Newer posts are loading.
You are at the newest post.
Click here to check if anything new just came in.

November 16 2013

Öffentliche Aufträge an amerikanische Spionageunternehmen?

Die Süddeutsche Zeitung hat am Freitag eine Serie mit dem Titel “Geheimer Krieg” begonnen, die sich mit den Aktivitäten amerikanischer Geheimdienste und US-Militärs auf deutschem Boden beschäftigt und auch damit, in welchem Umfang private Spionageunternehmen eingebunden werden und wie insoweit die Zusammenarbeit mit bzw. Duldung durch deutsche Behörden und Regierungsstellen ausgestaltet ist.

Davon, dass Geheimdienste ein schmutziges Geschäft betreiben, bin ich seit längerer Zeit überzeugt. Dennoch bin ich von einem Teil dessen was die SZ gerade berichtet, überrascht bis schockiert. Vor allen Dingen, was die Rolle von Privatunternehmen angeht. Der Bericht “Dubioser Partner der Regierung“, der in der Print-Ausgabe den Titel “Berlin, vertrauensselig” trägt, handelt von dem IT-Unternehmen CSC. Dieses Unternehmen hat laut SZ die CIA bei der Verschleppung von Menschen unterstützt und war hierbei mit einer Tochterfirma auch an der Verschleppung von Khaled el-Masri beteiligt. Die NSA unterstützt der IT-Dienstleister CSC bei deren Spionagetätigkeit. Gerade dieses Unternehmen hat aber auch immer wieder öffentliche Aufträge in Deutschland erhalten und zwar in hochsensiblen Bereichen. In den letzten fünf Jahren hat das Beschaffungsamt des BMI laut SZ drei Rahmenverträge mit der CSC Deutschland Solutions GmbH geschlossen, die Grundlage verschiedener Einzelverträge mit Ministerien waren. Laut SZ testet die CSC den Staatstrojaner des BKA, unterstützte das BMJ bei der Einführung der elektronischen Akte für Bundesgerichte und hat das BMI bei der Einführung des elektronischen Passes beraten. Auch in das DE-Mail-Projekt soll die Firma CSC eingebunden sein.

Ist unsere Bundesregierung tatsächlich so schlecht informiert und blauäugig? Oder nutzt man die zweifelhafte Expertise von CSC in Kenntnis aller Umstände? Jede der beiden Alternativen muss uns Angst machen. Die SZ zeigt mit ihrer Artikelserie die schmutzige und gefährliche Seite der Tätigkeit von Geheimdiensten auf und das ist ein Thema, über das in der Vergangenheit leider viel zu wenig berichtet wurde.

September 02 2013

Des groupes terroristes ont tenté d'infiltrer le renseignement américain

Des groupes terroristes ont tenté d’infiltrer le renseignement américain
http://www.lemonde.fr/ameriques/article/2013/09/02/des-groupes-terroristes-ont-tente-d-infiltrer-le-renseignement-americain_346

Le gouvernement américain suspecte que plusieurs groupes liés à des organisations terroristes ou ennemies, telles que Al-Qaida, ont cherché à infiltrer les agences de renseignement américaines, rapporte ce matin le Washington Post. Conséquence, celles-ci ont mené des enquêtes sur des milliers d’employés.
La CIA a révélé qu’environ un cinquième des postulants à un emploi présentant un profil suspect avaient « des liens significatifs avec des terroristes et/ou des services de renseignement hostiles », écrit le journal, qui s’appuie sur un document confidentiel remis au quotidien par Edward Snowden.

#CIA #USA #renseignements #surveillance #Snowden #NSA #AlQaïda #Hamas #Hezbollah

August 26 2013

Veteran Saudi Power Player Prince Bandar Works To Build Support to Topple Assad - WSJ.com

Veteran Saudi Power Player Prince #Bandar Works To Build Support to Topple Assad - WSJ.com
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323423804579024452583045962.html

Curieux quand même que l’article évoque l’effet boomerang du « contra-gate » sans évoquer celui du financement des Ben Laden contre l’URSS en Afghanistan.

