LE VOÎLE DÉCHIRÉ (1) Index du Forum

LE VOÎLE DÉCHIRÉ (1)
...

 FAQFAQ   RechercherRechercher   MembresMembres   GroupesGroupes   S’enregistrerS’enregistrer 
 ProfilProfil   Se connecter pour vérifier ses messages privésSe connecter pour vérifier ses messages privés   ConnexionConnexion 

RÉFORME DES MÉDIAS - MEDIA REFORM - CYBERTERRORISM & HUMAN CONTROL (PARTIE 2)
Aller à la page: <  1, 2, 3, … 12, 13, 14  >
 
Poster un nouveau sujet   Répondre au sujet    LE VOÎLE DÉCHIRÉ (1) Index du Forum -> NOUVELLES LOIS ANTITERRORISTES/NEW ANTITERRORIST LAWS -> RÉFORME DES MÉDIAS - MEDIA REFORM - CYBERTERRORISM (PARTIE 2)
Sujet précédent :: Sujet suivant  
Auteur Message
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Lun 20 Aoû - 16:33 (2012)    Sujet du message: GOVERNMENT HAS SHUTTERED 50 DATA CENTERS SINCE MAY Répondre en citant

GOVERNMENT HAS SHUTTERED 50 DATA CENTERS SINCE MAY


Eimantas Buzas/Shutterstock.com


By Joseph Marks August 17, 20120 Comments

NEXTGOV
NEWSLETTERSUBSCRIBE


The government has shuttered 318 data centers since 2010, 50 of them in the past three months, according to updated figures from the Office of Management and Budget released Friday.

Agencies plan to close 56 more centers by the end of September and 363 by the close of September 2013, according to a spreadsheet posted to the government open data platform Data.gov.

The government had closed 268 data centers as of the last update April 30. Friday’s update included all data centers closed as of Aug. 3.

OMB plans to shut down about 40 percent of the government’s original stock of roughly 3,100 data centers by the end of 2012. The program is expected to save $5 billion, though those savings won’t all have accrued by the 2015 deadline, federal Chief Information Officer Steven VanRoekel has said.

The initiative is aimed at modernizing the government’s computer storage by shifting to more efficient consolidated data centers and to vendor-operated computer clouds.

http://www.nextgov.com/cloud-computing/2012/08/government-has-shuttered-50-data-centers-may/57497/?oref=nextgov_today_nl


Revenir en haut
Publicité






MessagePosté le: Lun 20 Aoû - 16:33 (2012)    Sujet du message: Publicité

PublicitéSupprimer les publicités ?
Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Mar 21 Aoû - 19:32 (2012)    Sujet du message: L'INDE BLOQUE DES MESSAGES SUITE À DES MENACES Répondre en citant

L'INDE BLOQUE DES MESSAGES SUITE À DES MENACES

Rien dans le message qui parle d'arrêter ces extrémistes musulmans, qui sèment la peur et la destruction dans ce pays.



Agence France-Presse (New Delhi)
21 août 2012 | 07 h 25





L'Inde a demandé à des sites de réseaux sociaux sur Internet de supprimer des messages provocateurs et a bloqué du contenu en ligne après l'envoi de menaces anonymes ayant provoqué l'exode de travailleurs migrants depuis le sud du pays vers leurs foyers dans le nord-est.
Les médias locaux estiment que plus de 35 000 personnes ont fui les villes de Bangalore et de Bombay ces derniers jours.

Cet exode a été déclenché par l'envoi de menaces sur les téléphones portables et l'Internet affirmant que la population originaire de l'Assam, serait attaquée par des musulmans après la fin du ramadan, en représailles à de récentes violences interethniques qui ont opposé les deux communautés.

Le gouvernement indien a affirmé que de nombreux messages de menaces avaient été envoyés du Pakistan, pays voisin et rival de l'Inde.

Le ministère des Communications a indiqué qu'une demande avait été envoyée le 17 août aux sites de réseaux sociaux pour empêcher la publication de contenus provocateurs mais qu'«un tel contenu malfaisant et incendiaire continuait d'apparaître sur les sites».

Dans un communiqué diffusé lundi soir, le ministère a précisé que le gouvernement était en discussion avec des représentants de ces sites pour réfréner les messages «haineux» et la mise en ligne de fausse vidéos.

«Nous attendons toutefois beaucoup plus et une action plus rapide pour répondre à une question aussi sensible», a-t-il poursuivi.

Des responsables au sein du ministère n'ont pas souhaité citer les sites concernés. Twitter, Google et Facebook n'étaient pas joignables dans l'immédiat.

Le gouvernement a par ailleurs indiqué que 245 pages web ont été bloquées au cours des derniers jours, sans fournir plus de précisions.

Interrogé mardi par la presse pour savoir si les sites avaient été utilisés pour attiser la tension interethnique dans le pays, le ministre de l'Intérieur, Sushil Kumar Shinde, a simplement répondu: «Nous avons suffisamment de preuves. Nous poursuivons l'enquête».

Dans l'Assam, les violences entre musulmans et une tribu locale, la tribu Bodo, ont déjà fait 80 morts et provoqué le déplacement de plus de 400 000 personnes au cours des trois dernières semaines, selon les autorités.

Les deux communautés se disputent depuis des années la propriété de terres dans cette région reculée de l'Inde.

L'Inde a également suspendu temporairement l'envoi de textos de masse (à plus de cinq destinataires en même temps) pour essayer d'enrayer la propagation des menaces et rumeurs.

http://techno.lapresse.ca/nouvelles/201208/21/01-4566748-linde-bloque-des-messages-suite-a-des-menaces.php


Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Ven 24 Aoû - 14:39 (2012)    Sujet du message: OBAMA FACES DELICATE DECISIONS AS CYBERATTACK FEARS RISE Répondre en citant

OBAMA FACES DELICATE DECISIONS AS CYBERATTACK FEARS RISE


President Barack Ob, ... ] // White House photo

By Josh Smith National JournalAugust 23, 2012
NEXTGOV


At the height of the economic crisis in 2008, Saturday Night Live’s “Weekend Update” comedy news show rolled out the character Oscar Rogers as a faux financial commentator. His advice on how to restore the economy? “Fix it! It needs to be fixed! Now!”

Four years later, lawmakers are grappling with a cybercrisis, and despite rising concerns, legislative debates over how to secure U.S. networks and infrastructure have often resembled nothing so much as Oscar Rogers yelling “Fix it!”

Now, with Congress looking unlikely to act anytime soon to fix vulnerabilities in the nation’s computer systems that leave them open to cyberattacks, President Obama is weighing the pros and cons of using anexecutive order to do what Congress hasn’t.

Experts in government and industry alike report a tide of attacks aimed at stealing information from individuals, companies, and government agencies, potentially making a strong case for presidential action.

Further bolstering the case are warnings from top national-security officials that a catastrophic attack on a critical system like those that run energy grids or chemical plants could cause damage to the economy or even loss of life.

But Obama needs to consider his options carefully, because any unilateral steps could invite accusations from his critics of overstepping his authority. As the acrimonious debate over antipiracy legislation illustrated earlier this year, simmering Internet issues can easily explode.

In the final days before the August recess, the Senate hit an impasse on broad cybersecurity legislation that the White House and national-security and defense leaders support. The bill stalled after businesses and Republicans said the legislation would create burdensome regulations for industry without doing enough to shore up defenses against cyberattacks.

Top White House counterterrorism aide John Brennan said earlier this month that Obama was looking at the possibility of an executive order but that there is no decision yet.

Lee Hamilton, a Democratic former House member who sits on a board that advises the Homeland Security Department and who examined government security failures as cochair of the 9/11 Commission, said that Obama is right to consider moving forward on his own. He said the stalemate in Congress is a “serious breakdown” reminiscent of failures before the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.

“The preference would be to work together with Congress, but the threat is serious enough that an executive order is in line,” he said. “There is certainly a lack of urgency in dealing with this, and it’s not a business-as-usual problem.

Given the fact that Congress hasn’t acted, the president has the obligation to put together options to secure the country.”

While the debate in Congress largely broke down along party lines, some prominent Republicans support the cybersecurity standards backed by the White House.

Top national-security advisers for GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney, such as former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and former National Security Agency and Central Intelligence Agency chief Michal Hayden, differed with Republicans in Congress and publicly called for the Senate to pass provisions that have Obama’s support.

Romney campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul declined to elaborate on the Republican candidate’s assertion that more needs to be done to secure American networks, or comment on whether he would favor using an executive order in the absence of legislation. But she reiterated Romney’s promise to make cybersecurity an early priority and didn’t rule out executive action. Romney's plan would require agencies to begin developing a new national cybersecurity strategy within the first 100 days of his administration. “Once the strategy is formulated he will determine how best it can be implemented,” Saul said in an e-mail.

Polls show that while Americans express concerns over cyberattacks, they, too, are divided over what should be done.

Separate surveys published by United Technologies/National Journal and The Washington Post over the summer found that a majority of Americans prefer that the government either not create standards for private companies, or keep any standards voluntary.

Backers of the White House’s proposals, however, say an executive order could add clarity to the debate and prove to skeptics that the government can play a greater role in protecting American networks without violating privacy or burdening private businesses.

“I think it’s hard to make things any messier than it was politically,” said James Lewis, an expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “If done right, an executive order could help critics reconsider their arguments.”

That’s an analysis echoed by University of California (Berkeley) professor Steven Weber who said many people seem to be “sleepwalking” when it comes to the threat of cyberattacks. An executive order, he said, could reform cybersecurity policies before a catastrophic attack galvanizes public opinion.

An executive order could give Obama the chance to take a strong stand on a rising national-security concern while portraying Republicans in Congress as ditherers.

But an order is unlikely to accomplish all of the White House’s aims. It couldn’t hand DHS wider authority to ensure that certain private networks are secure. Nor could it entirely ease legal restrictions that prevent businesses from sharing threat information. Even policy changes for some federal network-security policies would likely need congressional action. Additionally, any action would need to avoid inciting privacy watchdogs who fear cybersecurity could be used as an excuse to undermine civil liberties.

And some analysts said the politics of an executive order could cut both ways for Obama. Presidents often win political debates that pit them against an unpopular Congress, especially one perceived as unable to do anything substantive, said Peter Feaver, a former National Security Council staffer during the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations. But if Obama were to take unilateral action, it would give his critics on the right an opening to paint him as an “imperial” president and to accuse him of saddling business with new regulations, Feaver said.

“In general, White Houses win in these fights with Congress, but this White House has played this card many times,” Feaver said. “This is an issue where there are bound to be unintended consequences and any cybersecurity measures will need a system to fix and update the provisions down the road. This administration has a hard sell assuring people to trust them to fix things later.”

Paul Rosenzweig, a consultant and visiting fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, said a cybersecurity executive order could play into both the “imperial presidency and do-nothing-Congress” narratives, but said he thinks there is a genuine possibility for a future compromise and unilateral action by Obama would do little to actually help secure private networks.

http://www.nextgov.com/cio-briefing/2012/08/obama-faces-delicate-decisions-cyberattack-fears-rise/57608/?oref=nextgov_today_nl


Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Lun 27 Aoû - 19:38 (2012)    Sujet du message: DATA MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS FOR GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS Répondre en citant

DATA MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS FOR GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS

+1 877 263 8277Contact Sales http://livechat.boldchat.com/aid/3438906697823849762/bc.chat?cwdid=99647641…



OverviewCivilianDODFederal System IntegratorsState and Local GovernmentU.S. Public Sector Contacts


NetApp helps agencies meet the challenges of exploding data growth by simplifying the complexities of storage management while cutting costs. NetApp can help DoD, civilian, intelligence, state, and local government organizations :

  • Secure both classified and “ordinary” data
  • Maintain continuity of service
  • Store and move data without degrading network performance
  • Accommodate data growth while reducing storage investments

Data Growth Accelerating IT Changes
With data volumes growing exponentially, getting information to the right people at the right time is crucial. So is cutting the cost of storing and managing data. Flexible and efficient IT from NetApp enables agencies to do both.




