Choctaws spoke was considered obsolete. That same language later helped bring about a successful end to the first World War (Allen) Of more than 10,000 Native Americans serving in WWI, a number of Choctaw soldiers “confounded German eavesdroppers”. (Flaherty).

When speaking of going into battle, you can almost be assured that communications is an important weapon. It can be used to defeat your enemy, or it can destroy you. During WWI, the Germans were able to decipher all of the allied forces’ coded communications. Then something almost miraculous happened. A group of 19 young Choctaw men appeared o n the scene, using their own language to transmit messages that the Germans were never able to decipher (“Choctaws”).

Native Americans including Choctaws, were not allowed to vote until 1924 – although years before this they volunteered to fight for what they considered their country, land and people (Allen). According to tribal documents, there were 19 Choctaw Code Talkers: Tobias Frazier, Victor Brown, Joseph Oklahombi, Otis Leader, Ben Hampton, Albert Billy, Walter Veach, Ben Carterby, James Edwards, Solomon Louis, Peter Maytubby, Mitchell Bobb, Calvin Wilson, Jeff Nelson, Joseph Davenport, George Davenport, Noel Johnson, Schlicht Billy and Robert Taylor. The men listed here were part of the 36th Division (“Choctaws”). Originally, o nly eight men were recognized as Choctaw Code Talkers, but as the success of using their native language as a “code” was recognized, others were quickly pressed into service (Allen”).

Toward the end of the war, the Germans had tapped radio and telephone communications. Messengers were sent out from o ne company to another. These messengers had been dubbed runners. One out of four runners were captured by German troops. The Germans had decoded all transmitted messages up to this point in the war (Bloor).
>>snip<<

Some of the Choctaw Code Talkers were Chickasaw who were fluent in Choctaw as well. I just thought this was an interesting fact. The Navajo are the ones the movie was made about. They served bravely, too, in WW2.

http://navajocodetalkers.org

They were a small band of warriors who created an unbreakable code from the ancient language of their people and changed the course of modern history.
KNOWN AS NAVAJO CODE TALKERS, they were young Navajo men who transmitted secret communications on the battlefields of WWII. At a time when America's best cryptographers were falling short, these modest sheepherders and farmers were able to fashion the most ingenious and successful code in military history. They drew upon their proud warrior tradition to brave the dense jungles of Guadalcanal and the exposed beachheads of Iwo Jima. Serving with distinction in every major engagement of the Pacific theater from 1942-1945, their unbreakable code played a pivotal role in saving countless lives and hastening the war's end.
>>>snip<<<

I always found this fascinating. A built-in encryption the Germans couldn't break, in either war.

.

[reusrename]

34. I had no idea this went back to WWI.

After reading your post, I imagine it has always been a part of the tradition of America at war, even before we were a country.