(Lire aussi la terreur des #Jordaniens)

Not everyone in the Obama administration is comfortable with the new U.S. partnership with the Saudis on Syria. Some officials said they fear it carries the same risk of spinning out of control as an earlier project in which Prince Bandar was involved—the 1980s #CIA program of secretly financing the Contras in Nicaragua against a leftist government. The covert program led to criminal convictions for U.S. operatives and international rebukes.

“This has the potential to go badly,” one former official said, citing the risk weapons will end up in the hands of violent anti-Western Islamists.

(...)

A generation ago, Prince Bandar, in a role foreshadowing his current one on behalf of Syrian opposition, helped the CIA arm the Afghan rebels who were resisting occupation by Soviet troops.

Arab diplomats said that in meeting with Russian officials this summer, the prince delivered the same message he gave the Soviets 25 years ago: that the kingdom had plenty of money and was committed to using it to prevail.

Incidemment,

Earlier this year it [the CIA] also began making salary payments to members of the Western-backed Free Syrian Army.

August 16 2013

Tiens, finalement, la CIA et le FBI avaient bien un dossier sur Chomsky. Une note du 8/0/1970 vient…

Tiens, finalement, la #CIA et le #FBI avaient bien un dossier sur #Chomsky.

Une note du 8/0/1970 vient d’être déclassifiée, prouvant la matérialité de la chose. À ce jour, il n’y a plus de dossier sur lui ; il a donc été détruit, en violation totale de la loi.

Question : saura-t-on un jour qui d’autre avait un dossier ?

Exclusive : After Multiple Denials, CIA Admits to Snooping on Noam Chomsky | The Cable
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/08/13/after_multiple_denials_cia_admits_to_snooping_on_noam_chomsk

For years, the Central Intelligence Agency denied it had a secret file on MIT professor and famed dissident Noam Chomsky. But a new government disclosure obtained by The Cable reveals for the first time that the agency did in fact gather records on the anti-war iconoclast during his heyday in the 1970s.

The disclosure also reveals that Chomsky’s entire CIA file was scrubbed from Langley’s archives, raising questions as to when the file was destroyed and under what authority.

The breakthrough in the search for Chomsky’s CIA file comes in the form of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. For years, FOIA requests to the CIA garnered the same denial: “We did not locate any records responsive to your request.” The denials were never entirely credible, given Chomsky’s brazen anti-war activism in the 60s and 70s — and the CIA’s well-documented track record of domestic espionage in the Vietnam era. But the CIA kept denying, and many took the agency at its word.

Now, a public records request by Chomsky biographer Fredric Maxwell reveals a memo between the CIA and the FBI that confirms the existence of a CIA file on Chomsky.

July 27 2013

La bataille du Chili est sans conteste un des plus saisissants films politique qui m'ait été donné…

La bataille du Chili est sans conteste un des plus saisissants films politique qui m’ait été donné de voir.
Le cinéaste et son équipe arrivent à capter cet instant si fragile ou la conscience politique collective du « peuple de gauche » entend le bruit des bottes et de la cravache de la soumission. les poings levés vont être coupés, l’ordre bourgeois, patronal, et militaire va régner. Une résistance sans armes va s’opérer jusqu’à la chute finale.
Bouleversant de voir comment une telle volonté politique d’organiser les moyens de productions, la répartition des richesses, et de la propriété va être écrasée par les forces les plus réactionnaires et conservatrices du pays.