Flexible IT
Flexible IT from NetApp and our partners is faster and more adaptable than traditional approaches. Powered by shared, virtualized infrastructures, Flexible IT enables agencies to deploy affordable, always-on IT services—at the speed of today’s missions.



Efficient IT
Storage is the number one line item in most agency IT budgets. But are agencies buying more storage than they need? NetApp helps agencies build an efficient storage foundation so they can:

  • Use half the storage of traditional approaches in many cases
  • Often realize payback windows of as little as six to nine months
  • Cut infrastructure and data storage costs

By leveraging best practices for shared infrastructure, we help agencies drive more value from their IT investments so they can do far more while spending much less.

NetApp is a Fortune 500 company and has a U.S. Government-approved Small Business Subcontracting Plan.
For more information, contact the U.S. Public Sector Team

http://www.netapp.com/us/solutions/industry/federal-government/federal-government.html


Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Jeu 13 Sep - 22:50 (2012)    Sujet du message: UNITED NATIONS PARTNERSHIP POSES MAJOR THREAT TO ONLINE FREE SPEECH Répondre en citant



UNITED NATIONS PARTNERSHIP POSES MAJOR THREAT TO ONLINE FREE SPEECH

Breaking News |September 12, 2012 |

(Madison Ruppert) The highly secretive Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations are coming under increased fire from both government officials like Senator Ron Wyden and civil society organizations like the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

More information on the somewhat mysterious TPP negotiations emerged recently in a Congressional Research Service (CRS) report published by the Federation of American Scientists which can be read here.

In a recent blog post, Sandra Fulton of the ACLU’s Washington Legislative Office went as far as to call the TPP the “biggest threat to free speech and intellectual property that you’ve never heard of,” which is likely not all that much of an exaggeration.

Others have characterized the TPP as “SOPA on steroids,” referring to the Stop Online Piracy Act which was abandoned thanks to a great deal of public activism. However, it became quite clear that SOPA would not be the end of these efforts.

As the EFF points out in a blog post, the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) is going above and beyond in the TPP negotiations by not just pushing for the proposed changes to intellectual property law but the USTR is also making a concerted effort to avoid any and all Congressional oversight.

According to the EFF, “the USTR has recently rebuffed a request from the staff director on the Senate Finance Committee’s International Trade Subcommittee to review documents pertaining to the negotiations.”

Speaking out against the USTR’s activities, Senator Ron Wyden, the Chairman of the Subcommittee, wrote that his office “is responsible for conducting oversight over the USTR and trade negotiations.

“To do that, I asked that my staff obtain the proper security credentials to view the information that USTR keeps confidential and secret,” continued Wyden. “This is material that fully describes what the USTR is seeking in the TPP talks on behalf of the American people and on behalf of Congress. More than two months after receiving the proper security credentials, my staff is still barred from viewing the details of the proposals that USTR is advancing.”

In other words, even though Wyden’s staff has already received “the proper security credentials,” they are, for some strange reason, still blocked from actually viewing the details of the proposals.

It is truly tragic when our so-called representatives can’t even know what the government is doing in our name. Clearly there is no regard for transparency (so much for the most transparent administration in history) and even less regard for the rights of the American people.

The EFF recently was able to get a more detailed look at how exactly the ACLU is working to bring transparency and openness to the TPP negotiations directly from Sandra Fulton and Gabe Rottman of the ACLU.

When asked how the TPP relates to the ACLU’s quest to fight for the protection of digital freedoms, the ACLU representatives said, “The TPP relates to the ACLU’s agenda of protecting free speech and privacy online, open government principles and ultimately protecting the Internet as the most open and innovative platform the world has seen.”

“While strong regulations are necessary to protect IP and promote innovation online, these must be crafted carefully and in a fully transparent fashion,” they continued. This is an incredibly important point which must be emphasized. In opposing CISPA, SOPA, the Protect IP Act (PIPA), ACTA, and the TPP, I am not saying that we should not protectintellectual property and online innovation.

To take such a position would be entirely nonsensical since I rely on such protections provided for my work as well.

“We are concerned that an overly broad policy to crackdown on copyright infringement would allow for the takedown of non-infringing content as well, in violation of the First Amendment, which was the same concern presented by SOPA and PIPA,” said the ACLU’s Fulton and Rottman.

“We also have strong concerns over any provision that would create legal incentives for ISPs to step up surveillance of Internet communications in search of suspected copyright infringement, which would potentially endanger the privacy of users. We also believe that whole site takedowns pose serious due process concerns,” they added.

The EFF brings out a quite important point in asking, “No one in the public has had access to the official TPP text. So what do you expect from the US government in regard to the TPP negotiation process moving forward?”

“First of all, we do not believe domestic IP law can or should be changed through international agreements. While the administration insists TPP will not change substantive US law, we are concerned that this will not be the case,” the ACLU responded. “Signing the agreement could make it unnecessarily more difficult for Congress to update copyrightlaws while staying compliant with new international obligations.”

“If negotiations of an international treaty that could affect domestic enforcement of IP law are to continue they must proceed in an open and fully transparent fashion. All negotiations must take place in a way where all interested parties, including those representing civil society, are able to participate,” said the ACLU.

When asked what the average citizen can do to engage in the TPP negotiation process, the ACLU recommended that citizens contact their representatives directly in order to demand Congressional oversight of the TPP, which is sorely lacking at this point.

They also said that citizens can actually directly lobby the USTR, although I personally think that effort might be a bit less fruitful than going to members of Congress.

“We are very concerned with the President circumventing constitutional checks and balances by wrongly asserting fast track authority in order to negotiate the agreement without Congressional oversight,” said the ACLU in summing up their thoughts on the TPP.

In order for any progress to be made, maximum engagement from citizens is absolutely required. Please use this tool to contact your representative and do not hesitate to call, write letters and emails or even show up at your representative’s office to demand oversight of the TPP negotiations.

We’ve seen that if the people get organized and raise a united voice against a piece of legislation or an issue, there can actually be some significant impact. However, if it is only a few people engaged in actually speaking out, it is much easier to ignore the outrage.

Did I forget anything or miss any errors? Would you like to make me aware of a story or subject to cover? Or perhaps you want to bring your writing to a wider audience? Feel free to contact me at admin@EndtheLie.com with your concerns, tips, questions, original writings, insults or just about anything that may strike your fancy.

More at EndtheLie.com - http://EndtheLie.com/2012/09/08/aclu-tpp-is-the-biggest-threat-to-free-speech-and-intellectual-property-that-youve-never-heard-of/#ixzz26IfSEkhg

http://govtslaves.info/united-nations-partnership-poses-major-threat-to-online-free-speech/


Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Ven 14 Sep - 16:20 (2012)    Sujet du message: INFILTRATION : LES TECHNIQUES DES AGENTS DU SYSTÈME MONDIALISTE AFIN DE CONTRÔLER LES FORUMS ET L’OPINION PUBLIQUE ! Répondre en citant



INFILTRATION : LES TECHNIQUES DES AGENTS DU SYSTÈME MONDIALISTE AFIN DE CONTRÔLER LES FORUMS ET L’OPINION PUBLIQUE !







Chers amis,
Il n’est pas rare de tomber sur – voire de participer à – des FORUMS INTERNET OU DES GROUPES DE DISCUSSION QUI SONT INFILTRÉS DE TOUTE PART PAR DES AGENTS MALFAISANTS DU SYSTÈME MONDIALISTE…
L’ARTICLE CI-DESSOUS NOUS EXPLIQUE LES TECHNIQUES SOURNOISES MISES EN PLACE PAR CES AGENTS AFIN DE :

• CONTRÔLER LES MILITANTS,

• DISCRÉDITER UN FORUM,

• FAIRE TOUT CE QU’IL FAUT AFIN QUE LES GENS CONTINUENT CROIRE AUX MENSONGES ENTRETENUS PAR LE GOUVERNEMENT, LA PRESSE ET LES AUTORITÉS,

• MANIPULER LES ACTIVISTES ET

• FAIRE ÉCHOUER TOUTE TENTATIVE D’INFORMATION RÉELLE OU DE RÉACTION POPULAIRE.

Voici donc un article auquel vous pourrez constamment vous référer.

BONNE LECTURE… ET BONNE RÉVOLUTION, SURTOUT ! Vic.

Source : http://www.wikistrike.com/article-les-techniques-secretes-pour-controler-le…

Dimanche 5 août 2012

LES TECHNIQUES SECRETES POUR CONTROLER LES FORUMS ET L'OPINION PUBLIQUE



Attention, c'est du lourd !

LE 12 JUILLET DERNIER, LE SITE CRYPTOME (cf. http://cryptome.org/ ), sorte d'ancêtre à Wikileaks (cf. http://wikileaks.org/ ), qui publie des documents que les gouvernements et les sociétés n'aimeraient pas voir sur le net, A MIS EN LIGNE LE TEMOIGNAGE ET LES EXPLICATIONS TECHNIQUES D'UN EX-AGENT DE COINTELPRO (cf. http://cryptome.org/2012/07/gent-forum-spies.htm ). COINTELPRO EST UNE ORGANISATION US LIEE AU FBI DONT LA MISSION ETAIT DE FAIRE DE LA DESINFORMATION ET DE FOUTRE LE BORDEL PARMI LES GROUPES D'ACTIVISTES. OFFICIELLEMENT, COINTELPRO A DISPARU EN 71, MAIS L'ORGANISATION A JUSTE CHANGE DE NOM. MAINTENANT, EN PLUS D'INFILTRER DE MANIERE CLASSIQUE DES GROUPES D'ACTIVISTES, CETTE OU CES ORGANISATIONS GOUVERNEMENTALES OFFICIENT SUR INTERNET POUR ENTERRER LES BAD BUZZ ET NOYER LE POISSON SUR LES FORUMS D'ACTIVISTES.

LE 18 JUILLET, CE TEMOIGNAGE SUR CRYPTOME A ETE MIS EN AVANT SUR SLASHDOT (cf. http://slashdot.org/ ) par un contributeur de longue date. ET CHOSE ETRANGE, LE POST A ETE CENSURE (cf. http://cryptome.org/2012/07/censored-slashdot-post.htm ). C'est ce qui a attiré mon attention sur le sujet.

CE DOCUMENT MET AU JOUR TOUTES LES TECHNIQUES EMPLOYEES PAR LES GOUVERNEMENTS, LES DESINFORMATEURS, LES POLITIQUES, ETC. SUR LE NET MAIS AUSSI DANS LA VRAIE VIE POUR DECREDIBILISER LEURS ADVERSAIRES ET ENTERRER LES SUJETS SENSIBLES. C'est très orienté US mais ce serait une erreur de croire que ce genre de pratiques n'a pas lieu en France. C'est riche d'enseignement et au fur et A MESURE QUE JE LISAIS LE DOCUMENT, JE ME RENDAIS COMPTE QUE J'AVAIS DEJA ETE LE TEMOIN DE CES MANIPULATIONS. À LA TELE DANS LES DEBATS POLITIQUES, DANS LES INTERVIEWS DANS LES JOURNAUX, MAIS CHOSE PLUS TROUBLANTE DANS LES COMMENTAIRES SUR MON SITE OU D'AUTRES OU SUR TWITTER (cf. http://www.twitter.com/korben ). Sans tomber dans la parano, je me demande maintenant si certaines personnes qui viennent poster et semer le doute dans certains de mes articles un peu "sensibles" sont juste des trolls qui s'emmerdent ou des AGENTS DESINFORMATEURS.

