[ARENA] ainda o site do Dr. Dabic

[miguel leal]

Olá de novo

Como eu imaginava, tudo indica que a página do Dr. Dabic é aquilo a   
que se chama usualmente um embuste (ou 'hoax', como preferirem).  
Ainda assim é um belo embuste (e, provavelmente, o site draganbic.com  
é apenas uma parte de um embuste maior). É tudo tão simples -- e foi  
tão rapidamente divulgado pela net -- que acaba por demonstrar, entre  
outras coisas, como uma ficção pode alimentar os media...
O post da Nettime que reenvio em baixo pode pode ajudar a esclarecer  
as coisas (Este t byfield foi mesmo um dos responsáveis pela  
circulação da informação na internet).
Repare-se na suposta data de registo do site, que alguém se deu ao  
trabalho de ir investigar:

  Domain Name: DRAGANDABIC.COM
    Registrar: ENOM, INC.
    Whois Server: whois.enom.com
    Referral URL: http://www.enom.com
    Name Server: NS1.DREAMHOST.COM
    Name Server: NS2.DREAMHOST.COM
    Name Server: NS3.DREAMHOST.COM
    Status: clientTransferProhibited
    Updated Date: 22-jul-2008
    Creation Date: 22-jul-2008
    Expiration Date: 22-jul-2009


ab

ml

________________

	From: 	  tbyfield  panix.com
	Subject: 	Re: <nettime> Karadzic's website digest [x3: Spaink,  
Wilson, Young]
	Date: 	July 24, 2008 9:49:29 PM GMT+01:00
	Resent-To: 	  nettime-l  kein.org
	To: 	  nettime-l  kein.org

It's good to see the diligence that's gone into 'debunking' the Dabic  
site,
but it isn't clear why anyone would assume the site was "real" -- or  
what
that would mean. That the HTML was hand-tweaked by a war criminal?  
Exciting
maybe, but sort of beside the point.

Anyone who grabbed (or wants to grab) the .zip archive I posted will  
find
an extra file that wasn't in the website's file structure -- a text  
file of
whois output for the domain. Since all the registration data is  
anonymized,
the record is interesting for one, and only one, thing: the registration
date. There's a reason I included it, and there's a reason (several,
actually) that I didn't advertise my skepticism about the site -- beyond
noting that archive.org had never heard of it.

It's unfortunately that subsequent ~discussion got sucked directly  
into a
real!/fake! dichotomy, which isn't very well suited to navigating the
wilderness of mirrors that is Serbian politics -- especially in the  
context
of a public charade like the government trading the declining utility  
of a
war criminal for the inclining utility of EU membership.

OK, let's go through this. The question isn't whether the site is a  
hoax --
of course it is -- but, rather *whose* hoax?

The chronology so satisfying (I guess) to debunkers has to go something
like this: after the arrest, some wag on the internet (1) registered the
.com domain for his pseudonym, (2) hunted down remarkably high-res  
candid
snapshots of an obscure Serbian new ager, (3) copied facts and/or text
about him from sites that don't actually mention him (and hadn't yet  
been
reported), (4) translated them in order to make the site seem more
'credible,' and (5) sorted out hosting details etc. And all of this  
went so
quickly that the DNS entry for the brand-new domain propagated in  
time for
the site to make it into the next news cycle around the world.

The droll facts (domain registration, hosting) are hardly in dispute,  
but
the interesting issues get paved over in the zeal to show that someone's
been duped. Where did the images and bio factoids come from? The  
debunkers
assume (I guess) that the Dabic site laundered images available  
elsewhere,
but the chronology makes much more sense if you assume the opposite  
-- that
the media laundered images first distributed through the Dabic site.

I did quite a bit of searching and certainly saw some of these images on
the Dabic site first; only later did they appear in mainstram outlets  
with
the laughable credits to "AP" and "AFP/Getty Images."

(Hey, and where did AFP get this one?

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23519567-details/Beast+of 
+Bosnia%27s+secret+life+revealed:+Karadzic+had+a+mistress+and+drank 
+red+wine+in+The+Madhouse+bar/article.do

It's in a series with one of the photos on the Dabic site, but aside  
from
that its provenance is unknown.)

It's good to be leery of post hoc ergo propter hoc arguments, but I'd be
equally leery -- moreso, even -- of assuming that the Serbian government
completely overlooked how to spin Karadzic's arrest. By which I mean:  
how
to establish a seemingly credible story. It's one thing to merely say  
that
he was hiding in plain sight, but how much more effective to *show* it:
here's his website (two, actually, the "fake" one and the "real" one --
says who? AP! -- registered just a few months before), here's a  
parade of
people duly swearing that if they passed him on the street they'd  
have NO
IDEA who he was, here's the bar where -- it's strongly suggested -- that
everyone had a very good idea who he was, etc, etc.

The official story is awfully hard to swallow: one of the most  
recognizable
people in the region grows a beard and kooky haircut, and suddenly no  
one
-- not even the his far-rightist neighbors -- recognizes him: not his
voice, not his mannerisms, not his posture. Pick your favorite political
bogey (Bush or Cheney in the US, for example): a beard would totally  
throw
you, right?

When reports surfaced that foreign intelligence agencies (US and UK at
least) were involved in tracking Karadzic down, the Serbian  
authorities --
which had insisted for years they had no idea where he was -- were  
quick to
retort that they hadn't needed any help because "his whereabouts have  
been
known for some time." No doubt. His arrest has been in the works for  
a long
time now, and, like his hiding, many aspects of it were a hoax.

DNS doesn't lie, but nor does it exactly tell the truth.

Cheers,
T
-- 
http://b1ff.org

-------------- próxima parte ----------
Um anexo em HTML foi limpo...
URL: http://lists.virose.pt/pipermail/arena_lists.virose.pt/attachments/20080725/a6745d42/attachment-0001.html