La bataille du Chili (1973) un film documentaire en trois parties de Patricio Guzman avec la collaboration entre autres de Chris Marker

Ici est présenté la première partie :
L’insurrection de la bourgeoisie

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8ujr2_la-bataille-du-chili-1-sur-

Une analyse du film par Rosa Llorens
http://www.legrandsoir.info/la-bataille-du-chili-40-ans-apres-21028.html

Le #film, tourné pendant la présidence d’#Allende, dans des conditions dramatiques, pourrait s’intituler #Chronique d’un Coup d’État annoncé : effectivement, dès la victoire d’Allende aux élections de septembre 1970, les #partis_politiques de #droite, les secteurs #radicaux de l’#armée et la #CIA avaient mis au point la stratégie du #chaos qui devait conduire au #coup_d_État.
La grande difficulté, pour l’équipe de #tournage, dit P. Guzman, était le décalage entre le peu de moyens matériels (le film fut tourné grâce à la #pellicule offerte par #Chris_Marker, et monté, après le coup d’État, à #Cuba) et la masse d’#événements et l’#effervescence des années 70-73 : il fallait choisir et planifier ce qu’on allait couvrir ; les choix furent judicieux, puisqu’on suit le film dans l’angoisse, l’estomac noué, revivant les possibilités extraordinaires de cette période, tout en pensant aux #tragédies #humaines auxquelles elle a abouti ; mais on assiste aussi, au-delà du #documentaire, à de grands moments de #cinéma.
Les #séquences font alterner trois groupes, trois centres de #pouvoir : les #ouvriers dans leurs #usines, la #droite_parlementaire appuyée sur l’#armée, et, entre les deux, Allende et le gouvernement d’#Unité #Populaire.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8ulm1_la-bataille-du-chili-2-sur-5_news

Face à la #stratégie de tension et de #sabotage de la part de la droite, Allende ne pouvait compter que sur le #peuple : il a donc encouragé les ouvriers à s’#organiser, ce qu’ils ont fait avec une détermination et une efficacité impressionnantes ; les usines passent entre les mains du peuple, constituant les nouveaux « #cordones », où le travail est inséparable des #actions_de_défense : on voit les ouvriers dresser des #barricades et obliger la police mais aussi le #gouvernement, qui voulait revenir sur ces nationalisations sauvages, à reculer.

Mais le moment le plus fort, c’est l’assemblée des responsables de cordones face à la direction des #syndicats, la #CUT, où les #communistes jouent un rôle (modérateur) important. Un ouvrier, visiblement exaspéré par les discours du responsable de la CUT, prend la parole : « Vous nous avez demandé de nous organiser, nous nous sommes organisés - mais pour quoi faire ? Les #camarades sont fatigués de s’entendre dire que ce n’est pas le moment, qu’il faut rendre des usines, parce qu’elles appartiennent à la reine d’Angleterre ou à des #banques suisses. Les camarades ne comprennent pas, ils veulent agir pour soutenir notre camarade #Président. »

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8um4k_la-bataille-du-chili-p-guzman-3-sur_news
(...)

Pendant ce temps, la droite déroule son plan. L’armée suit sa propre #politique : elle encercle les usines pour vérifier qu’il ne s’y cache pas d’armes, fouillant et arrêtant les ouvriers - sans qu’elle ait jamais rien trouvé ; mais ces opérations servent à étudier les lieux possibles de #résistance et à habituer les jeunes #soldats à #affronter les ouvriers. Parallèlement, la « #société_civile », appuyée par les #médias (ou du moins 75% des médias) s’organise : en 1972, la grève des #transporteurs routiers paralyse le pays ; les « ménagères » typiques, en grosses lunettes de soleil de marque et coiffure au brushing impeccable, celles auxquelles les médias français donnaient toujours la parole pour rendre compte de la situation au Chili, collectent des fonds pour soutenir les grévistes (déjà subventionnés par la CIA) et les médias accusent le gouvernement d’atteinte à la #propriété_privée quand il essaie de #réquisitionner les camions.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8vwjm_la-bataille-du-chili-p-guzman-4-sur_news