Mais peu importe... Lisez CE DOCUMENT, certes un peu long, mais passionnant, qui VOUS PERMETTRA DE "DETECTER" A L'AVENIR LES TENTATIVES DE MANIPULATION DONT NOUS FAISONS TOUS L'OBJET, EN TANT QUE PERSONNE AYANT UNE OPINION, OU EN TANT QUE SIMPLE SPECTATEUR.



TECHNIQUES POUR MANIPULER LES FORUMS SUR INTERNET

Il existe plusieurs techniques dédiées au contrôle et à la manipulation d'un forum sur internet, peu importe le contenu ou les personnes qui sont dessus. Nous allons voir chaque technique et démontrer qu'un nombre minimum d'étapes suffit pour prendre efficacement le contrôle d'un " forum incontrôlable. "

Technique #1 - " FORUM SLIDING "  

Si un post très sensible de nature critique a été posté sur le forum, il peut être rapidement supprimé grâce au " forum sliding". Dans cette technique, un nombre de posts (ou "sujets" en français) sans rapport sont discrètement positionnés sur le forum et " vieillissent ". Chacun de ces posts sans rapport peut être appelé pour lancer un " forum slide " (glissement de forum). Deuxièmement, cette technique a besoin de faux comptes. Ils sont nécessaires pour permettre dissimuler au public la manipulation. Pour déclencher un " forum slide " et " purger " les posts critiques, il suffit de se connecter sur chaque vrai ou faux compte et de répondre aux vieux sujets avec un message de 1 ou 2 lignes. Grâce à cela, ces vieux topics sont propulsés au sommet de la liste des topics, et les topics sensibles glissent vers les autres pages, hors de la vue du public. Bien qu'il soit difficile, voire impossible, de censurer le post sensible, il est maintenant perdu dans une mare de posts inutiles et sans rapports. De ce fait, il devient efficace et pratique de faire lire au public des posts sans rapport et non-problématiques.

Technique #2 - " CONSENSUS CRACKING "

Une deuxième technique efficace est le " consensus cracking. " Pour réussir à briser un consensus, la technique suivante est utilisée. Grâce à un faux compte, un message est posté. Ce message semble légitime et censé - mais le point sensible c'est que ce post possède une HYPOTHÈSE TRÈS FRAGILE sans preuve pour appuyer ce qui est écrit. Une fois cela fait et grâce à d'autres faux comptes, une réponse en votre faveur est doucement introduite. Il est IMPÉRATIF que les deux partis soient représentés, afin que le lecteur non informé ne puisse pas déterminer quel parti détient la vérité. Au fur et à mesure des posts et des réponses, la "preuve" forte ou désinformation est doucement établie en votre faveur. Ainsi, le lecteur non informé va probablement prendre la même position que vous et, si leur position est contre vous, leur opposition à vos messages va probablement être laissée aux oubliettes. Cependant, dans certains cas où les membres du forum sont hautement éduqués et peuvent contrer votre désinformation avec des faits réels et des liens vers des sites, vous pouvez " avorter " le cassage de consensus en démarrant un " Forum sliding ".

Technique #3 - " TOPIC DILUTION "

La dilution de topic n'est pas seulement efficace lors d'un glissement de forum, elle est également très utile pour garder l'attention des lecteurs sur des problèmes sans rapport et non productifs. Il s'agit d'une technique critique et très utile pour causer une " CONSOMMATION DE RESSOURCE ". EN IMPLEMENTANT UN FLUX CONTINU DE POSTS SANS RAPPORT POUR DISTRAIRE ET PERTURBER (TROLLING), LES LECTEURS DU FORUM VOIENT LEUR PRODUCTIVITE STOPPEE. Si l'intensité de la dilution graduelle est assez forte, les lecteurs vont arrêter de rechercher et vont simplement passer en " mode commérage ". Dans ce mode, ils peuvent plus simplement être éloignés des faits vers des conjectures et opinions profanes. Moins ils sont informés, plus il est facile et efficace de contrôler le groupe entier dans la direction que vous souhaitez. Il faut noter qu'une étude des capacités psychologies et des niveaux d'éducation doit être effectuée pour déterminer à quel niveau il faut " pousser le bouchon ". En allant trop rapidement trop loin hors sujet, cela peut déclencher une censure de la part d'un modérateur du forum.

Technique #4 - " COLLECTE D'INFORMATION "

La collecte d'information est très efficace pour déterminer le niveau psychologique des membres du forum et pour rassembler tous les renseignements qui peuvent être utilisés contre eux. DANS CETTE TECHNIQUE, UN SUJET "JE TE MONTRE LE MIEN, MONTRE-MOI LE TIEN " EST POSTE DANS UN ENVIRONNEMENT POSITIF. GRACE AU NOMBRE DE REPONSES FOURNIES, IL EST POSSIBLE DE COMPILER PLUS D'INFORMATIONS STATISTIQUES. Par exemple, on peut poster " votre arme préférée " et encourager les autres membres du forum à montrer ce qu'ils possèdent. De cette façon, il est possible de déterminer par pourcentage inversé, quelle proportion du forum possède une arme à feu ou une arme détenue de manière illégale. Cette même méthode peut être utilisée en postant en tant que membre un sujet comme " Quelle est votre technique préférée pour... " Grâce aux réponses, les diverses méthodes utilisées par le groupe peuvent être étudiées et d'autres méthodes mises au point pour les arrêter.

Technique #5 - " TROLLING ÉNERVÉ "

Statistiquement, il y a toujours un pourcentage de membres du forum plus enclins à la violence. Dans le but de déterminer qui sont ces gens, il est nécessaire de POSTER UNE IMAGE SUR LE FORUM QUI VA DELIBEREMENT INCITER A UNE FORTE REACTION PSYCHOLOGIQUE. GRACE A CELA, LE PLUS VIOLENT DU GROUPE PEUT ETRE EFFICACEMENT TRACE GRACE A SON IP. Pour accomplir cela, il suffit simplement de poster un lien vers une vidéo d'un officier de police en train d'abuser de son pouvoir envers un individu innocent. Statistiquement, sur le million de policiers en Amérique, il y en a toujours un ou deux pris en flagrant délit d'abus de pouvoir et leurs activités peuvent ensuite être utilisées dans l'objectif de rassembler des renseignements - sans avoir besoin de " simuler " une fausse vidéo. Cette méthode est extrêmement efficace et, plus la vidéo est violente, plus la méthode est efficace. Il est parfois utile d’ " influencer " le forum en répondant à vos propres posts avec des intentions violentes et en déclarant que vous vous " moquez de ce que les autorités pensent !! " En faisant cela et en ne montrant aucune crainte, les autres membres du forum, plus discrets et non violents, peuvent révéler leurs vraies intentions. CELA PEUT ENSUITE ETRE UTILISE DEVANT LE TRIBUNAL LORS D'UNE POURSUITE JUDICIAIRE.

Technique #6 - " ACQUÉRIR LE CONTRÔLE TOTAL " 
 
Il est important de bien insister et de continuellement manœuvrer POUR OBTENIR UN POSTE DE MODERATEUR SUR LE FORUM. UNE FOIS CETTE POSITION OBTENUE, LE FORUM PEUT ETRE EFFICACEMENT ET DISCRETEMENT CONTROLE EN SUPPRIMANT LES POSTS NON FAVORABLES - ET ON PEUT EVENTUELLEMENT GUIDER LE FORUM VERS UN ECHEC TOTAL ET PROVOQUER UN MANQUE D'INTERET DE LA PART DU PUBLIC. IL S'AGIT DE LA " VICTOIRE ULTIME " CAR LE FORUM N'EST PLUS INTERESSANT AUX YEUX DU PUBLIC ET N'EST PLUS UTILE POUR MAINTENIR LEURS LIBERTES. EN FONCTION DU NIVEAU DE CONTROLE QUE VOUS POSSEDEZ, VOUS POUVEZ DELIBEREMENT MENER LE FORUM VERS LA DEFAITE EN CENSURANT LES POSTS, EN SUPPRIMANT LES MEMBRES, EN FLOODANT OU EN METTANT ACCIDENTELLEMENT LE FORUM HORS LIGNE. GRACE A CETTE METHODE, LE FORUM PEUT ETRE RAPIDEMENT TUE. Cependant, il n'est pas toujours forcément intéressant de tuer un forum, car il peut être converti en une sorte de " pot de miel " pour centraliser et mal orienter les nouveaux et donc les utiliser pour vos besoins, sous votre contrôle.

CONCLUSION

Souvenez-vous bien que CES TECHNIQUES NE SONT EFFICACES QUE SI LES PARTICIPANTS DU FORUM NE LES CONNAISSENT PAS. UNE FOIS QU'ILS ONT ETE MIS AU COURANT, L'OPERATION PEUT COMPLETEMENT ECHOUER ET LE FORUM VA DEVENIR INCONTROLABLE. À ce moment, d'autres alternatives doivent être considérées, comme initier un faux problème juridique pour simplement faire fermer le forum et le mettre hors ligne. Cela n'est pas désirable, car cela empêche les agences du maintien de l'ordre de SURVEILLER LE POURCENTAGE DE LA POPULATION QUI S'OPPOSE TOUJOURS AU CONTROLE. Bien d'autres techniques peuvent être utilisées et développées et, au fur et à mesure que vous développez de nouvelles techniques d'infiltration et de contrôle, il est impératif de les partager avec le QG.



LES 25 REGLES DE LA DESINFORMATION

NOTE : LA PREMIERE REGLE ET LES CINQ DERNIERES (OU LES SIX, EN FONCTION DE LA SITUATION) NE SONT GENERALEMENT PAS DIRECTEMENT APPLICABLES PAR LE DESINFORMATEUR TRADITIONNEL. CES REGLES SONT GENERALEMENT PLUS SOUVENT DIRECTEMENT UTILISEES PAR LES DIRIGEANTS, LES ACTEURS CLES OU AU NIVEAU DE LA PLANIFICATION STRATEGIQUE DE CONSPIRATIONS CRIMINELLES.

• 1. NE RIEN VOIR, NE RIEN ENTENDRE, NE RIEN DIRE. En dépit de ce que vous pourriez savoir, n'en parlez pas - surtout si vous êtes une figure publique, un journaliste, un politique, etc. Si ce n'est pas signalé, ce n'est pas arrivé et vous n'aurez pas à faire face à des problèmes.

• 2. DEVENEZ INCREDULES ET INDIGNES. Évitez de parler des problèmes clés et concentrez-vous plutôt sur les problèmes secondaires qui peuvent être utilisés pour rendre le sujet comme étant critique de certains groupes ou thèmes sacro-saints. Cela est également connu comme le subterfuge " Comment oses-tu ! ".

• 3. CREEZ DES COMMERAGES. Évitez de parler des problèmes en dépeignant toutes les charges, sans tenir compte des lieux ou des preuves, en pures rumeurs et accusations violentes. Cette méthode fonctionne surtout très bien avec une presse silencieuse, car le public ne peut connaitre les faits qu'à travers ces " rumeurs discutables ". Si vous pouvez établir une relation entre le document / le problème avec internet, utilisez ce fait pour le certifier en tant que " rumeur sauvage " émanant d'une " bande d'enfants sur internet " qui ne peut pas avoir de fondement dans la réalité.

