Communities of Practice – Page 991 – Public Intelligence Blog

Phillip Knightley: When is a terror threat not a terror threat? Let's ask a man called Felix…

All intelligence services rely on convincing the public there is a monster at large waiting to grab them

The British undercover agent in the underpants bomb plot that has emerged so sensationally in recent days, was recruited using a technique pioneered by the founder of the KGB, Felix Dzerzhinsky. And Dzerzhinsky would be looking down from wherever he is now and smiling with satisfaction at the latest twists of an episode in which Western intelligence agencies have apparently foiled a plan to attack a US-bound plane.

Dzerzhinsky took over anti-terrorism duties in the newly-emerged Russia at the end of the First World War when the country was riven with revolt and violence. He realised that he had no chance of identifying all the terrorist threats and those planning to perpetrate them. Instead he developed a questionable technique that has become part of espionage theory throughout the international intelligence community: you lure the terrorist to you.

When the story of the foiled bomb plot first broke it seemed too good to be true. The security authorities had intercepted a man carrying a supposedly undetectable bomb which was being examined at the FBI laboratories in Quantico, Virginia. This suggested an amazing piece of intelligence work. What had led the authorities to the man? Why were they suspicious of him? Had they been tipped off? As details emerged it became apparent that the action was rather more straightforward.

Continue reading “Penguin: US/UK Perpetuate Soviet False Flag Model + Meta-RECAP”

2012/05/122012/05/12

DefDog: CEOs Receive Secret Cyber-Scare Briefing from USG

Corruption, Government, IO Impotency, Military

There are some scare tactics in this….while it is possible, I am not convinced that CyberCom has the capabilities, they are pretty noisy in their actions…..and then we have Y2K as a precedent for all talk and no damage.

Cyber Briefings ‘Scare The Bejeezus' Out Of CEOs

Cybersecurity analysts work in the watch and warning center during the first tour of the government's secretive cyberdefense lab intended to protect the nation's power, water and chemical plants, electrical grid and other facilities on Sept. 29, 2011, in Idaho Falls, Idaho.

Published: May 09, 2012

by Tom Gjelten

For the CEOs of companies such as Dell and Hewlett-Packard, talk of cyberweapons and cyberwar could have been abstract. But at a classified security briefing in spring 2010, it suddenly became quite real.

“We can turn your computer into a brick,” U.S. officials told the startled executives, according to a participant in the meeting.

The warning came during a discussion of emerging cyberthreats at a secret session hosted by the office of the Director of National Intelligence and the departments of Defense and Homeland Security, along with Gen. Keith Alexander, head of the U.S. military's Cyber Command.

The meeting was part of a public-private partnership dubbed the “Enduring Security Framework” that was launched at the end of 2008. The initiative brings chief executives from top technology and defense companies to Washington, D.C., two or three times a year for classified briefings. The purpose is to share information about the latest developments in cyberwarfare capabilities, highlighting the cyberweapons that could be used against the executives' own companies.

“We scare the bejeezus out of them,” says one U.S. government participant.

The hope is that the executives, who are given a special one-day, top-secret security clearance, will go back to their companies and order steps to deal with the vulnerabilities that have been pointed out.

“I personally know of one CEO for whom it was a life-changing experience,” says Richard Bejtlich, chief security officer for Mandiant, a cybersecurity firm. “Gen. Alexander sat him down and told him what was going on. This particular CEO, in my opinion, should have known [about the cyberthreats] but did not, and now it has colored everything about the way he thinks about this problem.”

Read full AP article.

Phi Beta Iota: In fairness to General Alexander, he is making up for decades of dereliction of duty by OMB and his predecessors, but he is also going about it completely wrong, spending tens of billions on secret capabilities that are at best immature and incomplete, while failing to illuminate the battlefield publicly and call for common open source hardware, open source software, and open spectrum that are secure at “root.” He is completely ignoring the related matter of computational mathematics and mathematical ethics.

2012/05/112012/05/12

Robert Steele: World Bank Open Access / Open Knowledge

Access, Advanced Cyber/IO, Civil Society, Collective Intelligence, Counter-Oppression/Counter-Dictatorship Practices, Cultural Intelligence, Earth Intelligence, Ethics, Future-Oriented, Government, International Aid, IO Deeds of Peace, Key Players, Knowledge, Non-Governmental, Officers Call, Open Government, Peace Intelligence, Policies, Politics of Science & Science of Politics, Resilience, Threats, True Cost, World Bank

steele smiling final — Robert David STEELE Vivas

Press Release

WASHINGTON, April 10, 2012 – The World Bank today announced that it will implement a new Open Access policy for its research outputs and knowledge products, effective July 1, 2012. The new policy builds on recent efforts to increase access to information at the World Bank and to make its research as widely available as possible. As the first phase of this policy, the Bank launched today a new Open Knowledge Repository and adopted a set of Creative Commons copyright licenses.