Entre les deux, il y a Allende, fidèlement soutenu par des #manifestations #populaires, et toujours respectueux de la #Constitution, même quand la droite fait assassiner son aide de camp, le commandant #Araya, pour le couper des secteurs #loyalistes de l’armée. La séquence des funérailles d’Araya est la plus magistrale du film : on voit, littéralement, les officiers supérieurs, filmés en plan américain, se féliciter, dans le dos d’Allende, de leur succès et se concerter pour les étapes suivantes du plan. Guzman explique comment il a obtenu cet effet de naturel : il avait juché, bien en vue, un cameraman sur une chaise, pendant qu’un autre, plus discrètement, avec un zoom, prenait les vraies images. Mais que pesait le soutien des ouvriers aux mains_nues face aux #tanks et à l’aviation ? L’issue de la #confrontation, on la connaît, et le film nous fait entendre le dernier message d’Allende, depuis la #Moneda bombardée : « Que mes paroles soient le châtiment de ceux qui ont trahi », « Je paierai avec ma vie la loyauté du peuple », « L’#histoire est à nous et elle est faite par le peuple », bientôt, de nouveau, « s’ouvriront les larges avenues par où passe l’#homme #libre pour #construire une #société #meilleure ».

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8w0ls_la-bataille-du-chili-p-guzman-5-sur_news

#Chili #Salvador_Allende #Patricio_Guzman #Commando_communal #Nationalisation #Expropriation #Capitalisme #Socialisme #Marxisme #Fascisme #Ordre #Etudiant #Etats_unis #La-bataille_du_Chili #Vidéo

August 26 2010

May 03 2010

The spy who came in from the code

If you were going to pick an adjective to describe the Central Intelligence Agency, "open" wouldn't immediately spring to mind. But according to Carmen Medina, who recently retired from the CIA and will speak at Gov 2.0 Expo, openness is just what the agency needs.

Medina's Role at the CIA:

Carmen Medina: I just retired after 32 years at the CIA. I spent 25 years as a manager of analysts. In the mid part of this decade, I was sort of the number two in charge of analysis and also ended in charge of the Center for the Study of Intelligence, which is kind of like the Agency's think tank and lessons-learned center. During my career, I was a bit of a heretic in the organization, though a successful one I guess, in that I always questioned how things were done. From the beginning, I was really interested in how information technology and the Internet had the potential to change the way we did our business. So back in the late '90s, I was pushing hard to get all of our work online, even though a lot of people in the agency were skeptical about it.

Social media and extreme views:

CM: What the Internet allows, if you're an individual that has an extreme view, is the ability to broadcast that view in the privacy of your den. You can get information to support your view without having to go to any unusual places that would attract suspicion. You can find other people who hold the same views that you do. You're able to hide in plain sight, basically, while you're doing that. While I'm a strong believer in the Internet and social networking, like everything else that's happened in human history, it also offers a lot of potential for people who are not well-intentioned.

How our ideas about privacy have to change:

Gov 2.0 Expo 2010

CM: It struck me two or three years ago that our historical concepts of privacy were dependent upon what the technologies were at the time. So in my view, privacy is going to have to adjust to what is now possible. While some of the things that are now possible are scary to people, many add to the public good.

I'll say it in a more generic way: If you're using the power of social networking or monitoring to prevent activities that the community has decided are illegal, because there is law, then I don't think you have the privacy to do illegal things.

Some concepts of privacy, that we thought were rights, are going to have to give way as we find out that social networks are just a lot more efficient, and monitoring and digital ubiquity are all more efficient ways to enforce laws, for example. That's a big thing in Britain. I mean God only knows how many cameras they have on their streets. And they're using it in ways to fight crime that, frankly, I don't think is yet possible in the U.S. because of our privacy concerns.

It's going to be very tricky. A not-well-intentioned government, or a government with authoritarian tendencies, is going to use these technologies in ways that the citizenry wouldn't approve of. But that government is not going to give them a chance to approve it.

But let me also give you the other side of it. Government is viewed as inefficient and wasteful by American citizens. I would argue that one of the reasons why that view has grown is that they're comparing the inefficiency of government to how they relate to their bank or to their airline. Interestingly enough, for private industry to provide that level of service, there are a lot of legacy privacy barriers that are being broken. Private industry is doing all sorts of analysis of you as a consumer to provide you better service and to let them make more profit. But the same consumer that's okay with private industry doing that is not okay, in a knee-jerk reaction, with government doing that. And yet, if government, because of this dynamic, continues not to be able to adopt modern transactional practices, then it's going to fall further behind the satisfaction curve.