• 4. UTILISEZ UN ARGUMENT EPOUVANTAIL. Trouvez en un et créez un élément dans l'argumentation de votre adversaire que vous pouvez facilement contrer pour vous faire bien voir et pour ridiculiser l'adversaire. Soit vous créez un problème dont vous insinuez l'existence en vous appuyant sur l'interprétation de l'adversaire/sur l'argumentation de l'adversaire/sur la situation, ou sélectionnez l'aspect le plus faible des charges les plus faibles. Amplifiez leur impact et détruisez-les d'une façon discréditante toutes les charges, réelles et fabriquées, tout en évitant de parler des véritables problèmes.

• 5. ÉCARTEZ VOS ADVERSAIRES EN LEUR DONNANT DES SURNOMS ET EN LES RIDICULISANT. Cela est aussi connu comme étant le stratagème " attaquer le messager ", bien que d'autres méthodes soient des variantes de cette approche. Associez les adversaires avec des noms peu flatteurs comme " fou ", " partisan de droite ", " libéral ", " partisan de gauche ", " terroriste ", " adorateurs de complots ", " radicaux ", " miliciens ", " racistes ", " fanatiques religieux ", " déviants sexuels " et bien d'autres. Cela permet d'empêcher les autres d'éventuellement s'associer à vos adversaires de peur de se faire traiter de la même façon et vous évitez donc de parler des vrais problèmes.

• 6. FRAPPEZ ET COUREZ. Dans n'importe quel forum public, attaquez brièvement votre adversaire ou la position de l'adversaire et fuyez avant qu'une réponse ne soit publiée ou ignorez tout simplement la réponse. Cela marche extrêmement bien sur internet dans les environnements de type courrier des lecteurs, dans lesquels un flux continu de nouvelles identités peuvent être utilisées pour éviter d'expliquer les critiques, d'argumenter - faites simplement une accusation ou une autre attaque, ne parlez jamais des problèmes et ne répondez jamais, car ceci donnerait du crédit au point de vue de l'adversaire.

• 7. MOTIFS D'INTERROGATION. Amplifiez chaque fait qui pourrait laisser penser que l'adversaire opère selon un parti pris. Cela évite de parler des problèmes et oblige l'accusateur à se mettre sur la défensive.

• 8. INVOQUEZ L'AUTORITE. Prétendez que vous faites partie de l'autorité ou associez-vous avec celle-ci en utilisant assez de jargon et de termes pour illustrer que vous êtes " celui qui sait " et discréditez tous les propos sans parler des problèmes ni démontrer pourquoi ou citer des sources.

• 9. JOUEZ A L'ABRUTI. Peu importe quels sont les arguments ou les preuves sur la table, évitez de parler des problèmes sauf pour les discréditer, dire que cela n'a aucun sens, ne contient aucune preuve, n'a aucun intérêt ou est illogique. Mélangez bien pour un effet maximal.

• 10. ASSOCIEZ LES CRITIQUES DE L'ADVERSAIRE AVEC DE VIEILLES ACTUALITES. Un dérivé de l'argument épouvantail qui est une sorte d'investissement pour le futur dans le cas où le problème ne peut pas être facilement contrôlé. On peut l'anticiper pour garder le contrôle. Pour cela, lancez un argument épouvantail et faites en sorte que l'on s'en occupe assez tôt dans le cadre du plan alternatif (ou plan B). Ainsi, les charges ou critiques suivantes, peu importe leur validité, pourront généralement être associées aux charges précédentes et être considérées comme étant simplement du réchauffé, sans avoir besoin de s'en occuper - encore mieux si l'adversaire qui en est à l'origine est ou était impliqué à l'origine.

• 11. ÉTABLISSEZ UN PLAN B ET AYEZ CONFIANCE EN CELUI-CI. Utilisez un problème mineur ou un élément basé sur des faits, prenez la " grande route " (face publique) et " confessez " avec vigueur qu'une erreur innocente a été faite - - mais que les adversaires ont saisi là l'opportunité de la mener hors de proportion et d'insinuer des choses malhonnêtes qui, bien entendu, " n'existent pas ". D'autres personnes peuvent vous renforcer plus tard et même demander publiquement de " mettre un point final à ce non-sens " car vous avez déjà fait " la chose juste ". Bien faite, cette technique peut vous permettre d'acquérir de la sympathie et du respect pour avoir " craché le morceau " et " confessé " vos erreurs sans aborder d'autres problèmes plus graves.

• 12. LES ENIGMES N'ONT PAS DE SOLUTION. Prétendez que l'affaire est trop compliquée à résoudre, en s'appuyant sur la multitude de personnes impliquées et d'évènements. Cela permet de faire perdre tout intérêt au problème de la part des autres personnes.

• 13. LOGIQUE D'ALICE AU PAYS DES MERVEILLES. Évitez de parler des problèmes en raisonnant à l'envers ou avec une logique déductive qui s'interdit tout véritable fait important.

• 14. DEMANDEZ DES SOLUTIONS COMPLETES. Évitez de parler des problèmes en demandant à vos adversaires de résoudre le crime ou le problème dans sa totalité. Il s'agit d'un stratagème qui marche mieux avec les problèmes relatifs à la règle 10.

• 15. FAITES CORRESPONDRE LES FAITS A DES CONCLUSIONS ALTERNATIVES. Cela requiert une pensée créative, sauf si le crime a été planifié avec un plan B.

• 16. FAITES DISPARAITRE LES PREUVES ET LES TEMOINS. Si cela n'existe pas, ce n'est pas un fait et vous n'avez pas à aborder le problème.

• 17. CHANGEZ DE SUJET. Généralement en lien avec l'un des autres stratagèmes listés ici, trouvez une façon de mettre la discussion sur le côté avec des commentaires mordants et controversés dans l'espoir de détourner l'attention sur un sujet plus gérable. Cela marche surtout très bien avec les gens qui peuvent " débattre" avec vous sur le nouveau sujet et polariser la discussion dans le but d'éviter de parler des problèmes clés.

• 18. CONTRARIEZ ET PROVOQUEZ LES ADVERSAIRES ET DONNEZ-LEUR UNE CHARGE EMOTIONNELLE. Si vous pouvez ne rien faire d'autre, réprimandez et raillez vos adversaires et obligez-les à répondre de manière émotionnelle, ce qui va permettre de les faire passer pour des gens stupides et beaucoup trop motivés. Non seulement vous éviterez de parler des problèmes, mais même si leur réponse émotionnelle aborde le problème, vous pouvez après éviter les problèmes en vous concentrant sur ô combien ils sont " trop sensibles pour critiquer. "

• 19. IGNOREZ LES PREUVES PRESENTEES, DEMANDEZ DES PREUVES IMPOSSIBLES. Il s'agit peut-être ici d'une variante de la règle " jouer l'idiot ". En dépit des preuves qui peuvent être présentées par un adversaire sur un forum public, prétendez que la preuve n'est pas recevable et demandez une preuve qui est impossible à trouver pour l'adversaire (elle peut exister, mais elle n'est pas à sa disposition ou elle est connue comme étant quelque chose de facile à détruire ou falsifier, comme une arme de crime). Dans le but de complètement éviter de parler des problèmes, il peut être nécessaire de catégoriquement discréditer les médias ou les livres, reniez le fait que les témoins peuvent être acceptables et reniez même les déclarations faites par le gouvernement ou par d'autres autorités.

• 20. FAUSSES PREUVES. Dès que possible, introduisez de nouveaux faits ou indices conçus et fabriqués en conflit avec les présentations et les arguments de l'adversaire - un outil pratique pour neutraliser les problèmes sensibles ou entraver les résolutions. Cela marche encore mieux lors des crimes pour lesquels les faits ne peuvent pas être distingués des fausses preuves.

• 21. FAITES APPEL A UN JURY D'ACCUSATION, UN PROCUREUR SPECIAL OU UN AUTRE CORPS HABILITE A L'INVESTIGATION. Renversez le processus en votre faveur et neutralisez efficacement les problèmes sensibles sans ouvrir la discussion. Une fois réunis, la preuve et le témoignage doivent être secrets pour être bien gérés. Par exemple, si vous êtes de mèche avec le procureur, le jury d'accusation peut tout simplement refuser toutes les preuves utiles, les sceller et les rendre inutilisables pour des enquêtes ultérieures. Une fois qu'un verdict favorable est atteint, le problème peut être officiellement considéré comme fermé. Généralement, cette technique s'applique pour rendre le coupable innocent, mais elle peut aussi être utilisée pour obtenir des accusations lorsque l'on cherche à faire un coup monté contre la victime.

• 22. FABRIQUEZ UNE NOUVELLE VERITE. Créez vos propres experts, groupes, auteurs, meneurs ou influenceurs capables de créer quelque chose de nouveau et différent via des recherches scientifiques, d'investigation ou sociales ou des témoignages qui se terminent favorablement. Dans ce cas, si vous devez vraiment aborder les problèmes, vous pouvez le faire autoritairement.

• 23. CREEZ DE PLUS GRANDES DISTRACTIONS. Si ce qui est cité ci-dessus ne fonctionne pas pour éloigner les gens des problèmes sensibles ou pour empêcher une couverture médiatique indésirable d'évènements comme des procès, créez de plus grosses histoires (ou traitez-les comme telles) pour éloigner les masses.

• 24. LE SILENCE CRITIQUE. Si les méthodes ci-dessus ne prévalent pas, pensez à supprimer vos adversaires de la circulation grâce à des solutions définitives afin que le besoin d'aborder les problèmes soit entièrement supprimé. Cela peut être fait par la mort, l'arrestation et la détention, le chantage, la destruction de leur personnalité grâce à la fuite d'informations ou encore en les détruisant financièrement, émotionnellement ou en leur infligeant des dommages sévères au niveau médical.

• 25. DISPARAISSEZ. Si vous êtes le détenteur clé de secrets ou si vous êtes beaucoup trop sous pression et que vous sentez que cela commence à être dangereux, quittez les lieux.



LES 8 TRAITS D'UN DESINFORMATEUR

• 1) L'EVITEMENT. Ils ne parlent jamais des problèmes de manière directe ni n'argumentent de manière constructive. Ils évitent généralement les citations ou les références. À la place, ils insinuent tout et son contraire. Virtuellement, tout à propos de leur présentation insinue que l'autorité et les experts en la matière ne possèdent aucune crédibilité.

• 2) SELECTIVITE. Ils tendent à choisir les adversaires prudemment, soit en appliquant l'approche " frappe et cours " contre de simples commentateurs supportant leurs adversaires ou en se concentrant plus fortement sur les opposants clés qui sont connus pour aborder directement les problèmes. Si un commentateur devient trop discutailleur sans aucun succès, la focalisation va changer pour également inclure le commentateur.

• 3) COÏNCIDENCE. Ils ont tendance à apparaitre subitement sur un sujet controversé avec pourtant aucun passé de participant sur une discussion générale dans l'arène publique concernée. Ils ont, de même, tendance à disparaitre une fois que le sujet n'est plus intéressant pour la masse. Ils étaient surement censés être ici pour une raison, et ont disparu avec cette raison.

• 4) TRAVAIL D'EQUIPE. Ils ont tendance à opérer en groupes auto-satisfaits et complémentaires. Bien sûr, cela peut arriver naturellement sur n'importe quel forum public, mais il y aura surement une lignée d'échanges fréquents de cette sorte, là où les professionnels sont impliqués. Des fois, l'un des participants va infiltrer le camp opposé pour devenir une source pour un argument épouvantail ou d'autres techniques conçues pour diminuer la force de frappe de l'adversaire.

