.png)
3 months ago
6
Let's get one thing straight from the start: Edward Snowden didn't have a crisis of conscience in 2013. He didn't suddenly grow a moral backbone while working for Booz Allen Hamilton. He didn't risk everything to warn the American people about surveillance.
Edward Snowden is an intelligence asset. He always has been. His entire backstory—the high school dropout turned genius hacker, the patriot turned whistleblower, the comfortable life abandoned for truth—was crafted in the same psychological operations labs that brought you every successful intelligence operation for the past seventy years.
And Julian Assange? Same playbook, different character.
You want to know how deep this goes? These aren't whistleblowers who got co-opted by intelligence agencies. They're intelligence operatives who were built from the ground up to sell you the surveillance tools their handlers want you to use.
Think about Snowden's story for five seconds and tell me it doesn't read like a Hollywood screenplay written by committee.
Brilliant but troubled hacker? Check. Works for CIA and NSA? Check. Has access to earth-shattering secrets? Check. Gorgeous girlfriend who represents everything he's sacrificing? Check. Dramatic escape to Hong Kong, then Russia? Check. Lives in exile, the lonely hero who gave up everything for truth? Check.
It's so fucking perfect it hurts.
Here's what really happened: Intelligence agencies identified that they needed a credible voice to guide the privacy community toward their preferred surveillance tools. They couldn't use an active agent—too risky if exposed. They couldn't use a traditional asset—not credible enough. They needed someone who would be seen as the ultimate anti-establishment hero.
So they built one.
Snowden's career trajectory reads like an intelligence agency talent development program. Dropped out of high school—establishes outsider credentials. Community college for a few months—shows he's smart but doesn't play by establishment rules. Gets high-paying tech jobs despite no formal qualifications—demonstrates exceptional ability. Moves rapidly through security clearance levels—gains access to sensitive information.
Every step designed to create the perfect backstory for credibility with the hacker/privacy community while ensuring he has access to information worth leaking.
Now let's talk about what Snowden actually revealed. He exposed surveillance programs that were already being phased out or modified. PRISM? Already under legal challenge. Bulk metadata collection? Already facing congressional scrutiny. Foreign surveillance? Everyone already assumed that was happening.
But here's what his leaks accomplished: they established him as the most credible voice on privacy and surveillance in the world. When Edward Snowden tells you to use a particular tool, you listen. Because this man sacrificed everything to warn you about surveillance.
Except he didn't sacrifice anything. He was deployed.
The programs he "exposed" were the old, clunky, legally problematic surveillance methods that intelligence agencies wanted to move away from anyway. His leaks provided cover for shutting down programs that weren't working well and transitioning to something much more effective: voluntary surveillance.
Watch what happened after Snowden's leaks. He didn't just expose surveillance—he started making specific recommendations. Use Tor. Install Tails. Get Signal. Use encrypted email. Download a VPN.
Every single tool he recommended funnels users into systems that provide better surveillance than the programs he "exposed."
Tor? Created by the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory, funded by the U.S. government, with known vulnerabilities that intelligence agencies understand better than anyone. Using Tor doesn't make you anonymous—it identifies you as someone who wants to be anonymous, which is incredibly valuable intelligence. And all your traffic routes through nodes that can be monitored, correlated, and analyzed.
Tails? A Linux distribution that promises anonymity but requires trusting thousands of packages from hundreds of maintainers. Any one of them could be compromised. The attack surface isn't smaller than Windows—it's distributed and unauditable. When Snowden tells people to use Tails, he's sending them toward an operating system that could contain any kind of surveillance capability hidden in plain sight.
Signal? Requires phone number verification, runs on compromised hardware, routes everything through centralized servers. It's not private communication—it's monitored communication with a privacy label.
VPNs? The crown jewel of the operation. Millions of people now voluntarily route all their internet traffic through centralized servers operated by companies with opaque ownership structures. Instead of surveilling everyone (expensive, legally complicated), intelligence agencies can monitor the curated group of privacy-conscious individuals who self-select for surveillance and pay monthly fees for the service.
Julian Assange represents a slightly different flavor of the same operation. While Snowden was built as the reluctant hero who sacrificed everything, Assange was constructed as the brilliant but controversial truth-teller who couldn't be silenced.
His early leaks—Collateral Murder, the Afghanistan Papers, diplomatic cables—were carefully curated to expose information that was politically embarrassing but operationally useless. None of it revealed current intelligence capabilities. None of it exposed ongoing operations. It was all historical material that made intelligence agencies look callous and secretive but didn't actually compromise their current activities.
And just like Snowden, Assange became a trusted voice recommending the tools that intelligence agencies wanted people to use.
The pattern is identical: establish credibility through leaked information that appears damaging but is strategically limited, then use that credibility to guide the privacy community toward compromised solutions.
Traditional intelligence assets have always been risky. They can be exposed, turned, or killed. But Snowden and Assange represent a new model: assets who don't know they're assets, backed by carefully constructed legends that make them absolutely credible to their target audience.
Snowden genuinely believes he's fighting surveillance. That authentic conviction makes him incredibly effective at selling surveillance tools to people who distrust government recommendations. When the world's most famous whistleblower tells you to use a particular privacy tool, you don't question it.
