|
Twin Threats: Coordinating Regime Change in Iran and Venezuela
Commentary by DeepJournal What you will find below is a discussion with readers of Cryptome and John Young of Cryptome, a website with a good reputation of providing classified documents (long before WikiLeaks arrived on the scene). Subject of discussion is the document below. It looks like an official document requesting a discussion with Israel on a coordinated attack on Iran.
For a better understanding of the situation surrounding Iran also check out the DeepJournal series on Iran, my (Dutch) book on The Next War - De Volgende Oorlog and the short video I made. - A2 writes: Grammatical errors are a classic authenticator in communiques of a certain type, but the type and frequency is what gives authenticity. In other words just because it's a marker for authenticity doesn't mean it is authentic, thus compounding its provenance; which is precisely the intent.
Cryptome: Yes. And there are reports that digital fonts can be marked to persist through formats -- typographers as cryptographers. Which is why the Wikileaks doctoring of the Afghan War Diary files damages their provenance, although it cloaks the source to some extent. Arrangements of words and sentences and headers can indicate source, but Wikileaks claims to take that into account. What comes of the cloaking of source likely renders the material unreliable, except -- always an exception -- the aggregation of files can be used to trace their source, but that too Wikileaks claims to obscure. And there's more yet to be tested. Digital fabrication is so easy and so easily marked that paper trails had to disappear so the new means and methods of marking and tracking could prevail. It is safe to assume there is no digital sanitization possible, only degrees of illusion. The motto of security wizards is to always expect failure, most often self-caused or by your most trusted associate. Thus the essential need to have a culprit ready to be blamed -- initiatives like Wikileaks had to be invented to advance cyberwar strategems and ploys, and, most of all, funding -- hence the synchronicity of WL and similar online formulations with the push for cyberwar funds, hackers, white-gray-black, premier beneficiaries. BTW, Top Secret is no longer top, merely a subterfuge to inspire low-level secret leakers to seed the information flow. A writes: Question: Do you have confidence in this document? I noticed that it contains several grammar and spelling errors. Not what I would expect of an official document. Just an observation. Cryptome: We do not vet material. Readers make the call. I saw the errors and know that they are common in the official documents, especially cables and spy reports. I'm told a deft forger always includes errors for credibility. 25 August 2010
Twin Threats: Coordinating Regime Change in Iran and Venezuela
Related: http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/89254.pdf
U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs Handbook Volume 5 Handbook 3 – TAGS/Terms Handbook
5 FAH-3 H-700
E.O. 12958, AS AMENDED, TELEGRAM CLASSIFICATION MARKING
[Excerpts] STEP 1: Classification Level The overall classification level is determined by the highest classification level of any of the telegram portions: C for Confidential, S for Secret, and TS for Top Secret. Place the overall telegram classification on the E.O. 12958 Line and on all subsequent pages, preferably at the top and bottom of each page. Remember to portion mark all portions of a classified telegram. Unclassified portions of a classified telegram must be marked (U). A portion is ordinarily defined as a paragraph but also includes subject lines, titles, subheadings, tables, or graphs. STEP 3: Reason for Classification Information may not be considered for classification unless it concerns one or more of the classification categories set forth in Section 1.4 of E.O. 12958, as amended. The reason(s) for classification must be shown with the “Classified by” information for originally classified documents only. Mark the number “1.4” plus the letter(s) that correspond to the pertinent classification category(ies) below:
* Telegrams containing foreign government information (FGI) shall be marked to indicate the source government and classification level. Example (UK-Secret). If the identity of the source government must be protected, the pertinent portions of the document should be marked “FGI” together with the classification. If the fact that information is foreign government information must be concealed, the markings described shall not be used and the document shall be marked as if it were wholly of U.S. origin.
DeepJournal
Sign up for the free mailing list. |
|
22 January 2012
NATO and CIA covertly arming Syrian rebels in order to weaken Iran
14 December 2011
Economist Albert Spits: the euro is gone by the summer of 2012
12 December 2011
Government has to be more open, transparent and accountable: Marietje Schaake (D66)
2 December 2011
Albert Spits over het verschil tussen de Keynesiaanse en de Oostenrijkse school
|