• 5) ANTI-CONSPIRATEUR. Ils expriment presque toujours un certain mépris envers les " théoriciens de la conspiration " et, généralement, pour tous ceux qui pensent que JFK n'a pas été tué par LHO. Demandez-vous pourquoi, s'ils possèdent un tel mépris pour les théoriciens de la conspiration, est-ce qu'ils se concentrent sur la défense d'un seul sujet discuté sur un newgroup abordant les conspirations ? Certains peuvent penser qu'ils sont là pour essayer de faire passer tout le monde pour des fous sur chaque sujet ou pour tout simplement ignorer le groupe pour lequel ils expriment un tel mépris. Ou, certains peuvent plus justement conclure qu'ils possèdent une raison cachée pour que leurs actions disparaissent de leur chemin.

• 6) ÉMOTIONS ARTIFICIELLES. Un genre étrange de sentimentalisme " artificiel " et une peau inhabituellement dure - une capacité à persévérer et à persister même face à un flot accablant de critiques et d'intolérances. Cette technique provient d'un entrainement des services de renseignement qui, peu importe à quel point la preuve est accablante, réfute tout et qui empêche d'être émotionnellement réactif ou impliqué. Pour un expert de la désinformation, les émotions peuvent sembler artificielles.

La plupart des personnes, si elles répondent avec colère, par exemple, vont exprimer leur animosité à travers leur rejet. Mais les professionnels de la désinformation vont généralement avoir des problèmes pour maintenir " leur image " et sont d'humeur changeante à l'égard de prétendues émotions et de leur style de communication plus calme et impassible. C'est juste un métier et ils semblent souvent incapables de " jouer leur rôle ". Vous pouvez piquer une colère absolue à un moment, exprimer un désintérêt ensuite et encore plus de colère plus tard - un yo-yo émotionnel.



En ce qui concerne le fait d'avoir la peau dure, aucune quantité de critiques ne va les dissuader de faire leur travail et ils vont généralement continuer leurs vieilles techniques sans aucun ajustement aux critiques sur la mise au jour de leur petit jeu - alors qu'un individu plus rationnel va vraiment s'inquiéter de ce que les autres peuvent penser et va chercher à améliorer son style de communication ou tout simplement abandonner.
• 7) INCOHERENT. Ils ont aussi une tendance à faire des erreurs qui trahit leurs vraies motivations. Cela peut éventuellement venir du fait qu'ils ne connaissent pas vraiment leur sujet ou qu'ils soient un petit peu " freudien ". J'ai noté que, souvent, ils vont simplement citer des informations contradictoires qui vont se neutraliser elles-mêmes. Par exemple, un petit joueur déclarait être un pilote de l'armée de l'air, mais avait un style d'écriture très pauvre (orthographe, grammaire, style incohérent). Il ne devait pas avoir fait d'études supérieures. Je ne connais pas beaucoup de pilotes de l'armée de l'air qui n'ont pas un diplôme universitaire. Un autre a notamment déclaré ne rien savoir d'un certain sujet, mais s'est prétendu, par la suite, expert en la matière.

• 8 ) CONSTANTE DE TEMPS. On a récemment découvert, en ce qui concerne les Newsgroups, le facteur temps de réponse. Il y a trois façons de le voir fonctionner, surtout lorsque le gouvernement ou une autre personne avec un certain pouvoir est impliqué dans une opération de dissimulation.

• 8.a) N'importe quel post sur un NG (Newsgroups) posté par un partisan de la vérité ciblé peut résulter en une réponse immédiate. Le gouvernement et les autres personnes habilitées peuvent se permettre de payer des gens pour s'asseoir devant et trouver une opportunité d'occasionner des dégâts. PUISQUE LA DÉSINFORMATION DANS UN NG NE MARCHE QUE SI LE LECTEUR LA VOIT - UNE RÉPONSE RAPIDE EST NÉCESSAIRE, ou le visiteur peut être aiguillé vers la vérité.

• 8.b) Lorsque l'on a affaire à un désinformateur d'une manière plus directe, par email par exemple, LE DÉLAI EST NÉCESSAIRE - il y aura généralement un minimum de 48-72h de délai. Cela permet à une équipe de se concerter sur la réponse stratégique à adopter pour un meilleur effet et même " d'obtenir une permission " ou une instruction d'une voie hiérarchique.

8.c) Dans l'exemple des NG 1) ci-dessus, on aura ÉGALEMENT souvent le cas où de plus gros moyens sont mis en place après le délai de 48-72h. Cela est surtout vrai lorsque le chercheur de vérité et ses commentaires sont considérés comme plus importants et potentiellement révélateurs de la vérité. Ainsi, un révélateur de vérité sera attaqué deux fois pour le même péché.



COMMENT REPERER UN ESPION

Une façon de NEUTRALISER DE POTENTIELS ACTIVISTES est de leur donner l'opportunité d'appartenir à un groupe qui ne fait que des mauvaises choses. Pourquoi ?

• 1) Le message ne sort pas

• 2) Beaucoup de temps est gaspillé

• 3) L'activiste est frustré et découragé

• 4) Rien de bon n'est accompli

LE FBI ET LES INFORMATEURS ET INFILTRES DE LA POLICE VONT ENVAHIR N'IMPORTE QUEL GROUPE ET ETABLIRONT DES ORGANISATIONS ACTIVISTES BIDONS. LEUR OBJECTIF EST D'EMPECHER L'ECLOSION DE VRAIS MOUVEMENTS POUR LA JUSTICE OU L'ECO-PAIX DANS CE PAYS. LES AGENTS VIENNENT EN PETITS, MOYENS OU GRANDS GROUPES. ILS PEUVENT VENIR DE DIFFERENTS MILIEUX ETHNIQUES. IL PEUT S'AGIR D'HOMMES OU DE FEMMES.

LA TAILLE DU GROUPE OU DU MOUVEMENT INFILTRE N'EST PAS IMPORTANTE. LE POTENTIEL D'EXPANSION DU MOUVEMENT ATTIRE LES ESPIONS ET LES SABOTEURS. Ce carnet liste les techniques utilisées par les agents POUR RALENTIR LES CHOSES, FAIRE RATER LES OPERATIONS, DETRUIRE LE MOUVEMENT ET SURVEILLER LES ACTIVISTES.

LE TRAVAIL DE L'AGENT EST D'EMPECHER L'ACTIVISTE DE QUITTER UN TEL GROUPE AFIN DE LE GARDER SOUS SON CONTROLE.

Durant certaines situations, pour avoir le contrôle, l'agent va dire à l'activiste : "Tu divises le mouvement. "

[Ici, j'ai inclus les raisons psychologiques qui font que cette manœuvre fonctionne pour contrôler les gens]

Cela FAIT NAITRE UN SENTIMENT DE CULPABILITE. BEAUCOUP DE GENS PEUVENT ETRE CONTROLES PAR LA CULPABILITE. Les agents établissent des relations avec les activistes derrière un déguisement bien conçu de " dévouement à la cause ". À cause de leur dévouement souvent proclamé (et leurs actions faites pour le prouver), lorsqu'ils critiquent les activistes, il ou elle - étant vraiment dédié au mouvement - est convaincu que tous les problèmes sont de LEUR faute. Cela s'explique par le fait qu'une personne vraiment dévouée tend à croire que tout le monde a une conscience et que personne ne dissimulerait ni ne mentirait comme ça " en le faisant exprès . " IL EST INCROYABLE DE VOIR A QUEL POINT LES AGENTS PEUVENT ALLER LOIN DANS LA MANIPULATION D'UN ACTIVISTE, car l'activiste va constamment chercher des excuses en faveur de l'agent qui s'est régulièrement déclaré fidèle à la cause. Même s'ils, occasionnellement, suspectent l'agent, ils vont se mettre des œillères en rationalisant " ils ont fait ça inconsciemment...ils ne l'ont pas vraiment fait exprès... je peux les aider en les pardonnant et en acceptant " etc.

L'agent va dire à l'activiste : " Tu es un meneur ! "

Cela permet à l'activiste d'améliorer sa confiance en lui. Son admiration narcissique de ses propres intentions altruistes/activistes vont augmenter tant qu'il ou elle admirera consciemment les déclarations altruistes de l'agent, qui sont délibérément conçues pour refléter celles de l'activiste.



IL S'AGIT DE " FAUSSE IDENTIFICATION MALVEILLANTE ". C'EST LE PROCESSUS GRACE AUQUEL L'AGENT VA CONSCIEMMENT IMITER OU SIMULER UN CERTAIN COMPORTEMENT POUR ENCOURAGER L'ACTIVISTE A S'IDENTIFIER A LUI, AUGMENTANT AINSI LA VULNERABILITE DE L'ACTIVISTE PAR RAPPORT A L'EXPLOITATION. L'agent va simuler les plus subtils concepts de soi de l'activiste.
Les activistes et ceux qui ont des principes altruistes sont plus vulnérables à la fausse identification malveillante, surtout durant le travail avec l'agent, lorsque les interactions incluent des problèmes liés à leurs compétences, autonomie ou connaissances.

LE BUT DE L'AGENT EST D'AUGMENTER L'EMPATHIE GENERALE DE L'ACTIVISTE ENVERS L'AGENT A TRAVERS UN PROCESSUS DE FAUSSE IDENTIFICATION AVEC LES CONCEPTS DE SOI RELATIFS A L'ACTIVISTE.

L'exemple le plus commun de ce processus est l'agent qui va complimenter l'activiste pour ses compétences, ses connaissances ou sa valeur pour le mouvement. À un niveau plus subtil, l'agent va simuler les particularités et les manières de l'activiste. Cela va permettre de promouvoir l'identification via mimétisme et les sentiments de " gémellité " (jumeaux). Il n'est pas inconnu pour un activiste, amoureux de l'aide perçue et des compétences d'un bon agent, de se retrouver à prendre en considération des violations éthiques et, même, un comportement illégal, au service de leur agent.

Le " sentiment de perfection " [concept de soi] est amélioré et un lien puissant d'empathie est tissé avec l'agent à travers ses imitations et simulations du propre investissement narcissique de la victime. [Concept de soi] Il s'agit là, si l'activiste le sait, au fond de lui, de leur propre dévouement à la cause, il va projeter cela sur l'agent qui le leur " reflète ".

LES ACTIVISTES VONT ETRE LEURRES EN PENSANT QUE L'AGENT PARTAGE LEURS SENTIMENTS D'IDENTIFICATION ET LEURS LIENS. Dans la configuration d'un mouvement social/activiste, les rôles de confrontations joués par les activistes vis-à-vis de la société/du gouvernement, encouragent les processus continus de séparation intrapsychique afin que les " alliances de gémellité " entre l'activiste et l'agent puissent rendre des secteurs entiers ou la perception de la réalité indisponible à l'activiste. Littéralement, ils " perdent contact avec la réalité. "

Les activistes qui renient leurs propres investissements narcissiques [n'ont pas une très bonne idée de leurs propres concepts de soi et qu'ils SONT les concepts] et qui se perçoivent eux-mêmes consciemment comme des " aides " doté d'un certain altruisme sont extrêmement vulnérables aux simulations affectives (émotionnelles) de l'agent entraîné.

L'empathie est encouragée par l'activiste à travers l'expression d'affections visibles. La présence de pleurs, de tristesse, de désir, de remords, de culpabilité peut déclencher chez l'activiste orienté vers l'aide un fort sens de la compassion, tout en améliorant inconsciemment l'investissement narcissique de l'activiste en lui-même.

