Microsoft Spy Guide

[Peter Presland]

This links to a series of exchanges between the BBC and John Young before, during and after a 'for radio' interview done at the BBC News Bureau in NYC a few days ago.

There is a video on the interview on YouTube here

Both are vintage John Young - priceless stuff. The man certainly IS 'a minor institution' and should be given vigorous support in his battles with Authority - IMHO.

A snippet - Chris is the out-of-his-depth BBC interviewer (MY Bolding):

Chris asked if there was any information Cryptome would not publish, even top secret information that would threaten a nation.

Cryptome said those questions are often posed as bait, that there is slight chance that "nation-threatening" information will ever be sent to Cryptome, that instead it is authoritatives who release such information when it suits their purpose.
That authoritatives are the principal source of classified and confidential information released to the public through orchestrated freedom of information and "openness" programs to appear public-friendly, but which corrupt public discourse and comprehension with carefully prepared disinformation in concert with other authoritatives, especially those who traffic in official statements, deliberate leaks and disclosures by unidentified officials "not authorized to speak" but who do so avidly.

Chris asked if Cryptome recognized the danger of releasing unauthorized and unvalidated information, in particular using the Internet.

Cryptome said there was little danger in that, the danger comes from too much control of information by authoritatives in the classic one-to-many manipulation of the public. Many-to-many handling of information is far superior and the Internet can be highly effective for that purpose if the current initiative by authoritatives to clamp down its unruly nature is resisted.

Chris cited the need for reputation protection against anonymous attackers.

Cryptome said reputation is a pretentious conceit to overvalue, that it deserves sustained attack not protection, the greater the reputation the more need for challenge whether anonymous or open. Anonymous challenges guard against authoritative abuse to protect unquestioned privilege. Those attacked should counter attack by the same means rather than demand authoritative intervention, to continuously demonstrate capability not to hide its husk's emptiness under libel law -- the latter is a vestige of ancient inherited privilege of authoritatives.