This is psychological operations at its finest. Instead of trying to convince people to trust government recommendations (impossible with the privacy community), they created anti-government heroes whose recommendations happen to align perfectly with intelligence agency objectives.
Here's what actual privacy looks like, and why no "privacy expert" ever recommends it:
Real anonymity requires SOCKS5 proxy chains through multiple countries, rotated frequently, with different proxy services for different activities. It requires compartmentalized identities that never cross-contaminate. It requires understanding that every digital connection is potentially compromised.
Real secure communication happens through mesh networks, not centralized servers. It uses protocols that can't be shut down, monitored, or controlled by any single entity.
Real financial privacy requires cash transactions that leave no digital trail, not cryptocurrency transactions recorded forever on public blockchains.
But none of the "privacy heroes" recommend these approaches. Why? Because they're inconvenient, complicated, and actually private. Intelligence agencies can't monitor what they can't access.
Instead, they recommend convenient, user-friendly, centralized solutions that provide the appearance of privacy while ensuring complete surveillance capability.
The genius of this operation is economic. Instead of spending billions on infrastructure to monitor everyone, intelligence agencies convinced privacy-conscious individuals to pay monthly subscriptions for their own surveillance.
VPN services generate billions in revenue from users who believe they're buying privacy. In reality, they're paying for comprehensive monitoring of their complete internet activity by entities with unknown ownership and unlimited data retention.
The business model is perfect: customers pay for the service, recommend it to others, and defend it against criticism. It's surveillance with a customer retention strategy.
Here's why this operation is so effective: network effects ensure that compromised solutions dominate legitimate ones.
Signal grows because "everyone uses Signal." VPN services thrive because "everyone needs a VPN." Popular Linux distributions dominate because "everyone recommends them."
Meanwhile, truly secure alternatives remain niche because they're difficult to use and have small user bases. The surveillance-friendly options become standard because they're convenient and have celebrity endorsements from trusted whistleblowers.
This isn't a U.S.-only operation. The Five Eyes alliance ensures that Snowden and Assange's recommendations reach privacy advocates worldwide. The same tools, the same talking points, the same solutions promoted globally by seemingly independent voices.
When privacy advocates in different countries all recommend the same VPN services and encrypted communication apps, it's not organic convergence—it's coordinated messaging from assets with global reach.
Modern AI transforms voluntary surveillance into unprecedented behavioral prediction. When users willingly provide complete browsing histories through VPN services, communication patterns through messaging apps, and social networks through metadata analysis, AI can build behavioral models that predict individual actions with scary accuracy.
The data quality from voluntary surveillance far exceeds forced surveillance because users don't try to hide, mislead, or obfuscate when they trust the service.
How do you know Snowden and Assange are assets rather than legitimate whistleblowers? Look at what they don't do:
They never recommend truly decentralized solutions. They never explain the fundamental vulnerabilities in their preferred tools. They never acknowledge that convenience and security are inversely related. They never mention that real anonymity requires inconvenient, difficult practices. They consistently promote solutions that create centralized monitoring opportunities.
Real privacy advocates would explain that actual security is hard, inconvenient, and incompatible with user-friendly applications. Assets promoting surveillance tools disguised as privacy tools emphasize convenience and ease of use.
This operation has been running for over a decade and shows no signs of slowing down. Every year, more people install "secure" operating systems that could hide anything in their code. More people subscribe to VPN services that monitor their complete internet activity. More people use "encrypted" messaging that routes through centralized servers.
The privacy movement grows larger and more committed to using exactly the tools that provide the best surveillance capabilities intelligence agencies have ever had.
What makes this operation perfect is that the evidence is hiding in plain sight. Snowden's career trajectory, Assange's selective leaks, the specific tools they recommend, the centralized nature of their "privacy" solutions—it's all there for anyone to see.
But people don't want to see it. They want to believe in heroes. They want to believe that someone sacrificed everything to warn them. They want to believe that there are simple, convenient solutions to complex surveillance problems.
Intelligence agencies understand human psychology better than privacy advocates understand technology. They know people will choose convenient lies over inconvenient truths. They know that hope sells better than reality.
Edward Snowden and Julian Assange aren't former intelligence operatives who became whistleblowers. They're active intelligence operatives who were deployed as whistleblowers.
Their job isn't to expose surveillance—it's to guide people toward better surveillance disguised as privacy protection.
Their job isn't to fight the system—it's to make the system more efficient by getting targets to volunteer for monitoring.
Their job isn't to protect privacy—it's to sell surveillance subscriptions to the people most interested in avoiding surveillance.
And they're incredibly fucking good at their jobs.
The privacy community isn't fighting surveillance—they're building it, funding it, and recruiting others into it, all while believing they're part of a resistance movement.
The greatest intelligence operation in history isn't secret. It's hiding in plain sight, promoted by the most trusted voices in the privacy community, and you're probably paying a monthly subscription fee to participate in it.
This truth comes at a cost—publishing it may very well get us silenced, shut down, or worse.
But if we’re targeted for exposing this, we need it to be worth it .
Share this article. Now.
Before it’s taken down. Before the narrative resets. Before the truth gets buried again.
Your share isn’t just visibility—it’s protection .
Once millions see this, they can’t come for us without coming for all of you.
Make the risk count.
Hit share—before it’s too late.
![AI-powered humanoid robot demo [video]](https://news.najib.digital/site/assets/img/broken.gif)