Les expressions de telles affections simulées peuvent être assez irrésistibles pour l'observateur et difficile à distinguer d'une profonde émotion.

Cela peut généralement être identifié par deux évènements : Tout d'abord, l'activiste qui a analysé ses propres racines narcissiques et est au courant de son propre potentiel pour devenir " émotionnellement accro " va être capable de rester tranquille et insensible à de telles effusions émotionnelles de la part de l'agent.

En conclusion de cette attitude tranquille et insensible, le second évènement va se produire : l'agent va réagir bien trop vite à une telle expression affective, laissant à l'activiste l'impression que " le jeu est terminé, le rideau est tombé " et l'imposture, pour le moment, a pris fin. L'agent va ensuite rapidement s'occuper d'une prochaine victime/d'un prochain activiste.

LE FAIT EST QUE LE MOUVEMENT N'A PAS BESOIN DE MENEUR, IL A BESOIN DE BOUGEURS (GENS QUI SE BOUGENT POUR FAIRE LES CHOSES). " Suivre le meneur " est une perte de temps.

Un bon agent va vouloir rencontrer sa victime le plus souvent possible. Il ou elle va beaucoup parler pour ne rien dire. Certains peuvent s'attendre à un assaut de longues discussions irrésolues.

CERTAINS AGENTS PRENNENT DES MANIERES INSISTANTES, ARROGANTES OU DEFENSIVES :

• 1) Perturber l'agenda

• 2) Mettre la discussion de côté

• 3) Interrompe de manière répétitive

• 4) Feindre l'ignorance

• 5) Lancer une accusation infondée contre une personne.
Traiter quelqu'un de raciste, par exemple. Cette tactique est utilisée pour discréditer quelqu'un aux yeux des autres membres du groupe.

LES SABOTEURS


Certains saboteurs prétendent être des activistes. Elles ou ils vont...

• 1) Écrire des dépliants encyclopédiques (actuellement, des sites web)

• 2) Imprimer les dépliants seulement en anglais

• 3) Faire des manifestations dans des endroits qui n'intéressent personne

• 4) Solliciter un soutien financier de la part de personnes riches au lieu d'un soutien des gens de la classe moyenne

• 5) Afficher des pancartes avec beaucoup trop de mots déroutants

• 6) Embrouiller les problèmes

• 7) Faire les mauvaises demandes

• 8 ) Compromettre l'objectif

• 9) Avoir des discussions sans fin qui font perdre du temps à tout le monde. L'agent peut accompagner ces discussions sans fin de boissons, de consommation de stupéfiants ou d'autres distractions pour ralentir le travail de l'activiste.

PROVOCATEURS
• 1) Veulent établir des " meneurs " pour les mettre en place lors d'une chute dans le but de stopper le mouvement

• 2) Suggèrent de faire des choses stupides, des choses illégales pour amener des problèmes aux activistes

• 3) Encouragent le militantisme

• 4) Vouloir railler l'autorité

• 5) Tenter de compromettre les valeurs des activistes

• 6) Tenter d'instiguer la violence. L'activisme veut toujours être non-violent.

• 7) Tenter de provoquer une révolte parmi les gens mal préparés à gérer la réaction des autorités.

INFORMATEURS
• 1) Veulent que tout le monde s'inscrive partout

• 2) Posent beaucoup de questions (collecte d'informations)

• 3) Veulent savoir à quels évènements l'activiste prévoit d'assister

• 4) Essayent de faire en sorte que l'activiste se défende lui-même pour identifier ses croyances, buts et son niveau de dévouement.

RECRUTEMENT

Les activistes légitimes ne soumettent pas les gens à des heures de dialogue persuasif. Leurs actions, croyances et buts parlent pour eux.
LES GROUPES QUI RECRUTENT SONT DES MISSIONNAIRES, MILITAIRES OU FAUX PARTIS POLITIQUES OU MOUVEMENTS CREES PAR DES AGENTS.

SURVEILLANCE
Supposez TOUJOURS que vous êtes sous surveillance. À ce moment, si vous n'êtes PAS sous surveillance, vous n'êtes pas un très bon activiste !

TACTIQUES D'INTIMIDATIONS

ILS LES UTILISENT.

DE TELLES TACTIQUES INCLUENT LA DIFFAMATION, LA CALOMNIE, LES MENACES, DEVENIR PROCHE D'ACTIVISTES MECONTENTS OU CONCERNES UN MINIMUM PAR LA CAUSE POUR LES PERSUADER (VIA DES TACTIQUES PSYCHOLOGIES DECRITES CI-DESSUS) DE SE TOURNER CONTRE LE MOUVEMENT ET DE DONNER DE FAUX TEMOIGNAGES CONTRE LEURS ANCIENS COLLEGUES. ILS VONT PLANTER DES SUBSTANCES ILLEGALES CHEZ LES ACTIVISTES ET MONTER UNE ARRESTATION ; ILS VONT SEMER DE FAUSSES INFORMATIONS ET MONTER UNE " REVELATION ", ILS VONT ENVOYER DES LETTRES INCRIMINANTES [EMAILS] AU NOM DE L'ACTIVISTE ; ET BIEN PLUS ; ILS FERONT TOUT CE QUE LA SOCIETE PERMETTRA.

Ce carnet (cf. http://www.amazon.fr/carnets.html  ) ne couvre pas du tout toutes les techniques utilisées par les agents pour saboter la vie des sincères et dévoués activistes.

SI UN AGENT EST " EXPOSE ", IL OU ELLE SERA TRANSFERE(E) OU REMPLACE(E).

COINTELPRO EST TOUJOURS EN OPERATION DE NOS JOURS SOUS UN NOM DE CODE DIFFERENT. Il n'est désormais plus mis sur papier pour éviter d'être découvert suite à loi pour la liberté de l'information.

LE BUT DU PROGRAMME DE CONTRE-ESPIONNAGE DU FBI : EXPOSER, DERANGER, DEVIER, DISCREDITER ET NEUTRALISER LES INDIVIDUS QUE LE FBI CONSIDERE COMME ETANT OPPOSES AUX INTERETS NATIONAUX. LA " SECURITE NATIONALE " CONCERNE LA SECURITE MISE EN PLACE PAR LE FBI POUR EMPECHER LES GENS D'ETRE MIS AU COURANT DES CHOSES VICIEUSES REALISEES PAR CELUI-CI, EN VIOLATION AVEC LES LIBERTES CIVILES DU PEUPLE.



EN RESUME : 17 TECHNIQUES POUR ENTERRER LA VERITE

Des allégations d'activités criminelles fortes et crédibles peuvent faire tomber un gouvernement. QUAND LE GOUVERNEMENT N'A PAS UNE DEFENSE EFFICACE ET BASEE SUR LES FAITS, D'AUTRES TECHNIQUES DOIVENT ETRE EMPLOYEES. La réussite de ces techniques dépend grandement d'une presse coopérative et complaisante ainsi que d'un simple parti d'opposition symbolique.

• 1. GARDEZ LE SILENCE. SI CE N'EST PAS REPORTE, CE N'EST PAS UNE ACTUALITE, CE N'EST PAS ARRIVE.

• 2. INDIGNÉ DE CIRE. ÉGALEMENT CONNU SOUS LE NOM DU STRATAGEME " COMMENT OSES-TU ? ".

• 3. QUALIFIEZ TOUTES LES CHARGES COMME ETANT DES " RUMEURS " OU, MIEUX, DES " RUMEURS FOLLES ". Si en dépit de l'absence d'informations, le public est toujours mis au courant des faits suspicieux, ce n'est que par l'intermédiaire de " rumeurs. " (S'ils tendent à croire aux " rumeurs ", c'est probablement parce qu'ils sont simplement " paranoïaques " ou " hystériques. ")

• 4. Démolissez l'argument épouvantail. Ne vous occupez que de l'aspect le plus faible des charges les plus faibles. Encore mieux, créez votre propre argument épouvantail. Inventez des fausses folles rumeurs (ou créez des fausses histoires) et faites-les entrer en action lorsque vous semblez discréditer toutes les charges, réelles et fantaisistes à la fois.

• 5. UTILISEZ DES MOTS COMME " THEORICIEN DE LA CONSPIRATION ", " BARJOT ", " RALEUR ", " FOU ", " CINGLE " ET, BIEN SUR, " COMMERES " POUR QUALIFIER LES SCEPTIQUES. Soyez bien certains d'utiliser des verbes et des adjectifs forts lorsque vous caractérisez les accusations et DEFENDEZ LE GOUVERNEMENT " PLUS RAISONNABLE " ET SES DEFENSEURS. Vous devez faire bien attention à éviter les débats ouverts avec toutes les personnes que vous avez ainsi calomniées.

• 6. CONTESTEZ LES MOTIVATIONS. Essayez de marginaliser les personnes critiques en suggérant fortement qu'elles ne sont pas vraiment intéressées par la vérité, mais qu'elles poursuivent simplement un but politique ou qu'elles veulent simplement gagner de l'argent.

• 7. INVOQUEZ L'AUTORITE. ICI, LA PRESSE CONTROLEE ET LA FAUSSE OPPOSITION PEUVENT ETRE TRES UTILES.

• 8. ÉCARTEZ LES CHARGES COMME ETANT DES " VIEILLES NOUVELLES. "

• 9. Crachez une moitié du morceau. Cela est également connu sous le nom de " confession et évitement. " De cette façon, vous pouvez donner une impression de franchise et d'honnêteté tandis que vous n'admettez que des " erreurs " sans conséquences et pas du tout criminelles. Ce stratagème requiert souvent l'existence d'un plan B, différent de celui d'origine.

• 10. DECRIVEZ LES CRIMES COMME ETANT INCROYABLEMENT COMPLEXES ET LA VERITE INTROUVABLE.

• 11. Raisonnez à l'envers, utilisez la méthode déductive avec vengeance. Avec une déduction rigoureuse, les preuves pénibles perdent toute crédibilité. Exemple : Nous avons une presse totalement libre. Si les preuves existent comme quoi la lettre de " suicide " de Vince Foster a été falsifiée, ils l'auraient reporté. Ils ne l'ont pas reporté donc il n'y a pas de telles preuves.

• 12. DEMANDEZ AUX SCEPTIQUES DE RESOUDRE TOTALEMENT LE CRIME. Exemple : si Foster a été tué, qui l'a tué et pourquoi ?

• 13. CHANGEZ DE SUJET. CETTE TECHNIQUE INCLUT LA CREATION ET/OU LA PUBLICATION DE DISTRACTIONS.

• 14. Signalez légèrement les faits incriminés, mais n'en faites rien. Cela est souvent assimilé au signalement " touche et cours ".

• 15. MENTIR EFFRONTEMENT SANS DETOUR. L'une des façons les plus efficaces de faire ceci est d'attribuer les " faits " fournis aux publics à une source au nom plausible, mais anonyme.

• 16. Pour développer un petit peu plus les points 4 et 5, faites que vos propres compères " exposent " leurs scandales et défendent des causes populaires. Leur travail est de contrecarrer les vrais adversaires et de jouer au football sur 99 yards. Une alternative est de payer les gens riches pour ce travail. Ils vont prétendre dépenser leur propre argent.