The new Open Access policy, which will be rolled out in phases in the coming year, formalizes the Bank’s practice of making research and knowledge freely available online. Now anybody is free to use, re-use and redistribute most of the Bank's knowledge products and research outputs for commercial or non-commercial purposes.

“Knowledge is power,” World Bank Group President Robert B. Zoellick said. “Making our knowledge widely and readily available will empower others to come up with solutions to the world’s toughest problems. Our new Open Access policy is the natural evolution for a World Bank that is opening up more and more.”

The policy will also apply to Bank research published with third party publishers including the institution’s two journals—World Bank Research Observer (WBRO) and World Bank Economic Review (WBER)—which are published by Oxford University Press, but in accordance with the terms of third party publisher agreements. The Bank will respect publishing embargoes, but expects the amount of time it takes for externally published Bank content to be included in its institutional repository to diminish over time.

Event 21 May 2012 1230-1400 Washington DC

Join us for an Open Discussion: What the Bank's Open Access Policy Means for Development

Monday, May 21, 2012 12:30 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. ET/16:30 – 18:00 GMT

The World Bank will be adopting an Open Access Policy as of July 1. In addition, the Bank recently launched the World Bank Open Knowledge Repository (OKR) and became the first major international organization to adopt a set of copyright licenses from Creative Commons. As a result, a wealth of Bank research and knowledge products are now freely available to anyone in the world for use, re-use, and sharing.

Why is this so significant?
How can open access contribute to the goal of eliminating poverty?
How does the new policy impact the Bank's researchers and authors?
How will the OKR benefit users of Bank knowledge, in particular those in developing countries?

Join us in person at the World Bank or online for a lively conversation about these and other aspects of open access to research, and its potential for development progress.

FEATURED GUESTS:
Peter Suber Director of the Harvard Open Access Project and a leading voice in the open access movement	Cyril Muller Vice President for External Affairs at the World Bank
Michael Carroll American University law professor and founding board member of Creative Commons	Adam Wagstaff Research Manager of the World Bank's Development Research Group
HOST:
Carlos Rossel World Bank Publisher

THE OPEN SOURCE EVERYTHING MANIFESTO: Transparency, Truth & Trust

INTELLIGENCE FOR EARTH: Clarity, Diversity, Integrity, & Sustainability

COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCE: Creating a Prosperous World at Peace

Open Source Agency: Executive Access Point

2012/05/112012/05/11

Owl: Frack Fluids Can Migrate to Aquifers Within Years

07 Other Atrocities, 12 Water, Civil Society, Commerce, Corruption, Earth Intelligence, General Accountability Office, Government, Idiocy, Office of Management and Budget

New Study Predicts Frack Fluids Can Migrate to Aquifers Within Years

A new study has raised fresh concerns about the safety of gas drilling in the Marcellus Shale, concluding that fracking chemicals injected into the ground could migrate toward drinking water supplies far more quickly than experts have previously predicted.

More than 5,000 wells were drilled in the Marcellus between mid-2009 and mid-2010, according to the study, which was published in the journal Ground Water two weeks ago. Operators inject up to 4 million gallons of fluid, under more than 10,000 pounds of pressure, to drill and frack each well.

Scientists have theorized that impermeable layers of rock would keep the fluid, which contains benzene and other dangerous chemicals, safely locked nearly a mile below water supplies. This view of the earth's underground geology is a cornerstone of the industry's argument that fracking poses minimal threats to the environment.

But the study, using computer modeling, concluded that natural faults and fractures in the Marcellus, exacerbated by the effects of fracking itself, could allow chemicals to reach the surface in as little as “just a few years.”

“Simply put, [the rock layers] are not impermeable,” said the study's author, Tom Myers, an independent hydrogeologist whose clients include the federal government and environmental groups.

“The Marcellus shale is being fracked into a very high permeability,” he said. “Fluids could move from most any injection process.”

2012/05/11

Eagle: Are We Eating Ourselves to Death?

07 Health, 07 Other Atrocities, Civil Society, Commerce, Cultural Intelligence, Government

Is The Food We Eat Killing Us?

