En una página anterior de ésta bitácora habíamos sospechado bajo el título de:
¿UN GOLPE MAESTRO DEL PANOPTICON DE LA "NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY" : HACER QUE EL VIGILADO SE VIGILE A SÍ MISMO?
http://sisifocansado.blogspot.com/2013/07/un-golpe-maestro-del-panopticon-de-la.html
Pués ahora, Naomi Wolf, que es una de esas personas que sabe muy bien lo que dice, habla y piensa, ha sospechado también respecto al caso "Snowden", y sobre el tema declara:
a) "He is super-organized, for a whistleblower, in terms of what candidates, the White House, the State Dept. et al call 'message discipline.' He insisted on publishing a power point in the newspapers that ran his initial revelations. I gather that he arranged for a talented filmmaker to shoot the Greenwald interview. These two steps — which are evidence of great media training, really 'PR 101″ — are virtually never done (to my great distress) by other whistleblowers, or by progressive activists involved in breaking news, or by real courageous people who are under stress and getting the word out. They are always done, though, by high-level political surrogates.
b) In the Greenwald video interview, I was concerned about the way Snowden conveys his message. He is not struggling for words, or thinking hard, as even bright, articulate whistleblowers under stress will do. Rather he appears to be transmitting whole paragraphs smoothly, without stumbling. To me this reads as someone who has learned his talking points — again the way that political campaigns train surrogates to transmit talking points.
c) He keeps saying things like, "If you are a journalist and they think you are the transmission point of this info, they will certainly kill you." Or: "I fully expect to be prosecuted under the Espionage Act." He also keeps stressing what he will lose: his $200,000 salary, his girlfriend, his house in Hawaii. These are the kinds of messages that the police state would LIKE journalists to take away; a real whistleblower also does not put out potential legal penalties as options, and almost always by this point has a lawyer by his/her side who would PROHIBIT him/her from saying, 'come get me under the Espionage Act." ...
d) It is actually in the Police State's interest to let everyone know that everything you write or say everywhere is being surveilled, and that awful things happen to people who challenge this. Which is why I am not surprised that now he is on UK no-fly lists – I assume the end of this story is that we will all have a lesson in terrible things that happen to whistleblowers. That could be because he is a real guy who gets in trouble; but it would be as useful to the police state if he is a fake guy who gets in 'trouble.'
e) In stories that intelligence services are advancing (I would call the prostitutes-with-the-secret-service such a story), there are great sexy or sex-related mediagenic visuals that keep being dropped in, to keep media focus on the issue. That very pretty pole-dancing Facebooking girlfriend who appeared for, well, no reason in the media coverage...and who keeps leaking commentary, so her picture can be recycled in the press...really, she happens to pole-dance? Dan Ellsberg's wife was and is very beautiful and doubtless a good dancer but somehow she took a statelier role as his news story unfolded...
f) Snowden is in Hong Kong, which has close ties to the UK, which has done the US's bidding with other famous leakers such as Assange. So really there are MANY other countries that he would be less likely to be handed over from...
g) Media reports said he had vanished at one point to 'an undisclosed location' or 'a safe house.' Come on. There is no such thing. Unless you are with the one organization that can still get off the surveillance grid, because that org created it.
h) I was at dinner last night to celebrate the brave and heroic Michael Ratner of the Center for Constitutional Rights. Several of Assange's also brave and talented legal team were there, and I remembered them from when I had met with Assange. These attorneys are present at every moment when Assange meets the press — when I met with him off the record last Fall in the Ecuadoran embassy, his counsel was present the whole time, listening and stepping in when necessary. WHERE IS SNOWDEN'S LAWYER as the world's media meet with him? ..."
Y la clave con la que totalmente coincidimos:
"It is actually in the Police State’s interest to let everyone know that everything you write or say everywhere is being surveilled."
"Es realmente en el interés de éste Estado Policíaco hacer saber a cada uno de nosotros que lo que escribimos o decimos está siendo espiado".
Que es lo que se apuntó en el 'post' citado:
Asi, los que se sienten y se saben supervisados
por un omnimodo poder tengan más cuidado
con lo que dicen, escriben, hacen y ocultan,
y en éste contexto van a solidificar mucho más
su policía interior que los que no se saben vigilados.
Hay que hacerle conocer al observado
su minusvalía e impotencia frente a la autoridad global
del Panopticon que los controla: es la mejor metodología
para hacer del vigilado que se vigile a sí mismo.
por un omnimodo poder tengan más cuidado
con lo que dicen, escriben, hacen y ocultan,
y en éste contexto van a solidificar mucho más
su policía interior que los que no se saben vigilados.
Hay que hacerle conocer al observado
su minusvalía e impotencia frente a la autoridad global
del Panopticon que los controla: es la mejor metodología
para hacer del vigilado que se vigile a sí mismo.
Ahora, con el toque de Naomi, nuestra originaria sospecha, ex hypothesis corpus delicti, ha pasado al distinto escalón de poder asegurar que existen los suficientes elementos para que el Principium Rationis Sufficientis de Leibniz, gran matematico y pensador, sea aplicado al caso "Snowder" con una única conclución de poder ya responder a la pregunta que nos hicimos:
¿UN GOLPE MAESTRO DEL PANOPTICON DE LA "NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY" : HACER QUE EL VIGILADO SE VIGILE A SÍ MISMO?
SI.
Ha sido y es un Golpe Maestro.
Son Maestros en Golpe Maestros.
Son Maestros dando Golpes.
Los vienen dando desde "In illo tempore"
¿Y por qué ahora,
en su agónica, putrefacta, orwelliana,
y, consecuentemente,
policíaca etapa histórica,
cuánta tantísima falta les hace
dar uno de esos Golpes...
no iban a darlo?
(No perdamos de vista
que aqui estamos hablando
de los que dieron el Golpe de "9-11"
con las TRES Torres neoyorquinas)