• 17. INONDEZ INTERNET D'AGENTS. C'est la réponse à la question, " qu'est-ce qui pourrait pousser quelqu'un à passer des heures sur les newsgroups d'internet pour défendre le gouvernement et/ou la presse et discréditer les critiques authentiques ? " Est-ce que les autorités n'ont pas assez de défenseurs avec tous les journaux, magazines, radios et télévisions ? Certains peuvent penser que refuser d'imprimer des lettres critiques et écarter les appels sérieux ou les interdire des talkshows à la radio est suffisant comme contrôle, mais, apparemment, ce n'est pas le cas.

J'espère que vous aurez appris des trucs et que maintenant, vous saurez un peu mieux lire entre les lignes de ce qui se passe sur le net et les forums.

Source: Korben (cf. http://www.twitter.com/korben et http://forum.korben.info/ )



Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Sam 15 Sep - 15:08 (2012)    Sujet du message: PAKISTAN INTERIOR MINISTER PUSHING INTERPOL TO BAN ANTI-ISLAM MATERIAL ONLINE Répondre en citant


PAKISTAN INTERIOR MINISTER PUSHING INTERPOL TO BAN ANTI-ISLAM MATERIAL ONLINE

Published: 4:36 PM 09/14/2012


By Caroline May
Bio | Archive | Email Caroline May

Caroline May is a reporter for The Daily Caller.


ASIF HASSAN/AFP/Getty Images

If one well-known Pakistani politician gets his way, international law will forbid “anti-Islam” material from the Internet.

Friday afternoon, Pakistan Interior Minister Rehman Malik wrote in a series of tweets that he has spoken with and written to the Secretary General of Interpol about enacting an international law to stop all anti-Islam propaganda online.

He followed it up with a response to fellow tweeter Kanwal Zahra Zaidi (@KanwalZaidi), noting that the “Anti Islam element must stop hurting Muslims.”

Malik concluded with a tweet reiterating his initial contention, that propagating anti-Islam material is a “crime” and that it must be stopped.


Interpol is the world’s largest international policing body, with 190 member countries. This week Muslims have been up in violent arms over a film with depicts their prophet Muhammad in a poor light.

http://networkedblogs.com/Cawul


Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Dim 16 Sep - 15:25 (2012)    Sujet du message: UN ARTISTE SANCTIONNÉ POUR AVOIR UTILISÉ L'IMAGE DU SOU NOIR SUR SON ALBUM Répondre en citant


UN ARTISTE SANCTIONNÉ POUR AVOIR UTILISÉ L'IMAGE DU SOU NOIR SUR SON ALBUM

Publié le 12 septembre 2012 à 21h17 | Mis à jour le 12 septembre 2012 à 21h17





La Monnaie royale canadienne cessera de produire des sous noirs cet automne. Un artiste devra verser de l'argent à l'organisme parce qu'il a l'image d'un cent sur son album.

La Presse Canadienne
Pictou, Nouvelle-Écosse

Le musicien folk Dave Gunning pourrait être contraint de verser de l'argent à la Monnaie royale canadienne (MRC), à cause de l'hommage qu'il rend au sou noir.

L'artiste néo-écossais affirme que l'agence fédérale l'a prévenu que son album - qui sera lancé sous peu - enfreint les lois sur le droit d'auteur, car la pochette reproduit des images de la pièce d'un cent.

M. Gunning insiste plutôt sur le fait que son album «No More Pennies» est un hommage à la pièce de monnaie appelée à disparaître. La MRC cessera de la produire cet automne, mais elle aura toujours cours légal.

Le musicien précise que l'agence a accepté de retirer les frais d'administration et de permis pour les 2000 premiers albums produits. En revanche, les 2000 autres disques qu'il produira lui coûteront 1200 $ au total, ou 60 cents chacun.
 
En réplique à cette amende, M. Gunning demande à ses admirateurs de faire don de leurs sous noirs, qu'il enverra ensuite à la Monnaie royale.

À la MRC, la porte-parole Christine Aquino explique que l'agence n'écarte pas la possibilité de retirer les frais, mais ajoute qu'elle souhaite également protéger sa propriété intellectuelle.

«Nous n'empêchons pas Dave (Gunning) de rendre hommage à la pièce d'un cent avec son album, le problème concerne simplement l'utilisation de l'image du sou noir», a-t-elle indiqué.

Sur l'album, un sou noir représentant le soleil disparaît derrière l'horizon. Une autre image montre une locomotive à vapeur dont les roues ont été remplacées par des pièces d'un cent.

http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/insolite/201209/12/01-4573520-un-artiste-sanctionne-pour-avoir-utilise-limage-du-sou-noir-sur-son-album.php


Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Sam 6 Oct - 23:07 (2012)    Sujet du message: FACE OF DEFENSE: ARMY ACQUISITION OFFICER WORKS WITH GOOGLE Répondre en citant

FACE OF DEFENSE: ARMY ACQUISITION OFFICER WORKS WITH GOOGLE

By Jonathan Pruett
21st Theater Sustainment Command

KAISERSLAUTERN, Germany, Oct. 5, 2012 – An Army acquisition officer assigned here is the first in his branch selected to work with Google Inc. as part of the Army's Training with Industry Program.

Army Maj. Matthew Bisswurm, plans and operations officer with the 903rd Contingency Contracting Battalion in Kaiserslautern, Germany, was selected for a position at Google Inc. as part of the Army's Training with Industry Program. U.S. Army photo


(Click photo for screen-resolution image);high-resolution image available.
Maj. Matthew Bisswurm, plans and operations officer with the 903rd Contingency Contracting Battalion, 409th Contracting Support Brigade, began his one-year internship with the Fortune 100 company in August and will bring back to the Army any lessons learned. "I'm looking to bring some of the innovative processes and successful techniques that Google has used, and help integrate them into the Army," Bisswurm said.

The Army, as well as the acquisition career field, has prepared Bisswurm for this opportunity.

"I love the expeditionary side of contingency contracting," Bisswurm said. "I love doing missions, and I love being on a team."

One of the objectives of the TWI is to provide soldiers hands-on experience in top defense, information technology and pioneering commercial companies, officials said. The program helps improve communication between commercial industry and the Army. Working with major corporations helps the Army speak the same language as its industry partners.

Bisswurm joined the Army in 2000 and made the transition into contracting in 2008 following a second combat deployment to Iraq.

"I wanted to broaden my skills," he said. "Being in a combat deployment, I saw the direct impact contracting had on the warfighter."

Bisswurm said he wants to use the skills he learns at Google and take them back with him to his next assignment.

"I want to have a different perspective on decision making, theory, manufacturing, and problem solving," he said. "I think the Army gains ten-fold on this program. The experience and insight are immeasurable."

Selected officers, warrant officers and noncommissioned officers are placed in jobs with industry partners and exposed to innovative industrial management tactics, techniques and procedures that can benefit the Army, officials said.
After completing the training, participants are immediately placed in a mandatory follow-on Army assignment to improve the Army's ability to interact and conduct business with industry.

"We want our guys to benchmark lessons learned and effect positive change in the Army Acquisition Corps," said Scott Green, acquisition education and training branch chief, U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center.

http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=118123


Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Sam 6 Oct - 23:26 (2012)    Sujet du message: CYBERSECURITY Répondre en citant

...

Cybersecurity is a growing concern across the world, Panetta said.

Cyber is increasingly being used in ways that can undermine the security of countries,” he said, “and for that reason I think it’s important for NATO to take steps to discuss what can be done to provide cybersecurity and … what steps can be taken to ensure that we do everything possible to deter those countries that engage is cyber warfare.”

...

http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=118133


Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Mar 9 Oct - 20:38 (2012)    Sujet du message: OBAMA TO ISSUE DISASTROUS “CYBERSECURITY” EXECUTIVE ORDER Répondre en citant


OBAMA TO ISSUE DISASTROUS “CYBERSECURITY” EXECUTIVE ORDER



October 2, 2012

in Front Page, Government





By Julie Borowski | Subscribe | Julie Borowski is the Policy Analyst at FreedomWorks. She is also an activist and an advocate for the Austrian School of economics


Opinions from Liberty Crier contributors and members are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of The Liberty Crier.




The American people stopped Congress from passing disastrous so-called cybersecurity bills that would infringe on the free speech and privacy of internet users. Nothing short of amazing happened when Congress tried to ram through CISPA, SOPA, and PIPA. The defeat of these bills showed the power of grassroots activism as countless activists rose up and took action by calling their congressmen and spreading the word on social media.

Senator Joe Lieberman hasn’t been pleased.

Lieberman was the lead co-sponsor of the Cybersecurity Act of 2012 that failed to muster up the 60 votes it needed to overcome a filibuster in the Senate.

Now, according to the Daily Caller, Lieberman is pushing Obama to issue a cybersecurity executive order identical to the Cybersecurity Act of 2012:

format_text entry-content a écrit:
In a letter to President Barack Obama Monday, Lieberman urged the administration to use the president’s ‘executive authority to the maximum extent possible to defend the nation from cyber attack.’



Outrageous.

There’s a reason that the Founding Fathers were so adamant on a system of checks and balances to help ensure that one branch does not become too powerful.

Obama to Issue Disastrous”Cybersecurity” Executive Order [continued]

Related posts:

  1. After Defeat of Senate Cybersecurity Bill, Obama Weighs Executive-Order Option
  2. White House Circulating Draft of Executive Order As A Stand-In For CISPA
  3. Strassel: Obama’s Imperial Presidency
  4. Watchdog Who Exonerated Obama on Energy Loans Now an Obama Donor
  5. Fox News Got An ‘Angry Phone Call’ From The White House After Airing



http://libertycrier.com/government/obama-to-issue-disastrouscybersecurity-executive-order/?fb_action_ids=10151040441742331&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=%7B%2210151040441742331%22%3A415387425187580%7D&action_type_map=%7B%2210151040441742331%22%3A%22og.likes%22%7D&action_ref_map


Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Lun 22 Oct - 17:23 (2012)    Sujet du message: CONFUSED BY DEFENSE CYBER THREAT ALERTS? A TRANSLATION IS ON THE WAY Répondre en citant

CONFUSED BY DEFENSE CYBER THREAT ALERTS? A TRANSLATION IS ON THE WAY



Laborant/Shutterstock.com


By Aliya Sternstein October 19, 2012
http://www.govexec.com/newsletters/?oref=ng-subscribe


An expanded information-sharing program will potentially allow more than 2,600 defense suppliers access to top-secret Pentagon communications with select companies about indications of cyber threats, partly by adding context understandable to a wider audience, officials with the contractor responsible for the ramp-up say.

The defense industrial base collaboration initiative started as a pilot program during summer 2011. In May, the Pentagon allowed the whole industry to join. Participants receive disclosures when the military detects signs of unfolding malicious campaigns so that their in-house technical teams can take protective measures. The Defense Department also distributes reports about breaches participating companies have suffered, after deleting identifying information to avoid exposing the weaknesses of competitors.

Around the time the initiative began ramping up, the General Services Administration signed a deal with Lockheed Martin Corp. worth up to $454 million for help running the Defense Cyber Crime Center, or DC3, which operates the program.

“One of our primary focuses is – ‘How do we help the government scale?’ ” said Rohan Amin, Lockheed’s program director for DC3. “Going from a small number of companies to a large number of companies is a very big problem.”

To facilitate growth, the firm is modifying communication procedures by, for example, explaining threat intelligence in a way that any military contractor, regardless of practice area, can grasp.

The program will contextualize the data using a technique Lockheed honed to protect its own business systems and its customers’ systems. The process dissects an intruder’s attack plan into a series of actions, taken over a period of time, that are intended to achieve an ultimate goal -- for instance, obtaining drone designs from a defense contractor’s network. Analysts then devise a corresponding response for each action that, if applied along any point in the chain, can foil the crook’s plan.