Are we digging our own graves with our teeth? Is the food that we eat every day slowly killing us? When I was growing up, I just assumed that everything in the grocery store was perfectly safe and perfectly healthy. I just assumed that the government and the big corporations were watching out for us and that they would never allow something harmful to be sold in the stores. Boy, was I wrong! Today, the average American diet is extremely unhealthy. Most of the foods that we all love to eat are absolutely packed with things that will damage our health. Many of the ingredients that make our foods “taste good” such as fat, salt and sugar can be extremely damaging in large amounts. On top of that, most processed foods are absolutely loaded with chemicals and preservatives. The next time you go to the grocery store, just start turning over packages and read the “ingredients” that are being put into our food. If you have never done this before, you will be absolutely amazed. In many of our most common foods there are “ingredients” that I cannot even pronounce. Sadly, most Americans have no idea that eating a steady diet of these processed foods will likely leave them massively overweight, very sick and much closer to death.

American Pig — Click on Image to Enlarge

Eating healthy takes more time, more effort and more money than eating poorly does. Unfortunately, most Americans are content to chow down on foods that are quick to make and that taste good. In particular, Americans are absolutely addicted to foods that are loaded with sugar and high fructose corn syrup. When you start looking at food product labels, you will find that either sugar or high fructose corn syrup is in almost everything. For example, I was absolutely amazed when I learned that most bread sold in our grocery stores contains high fructose corn syrup. Why in the world would they need to put that into our bread? Today, Americans are consuming far more sugar and high fructose corn syrup than ever before, and this has many health professionals very alarmed.

Read full article.

2012/05/11

Mini-Me: $4 Billion for Israel, Nothing for US Jobs

03 Economy, 07 Other Atrocities, 08 Wild Cards, Budgets & Funding, Corruption, DoD, Government, Idiocy

Huh?

Congressional Committee Proposal would raise US taxpayer support for Israel’s military in 2013 to a record $4 billion.

Tim King | Salem-News.com

(WASHINGTON DC) – As news about Israeli political parties merging dominates headlines, this one is being overlooked. The US House of Representatives Defense Appropriations Subcommittee yesterday approved almost $1 billion for Israel’s anti-missile defense programs.

The expensive systems are called Arrow 3. The American politicians propose spending this exorbitant amount in order to upgrade the current Arrow system, David’s Sling, and Iron Dome.

The names are fancy, unlike the missiles they say they are defending themselves from. The munitions fired from Gaza are al Qassam rockets and they are little more than unguided fireworks.

Israeli and American media portray the ‘rocket attacks from Gaza’ as a serious danger and they claim that the large U.S. tax payer contributions are necessary in order to ‘defend’ Israel. The Gaza rockets have in all time, killed a total of 28 Israeli citizens. Some place the number at 29.

The total appropriation is the highest ever approved for the four programs; it reflects the willingness of the United States to back yet another racist, apartheid government that uses American investments to send Israeli youth to college, and to kill Palestinians; Muslims and Christians, who have few rights under a system that Israel created, offering one set of laws and punishments to Jews, and a different set for all other human beings.

Read full article.

Phi Beta Iota: Equally troubling is the continued borrowing of $1 trillion a year and the continued waste of over $2 trillion a year.

2012/05/112012/05/12

David Isenberg: Death for Reed-Elsevier, Life for Knowledge

Academia, Access, Advanced Cyber/IO, Collective Intelligence, Commercial Intelligence, Knowledge

Elsevier Versus Wikipedia: Academics Revolt Against Giant Publisher

by Pratap Chatterjee, CorpWatch Blog

CorpWatch, May 11th, 2012

Over 11,000 academics have pledged to boycott Elsevier, the Dutch publishing giant, for profiting off their work and making it unavailable to the general public. Now Jimmy Wales, the founder of Wikipedia, is about to turn the world of corporate academic publishing on its head, in the same way that his website effectively took down Encyclopedia Britannica.

Elsevier is part of the Anglo-Dutch company Reed Elsevier, which had 2010 revenues of $9.3 billion and annual profits of over $1.67 billion. It publishes over 250,000 articles in some 2,000 journals a year that range from global publications like the Lancet to more specific ones like the Journal of the Egyptian Mathematical Society.

Some of these journals are very expensive. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, for example, sells for $31,000 to Japanese subscribers and $25,000 a year to European and Iranian subscribers. (The rest of the world can buy it for a mere $20,930 a year!) There is a market: University libraries in the UK alone spend over $320 million to make these publications available to their students.

Publishers like Elsevier knew they were onto a good thing because before the arrival of the Internet, there was no other way for researchers to tell their peers about the important work they were doing, or vice versa. Plus getting published in a respectable journal was also the key to keeping academic jobs and getting promotions, so the researchers and professors – like rock musicians and best-selling writers – were leery about giving away their work for free.

“(P)ublishing companies became the de facto gatekeepers to scientific knowledge, restricting who could see the latest ideas rather than allowing ideas to spread as far as possible,” writes Aloke Jha in the Guardian.

Continue reading “David Isenberg: Death for Reed-Elsevier, Life for Knowledge”