the search for another snowden

http://jfkfacts.org/assassination/support-operation-secure-drop-were-looking-for-the-edward-snowden-of-the-jfk-story/

Any thoughts?

It sounds good on the surface, but two things jump out at me.
 
First, if there are knowledgeable insiders who would like to talk about what they know, why couldn't they simply bundle up their information and contact some researcher or researchers anonymously and send them what they have. Be a Kennedy assassination "Deep Throat."
 
For example: I am an old retired CIA person who is haunted by what went on and what was covered up. I depend on my pension, so I'm not willing to rock the boat. But I follow JFK websites and blogs, hoping others can crack this thing before I die. I see some damn good work going on at ReopenKennedyCase and I decide to send them copies of all my stuff anonymously. I get an address and sent it off. Then wait and watch. Something like that.
 
Second, wouldn't this be a nice drop box for governmental disinformation?
 
Just my initial thoughts here.

These days, I would not assume any software to be secure, let alone open source (witness the Heartbleed openSSL bug: http://www.wired.com/2014/04/heartbleedslesson). It's probably safer sending documents anonymously through the mail in a plain brown wrapper (wink).

Stan Dane wrote:It sounds good on the surface, but two things jump out at me.
 
First, if there are knowledgeable insiders who would like to talk about what they know, why couldn't they simply bundle up their information and contact some researcher or researchers anonymously and send them what they have. Be a Kennedy assassination "Deep Throat."
 
For example: I am an old retired CIA person who is haunted by what went on and what was covered up. I depend on my pension, so I'm not willing to rock the boat. But I follow JFK websites and blogs, hoping others can crack this thing before I die. I see some damn good work going on at ReopenKennedyCase and I decide to send them copies of all my stuff anonymously. I get an address and sent it off. Then wait and watch. Something like that.
 
Second, wouldn't this be a nice drop box for governmental disinformation?
 
Just my initial thoughts here.

Yep, my thoughts too... to which I'll add that I get occasional anonymous info come to my inbox. I'm sure it happens to those running other forums. Most of it is from the loony fringe. I'm betting this will be a magnet for that demographic, along with your government disinfo agents. 

JM specifically mentions Howard Hunt. Blowing my own trumpet here, I know, but I believe I have, in my book,  provided the best new lead on Hunt -- his connection to the family that opened and funded Youth House along with the estate where the Rosenberg's lived at the time that Julius was a civilian employee of the army signal corps. This same family also had ties to George Hunter White and the Paines.  

Further, I showed here the likelihood that Hunt knew Paul Raigorodsky - one of the Dallas White Russians who surrounded the Oswalds. https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t148-did-paul-raigorodsky-know-e-howard-hunt?highlight=howard+hunt

I'm with Stan on this one.

Sure, another Snowden localized to the JFK data would be nice but if they had anything to do with the way the intelligence community works they would know better than to trust digital transmission. Face to face in a parking garage or snail mail with Albert's plain brown wrapper ( as long as it is not more than 22 inches ) would be preferable.

Maybe I'm a cynic but I don't see anyone in that position getting too antsy. There has already been one too many "exposé" on the subject. Even the truth today might look like nothing more than another loony fringe claim.

In Mark Lane's recent book he mentioned that he'd get calls from the National Archives telling him that the document he requested had been released. He hadn't actually requested anything.  As JFK docs were declassified, someone at the Archives would flag interesting documents and call him. His big find was documentation for the Nov 23 conversation (I forget offhand if it was Hoover's memo or LBJ's recording transcript), where Hoover tells LBJ that his agents who'd seen Oswald and heard his voice said the man in Mexico City the CIA said was Oswald  wasn't him.
Unless you think one guy both impersonated Oswald and shot Kennedy, clearly there was a conspiracy afoot.

Low tech works for me. You don't need a Directorate of Science and Technology to open a can of sardines.

I agree with the points made by Stan, Albert and Terry. Being even more cynical, one of the first things that occurred to me is that you'd have to find a journalist and "journalism organizations" who would do anything about it if given real information. And $3500???? Gonna need a lot of donations and it sure as hell better be worth it.

dwdunn(akaDan) wrote:I agree with the points made by Stan, Albert and Terry. Being even more cynical, one of the first things that occurred to me is that you'd have to find a journalist and "journalism organizations" who would do anything about it if given real information. And $3500???? Gonna need a lot of donations and it sure as hell better be worth it.

And what do you get for your $3,500? No guarantee of anonymity, but to ease your mind, you do get a sales pitch that it is safer than email!!! 

From the wiki entry for Securedrop
"Anonymity is not guaranteed, but the creators claim that the system is safer than electronic mail."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SecureDrop

I'm not sure about any security or lack of using the secure drop provided. But it can't hurt to have an extra outlet for more information to come or way, or at least that is how I see it.

Frankie Vegas wrote:I'm not sure about any security or lack of using the secure drop provided. But it can't hurt to have an extra outlet for more information to come or way, or at least that is how I see it.

Don't mind us old fogeys, Frankie. It does seem to be catching on - though it has had some security issues. 
https://pressfreedomfoundation.org/blog/2014/04/securedrop-and-openssl-vulnerability

All we're saying is the more hi tech, the more potential for something to go wrong. Sometimes there's a lot to said for the mundane.