Wednesday, May 28, 2014


If you read my recent article* about how Venezuelan hacker Rafael Nuñez-Aponte, a/k/a RaFa, a specialist in hiding online negative information about corrupt Venezuelans, and their crimes, crossed the line by inserting libelous segments about two Opposition advocates, into an InfoBAE article that named the worst corrupters in the Maduro regime, there is some good news. After numerous requests, which delivered information that proved  the information inserted about him could not possibly be true, as it could not have occurred, InfoBAE did remove the disinformation about Thor Halvorssen.

The hacker's target, former Venezuelan Ambassador Thor Halvorssen, a cabinet-level minister in a prior democratic Venezuelan government, and a prominent opponent of the Chavista regime since it came to power in 1999, is one of the country's leaders in exile. The placement of disinformation about Sr. Halvorssen was made solely to destroy his credibility with Venezuelans, and was obviously placed there by Nuñez on the orders of powerful PEPs who do not want to be removed from power, lest their ability to bleed Venezuela come to an end, and they be tried for Crimes against the State.

Ambassador Halvorssen

Nuñez, whom I understand is attempting to gain the ability re-enter the United States, notwithstanding his deportation after a felony conviction for hacking US military computers, deserves to be punished for seeking to malign one of Venezuela's best-known patriots. He obviously did not learn his lesson the first time he was imprisoned for computer crime; seven months of incarceration was insufficient. Perhaps the next time he comes up for sentencing, he will receive the appropriate punishment.

Professional hacker: Rafael Nuüez-Aponte
I do blame InfoBAE for failing to conduct fact checking, before publishing the article. Anyone with even a rudimentary knowledge of Venezuelan politics knows who is a corrupt "Bolivarian," and who is an official, or even unofficial, member of the Opposition. All reputable media vet their information before it is released to the public. That is what we call malpractice in journalism.

The lesson here for compliance is that even authoritative, trusted publications should not be solely relied upon for an item of major negative information. Always get at least one other source, well-known to you, and proven to be not just accurate, but objective, to confirm your information, when it is negative.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.