We have to rethink government along these lines. And it's interesting to me that at least in the British election, it's out there as an issue in an explicit way that it has yet to be in the U.S.

How failure to share information leads to more failure:

CM: One of the objections to social networking and transparent collaboration that you get at an agency like the CIA, is that when you are really doing something where you cannot have failure, the work has to be tightly controlled. It has to be much more point-to-point and hierarchical. I thought that was a stupid argument that needed to be taken apart.

The first two-thirds of my Expo talk will use the chronology of the 2003 blackout as an example. One of the main utilities had made a decision to buy a different process software, and so they were no longer paying for the upgrades to the old software. Some of those bugs, that would've otherwise been fixed, brought the system down. I'm going to talk about why high-reliability, high-risk organizations should be adopting the principles of transparent and collaborative work first, because when these kinds of organizations have catastrophic failure, it's usually because of stovepipes and lack of systemic awareness.

Since I come at this like a manager, I'm going to also talk about what it means for managers when you adapt transparent, collaborative, networked work. Most of what old-style managers are accustomed to doing is based on the industrial way of working. But if you create a transparent collaborative network, the manager becomes a monitor of the network's health and the network's talents. They make sure the mission is done, rather than acting as a quality control officer over every step of the process.

Why previous attempts to share intelligence have failed:

CM: In every instance that I can think of, people get sucked in by the technology solution without looking at the culture and the way people are doing the work. And when you overlay this new shiny toy on old processes, you actually make everything worse. People decide they have to create a big program and ask for a new budget line, and it has to be rolled out with bells and whistles. Then the contractors come along and see real opportunities for billable hours. So instead of getting modest iterative development, you get this massive program that takes 10 years to roll out. And you're still working on implementing a technology that's now three generations old. I've seen that happen.

But I still think it can be done. Most of what we would want to achieve we can achieve with existing technologies. You've got to start with the process. You have to change the objectives of the intelligence business to a certain degree. Make it less hierarchical and less about the "definitive answer." Once you agree that things could work differently, then different technological solutions will become apparent.

The way government adopts technology is broken:

CM: There's a tradition of huge IT programs and huge IT departments. And part of that is because that's how you play the budget game with Congress. But now we're moving into a world of apps. People are rolling out for pennies on the dollar little apps that can do essentially what a huge big government program is supposed to do. Five years from now, it's going to be unsustainable for government to still be saying it needs five years and $2 billion to create a new information-sharing system. It's nuts.

Can we crowdsource intelligence gathering?


CM: The intelligence community is betting that a closed network of limited people can actually be smarter about the world than the open network out in the world. And as a citizen, I don't think that's a good bet. In fact, people have been saying that for a while. There's a move toward greater openness called "outreach." But outreach is a very old-style static process: an event here, an event there. You're always going to lag, and you're always going to have less information about the world around you because you're within a closed network. I strongly believe that. I'll probably get in trouble for saying it, but that's my view.

There are ways to create trusted networks, and it would be fascinating to do some prototypes on that. Look at what happened when Steve Fossett got lost. Satellite images were farmed out to people to see if they could find anything. Another example is Mechanical Turk. I've joined Mechanical Turk. I've done little tasks on it. If you can itemize a job into small, discreet tasks, then you can farm it out to large networks of people. You could create trusted networks like Proctor & Gamble and some of these other companies do. There's just huge potential there.

This administration and these policymakers need to ask for this kind of stuff. It's like if you're raising money. You've got to make the ask. If you don't, you don't get it. With something as important as the intelligence community, something that's also difficult to change, you've got to make the ask.

This interview was condensed and edited.

Tags: cia gov20

March 10 2009

Older posts are this way If this message doesn't go away, click anywhere on the page to continue loading posts.
Could not load more posts
Maybe Soup is currently being updated? I'll try again automatically in a few seconds...
Just a second, loading more posts...
You've reached the end.

Don't be the product, buy the product!

Schweinderl