Spinning Pegasus

https://www.npr.org/2021/07/29/1022214491/leaks-reveal-spyware-meant-to-track-criminals-targeted-activists-instead

The Fresh Air interview contained some helpful information but it was overshadowed by an air of absurdity. There were numerous elephants in the room that were being ignored leading one to question the sincerity of the participants.

 

Every few years there's yet another revelation, another scandal regarding espionage and technology. Even the latest Pegasus Scandal which has been tied to an Israeli Cybersecurity company reveals nothing new. Edward Snowden revealed these capabilities back in 2013 – capabilities which were already hinted at and partially exposed a decade earlier.

Everyone seems so surprised that Pegasus had this capability. Why? This kind of technology was being pursued decades ago. One immediately thinks of the Promis Software scandal and all the mysteries and crimes that went along with it. Governments and corporations (and the entities that hold the blurry ground between them) want this kind of data and capability to manage it. We know intelligence agencies are after it and will happily use front companies or collaborate with (or even blackmail) other private entities. It's nothing new. Nothing about Pegasus even made me raise an eyebrow. We already knew that phones can be hacked, cameras and microphones can be turned on, and data can be collected.

And yet over the course of the interview these realities were ignored and treated as if they didn't exist - as if it was new. Edward Snowden revealed the US government is already engaged in this type of behaviour – everything Pegasus is accused of doing. We know US intelligence agencies (and their contractors) capture and collate data. They utilise back doors, tap communications cables, steal data under threat, and have constructed complex large-scale algorithms to process public and private data. And they've utilised these tools to pursue activists, journalists, whistleblowers, and dissidents. The interview simply ignored this reality.

And why? The Washington Post reporter gives us a hint. He clearly supports the programs and believes they're necessary. He pulls out the 'bad guy' appeal and argues these tools are needed for the state to combat (the old stand-by's) drug traffickers and paedophiles.

The Constitution and more importantly the principles behind it is jettisoned. The hypocritical realities of the US state are ignored. The focus is on the technology's utilisation by other state actors and the scandal born of these revelations.

But what's the purpose of the said focus? The leak happened. The information is out there. The Washington Post is engaged in what I continue to call False Exposé. They're 'digging deep' and 'investigating'. What they're really doing is helping to cover-up and whitewash the criminality. They purport to be facilitating a public discussion knowing that the story will die within a few news cycles. The shoddy and deceptive nature of the interview reveals there will be no actual dialogue but instead revelation (as a means) toward an end of normalisation. We've seen this happen time and again since 9/11 and even in the decades previous to it.

There's another glaring omission. The Washington Post is owned by Jeff Bezos who is deeply connected to the CIA as his companies provide Langley with various web services such as data storage, and cloud computing. The owner of the Post has a stake in the story.

Why? Well, that's the other ignored element. The CIA and Mossad which certainly has its fingerprints all over Pegasus are close collaborators and the agencies share both agendas and data. So close are the agencies at times that when the Stuxnet virus was investigated no one could disentangle the roads that led back to both the Mossad and Langley.

Another factor that was conveniently ignored was that we now know that states will use other states to spy on its citizens. Even the Post reporter couldn't take seriously the claim that no US citizens are spied upon. Of course, we already know the US government is collecting our data and effectively spying on whomever it wishes. This was ignored but the question was left open as to whether or not Pegasus could be utilised to spy on US citizens via their Smartphones.

Through privatisation of intelligence gathering and analysis many states can now elude these laws and it has become quite common for nations to engage in a quid pro quo with their allies. The UK will spy on US citizens and quietly pass the data to Langley and the US spies on UK citizens and gives the data to MI5 and MI6. The Post reporter and Terry Gross know this but chose to ignore it.

The whole interview smelled rotten and the fact that NPR's phone lines aren't burning up – testifies to the state of US society and its lack of memory, critical thinking, and general awareness. It also testifies to the corruption that is deeply rooted in US media, a corruption born of greed and the need for access. Terry Gross and Dave Davies have conducted many interesting interviews but if they really started pursuing the stories the show would no longer have access to top tier interview subjects and as a consequence it would collapse.