“DC3 has adopted that framework to enhance its information sharing,” Amin said, referring to the breakdown of the attack path, or “cyber kill chain.”

Critics of the industrial base program are skeptical that the intelligence gained is any better than what companies already know from their commercial cybersecurity providers.

Amin responded that, from Lockheed’s perspective, the information-sharing endeavors “are of value, but like any cybersecurity tool, nothing is ever going to be a silver bullet for solving all problems.”

One unique benefit for the contractor is the ability to compare incidents happening elsewhere in industry and government with its own experiences. “If you see that you have periods where things are quiet,” but others in the same sector are experiencing network irregularities, “that may cause you to think through if there are things you are missing,” Amin said. He added that the most sophisticated adversaries move without being detected by commercial cybersecurity services.

Defense on Sept. 24 announced a one-year renewal of a separate agreement with Booz Allen Hamilton worth up to $10 million for hardware and software that transmits the threat alerts.

There is discussion of establishing similar classified exchanges with other sectors critical to daily life, such as water utilities and financial institutions. The Homeland Security Department could offer these critical sectors entry into a facility called the National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center that already circulates top secret warnings about threats, Seán McGurk, a former DHS official who launched the center, said on Sept. 29.

“We started the capability -- and now we need to advance that capability and we need to extend it” beyond the currently six or seven active industries, he added.

Amin said “those other critical sectors are being looked at by DHS,” but DC3 is not directly involved in the conversations.

(Image via Laborant/Shutterstock.com)

http://www.nextgov.com/cybersecurity/2012/10/confused-defense-cyber-threat-alerts-translation-way/58906/?oref=nextgov_today_nl


Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Lun 22 Oct - 17:33 (2012)    Sujet du message: LEVERAGING PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS TO PROTECT CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE Répondre en citant

LEVERAGING PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS TO PROTECT CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE

Summary

  
Lisa Kaiser

Program Manager,
Control Systems Cybersecurity Standards and Tools,
Department of Homeland Security
 
  
Mark Engels

Enterprise Technology Security and Compliance Director,
Dominion
 
  
Katherine McIntire Peters
Executive Editor,
Nextgov

Voluntary cybersecurity guidelines could soon be developed for owners of power, water and other critical infrastructure facilities under a White House executive order. However, there are already examples where the public and private sector have worked together to protect the nation’s core critical infrastructure.

The Electric Sector Cybersecurity Capability Maturity Model has helped firms evaluate and strengthen their cybersecurity capabilities and prioritize network protection investments. Led by the Department of Energy and Department of Homeland Security, this effort has enabled utilities to evaluate and benchmark cybersecurity capabilities and prioritize actions and investments to improve cybersecurity.

Attendees of this event will learn:



Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Mer 24 Oct - 16:07 (2012)    Sujet du message: U.N. CALLS FOR 'ANTI-TERROR' INTERNET SURVEILLANCE Répondre en citant


U.N. CALLS FOR 'ANTI-TERROR' INTERNET SURVEILLANCE

United Nations report calls for Internet surveillance, saying lack of "internationally agreed framework for retention of data" is a problem, as are open Wi-Fi networks in airports, cafes, and libraries.
by Declan McCullagh


October 22, 2012 1:18 PM PDT




The United Nations is calling for more surveillance of Internet users, saying it would help to investigate and prosecute terrorists.

A 148-page report (PDF) released today titled "The Use of the Internet for Terrorist Purposes" warns that terrorists are using social networks and other sharing sites including Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Dropbox, to spread "propaganda."

"Potential terrorists use advanced communications technology often involving the Internet to reach a worldwide audience with relative anonymity and at a low cost," said Yury Fedotov, executive director of the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC).

The report, released at a conference in Vienna convened by UNODC, concludes that "one of the major problems confronting all law enforcement agencies is the lack of an internationally agreed framework for retention of data held by ISPs." Europe, but not the U.S. or most other nations, has enacted a mandatory data-retention law.

That echoes the U.S. Department of Justice's lobbying efforts aimed at convincing Congress to require Internet service providers to keep track of their customers -- in case police want to review those logs in the future. Privacy groups mounted a campaign earlier this year against the legislation, which has already been approved by a House committee.

The report, however, indicates it would be desirable for certain Web sites -- such as instant-messaging services and VoIP providers like Skype -- to keep records of "communication over the Internet such as chat room postings." That goes beyond what the proposed U.S. legislation, which targets only broadband and wireless providers, would cover.

Other excerpts from the UN report address:
Citation:
Open Wi-Fi networks: "Requiring registration for the use of Wi-Fi networks or cybercafes could provide an important data source for criminal investigations... There is some doubt about the utility of targeting such measures at Internet cafes only when other forms of public Internet access (e.g. airports, libraries and public Wi-Fi hotspots) offer criminals (including terrorists) the same access opportunities and are unregulated."

Cell phone tracking: "Location data is also important when used by law enforcement to exclude suspects from crime scenes and to verify alibis."

Terror video games: "Video footage of violent acts of terrorism or video games developed by terrorist organizations that simulate acts of terrorism and encourage the user to engage in role-play, by acting the part of a virtual terrorist."

Paying companies for surveillance: "It is therefore desirable that Governments provide a clear legal basis for the obligations placed on private sector parties, including... how the cost of providing such capabilities is to be met."


Today's U.N. report was produced in collaboration with the United Nations Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force, which counts the World Bank, Interpol, the World Health Organization, and the International Monetary Fund as members.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57537559-38/u.n-calls-for-anti-terror-internet-surveillance/


Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Ven 26 Oct - 18:00 (2012)    Sujet du message: INDUSTRY PARTNERSHIPS KEY TO MOBILITY STRATEGY, OFFICIAL SAYS Répondre en citant



INDUSTRY PARTNERSHIPS KEY TO MOBILITY STRATEGY, OFFICIAL SAYS


By Claudette Roulo
American Forces Press Service


WASHINGTON, Oct. 25, 2012 – The Defense Department's partnerships with industry, particularly in the mobile realm, are essential to its future success, the department’s deputy chief information officer for command, control, communications and computers and information infrastructure said here yesterday.

"I think that's what's going to make or break us in the future," Air Force Maj. Gen. Robert E. Wheeler told attendees at the 2012 Security Innovation Network conference.

DOD's plans for mobility, spectrum policy and programs, and national leadership command capabilities all are interconnected, he said.

Mobility -- the ability to perform the department’s functions in various locations -- hinges on the effective use of the wireless spectrum across all of DOD's systems, Wheeler said. This includes planning for the president's order to free up 500 megahertz of the spectrum, as well as future technological changes. National leadership command capabilities tie back to mobility as well, he added, because the president and other senior leaders need the ability to make decisions while on the move, anywhere in the world.

"They're all tied together," he said, "and there's a thread that goes between them all."
Wheeler said that DOD's agility -- its ability to change quickly in response to technology -- worries him.

"This is an area that DOD is getting better at, but we're still not perfect yet," he said. "Our acquisition programs are known throughout the world to be large, … but not to be very fast."

That's something that has to change, especially in regard to "tech-heavy" areas, Wheeler said. "We're trying to make sure that the way we write our programs and build them [includes] that ability, the agility, to move and to change quickly, unlike in the past."

The need for speed must be balanced with security, he said, and DOD is working with industry to accomplish that from the beginning of the acquisitions process. "No matter which way you look at this, we have to have cybersecurity dialed in from the beginning,” he added. “It has to be dialed in at the right level and dialed in at the right speed."

DOD also has to be able to move more quickly in the mobility arena, he said. Mobility is an important part of being able to keep up with change, he added, noting that decisions now are made at a much higher rate than in the past, and DOD is going to become much smaller in the future.

"What do we have to have? Access to information any time, anywhere and on any device," Wheeler said. Without communications, DOD can't conduct operations, he said.

DOD released its mobile device strategy earlier this year, and will release the implementation plan in the next few days, the general said. The bottom line, he said, is that DOD's approach to mobile devices provides cost savings to the nation, increases communications security and jumps the productivity curve.

DOD has an "intense" interest in adapting commercial mobile technology, Wheeler said, noting that mobility pilot programs are ongoing throughout the department. All of them use mobile devices to communicate in one of three ways: off the network, or via commercial Internet; secure but unclassified; or classified.

Each of the three "bins," he said, has unique security requirements and will have its own application store where users can download mission-related apps.

The Pentagon has issued an open request for proposals to build the mobile applications store, Wheeler said. Applications submitted to the store will be approved, disapproved or returned for revision within 90 days, he added.

"The key to us is streamlined certification," Wheeler said. "If somebody says [certification will take] six months to a year, it's useless. … Things change too dramatically. Even 90 days is probably a little bit too long."

Mobility also is tied to spectrum policy, the general said.

The president has asked for the federal government and commercial industries to clear 500 MHz of spectrum to use for economic development, he said. That could enable broadband companies to put a 4G network, for example, across the nation, including in rural areas, he added.

A change like that would have an extremely significant economic impact on the country, Wheeler said, similar to the impact of GPS and other breakthroughs.

"I would argue that it would transform the nation," the general added.

But vacating spectrum is costly and time-consuming, Wheeler said, as it requires equipment replacement and new acquisition strategies. And because U.S. allies have bought equipment that frequency shifts would affect, it also has international implications. Those allies may not be able to simply change to a different frequency, because their home country's spectrum also may be crowded, he explained.

"In the future, we have to have the ability to go to multiple bands with our equipment," Wheeler said, and to be cost-effective, that ability needs to be built into the planning process from the beginning.

Spectrum crowding isn't strictly a negative issue, the general said. "Scarcity is the mother of all inventions," he said, noting that new ways to use the communications spectrum have been developed that probably wouldn't have been had there been enough spectrum to go around.

For example, he said, some new technologies allow a frequency to be shared, rather than owned by a single user who may not use its full capacity. In the short term, Wheeler said, DOD is shifting the focus to sharing frequencies instead of clearing and auctioning off frequencies.

Long-term spectrum plans include exploring the concept of a national spectrum research facility and developing a long-term spectrum strategy, the general said.

DOD is working on increasing system flexibility, operations agility and refreshing and updating the regulatory framework, Wheeler said.

"While we're working very quickly to do this, we also have to have the regulatory requirements -- to include laws -- that allow us to do some of that sharing," he said. But that can be a slow process, he added, so the regulatory process has to become faster and work in tandem with the acquisition process.

Long-term Defense Department strategy has to connect to the national and commercial strategies, Wheeler said. "Connecting those dots is something that we have been trying to do for about the past decade correctly, and I actually think we're getting close," the general said.

Industry can help by understanding the budget and political environments, Wheeler said. "It's an environment where, obviously, all of the budgets are restricted right now … as our nation comes out of the economic slump," he said.

Despite what many view as a negative economy, Wheeler said, he sees a lot of opportunity for development. "Watching all the innovation [coming] out of scarcity in the Department of Defense … shows me that there's probably more opportunity now than there's been in many years to fix some of the problems that have been difficult in the past."

Success will consist of a partnership between government and industry, Wheeler said, noting that many companies are finding out they need the same levels of cybersecurity and innovation as DOD does.

"If you come in and make it more secure, cheaper for the department overall and help us with productivity, you're going to get in the door, because that's what we need,” the general said.

It's good for the taxpayer, it's good for the nation, and I don't care what agency you're going into, they're going to need your help."


http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=118331


Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Ven 26 Oct - 18:07 (2012)    Sujet du message: ISRAELI POLICE PULL NATIONAL COMPUTER SYSTEM OFFLINE OVER CYBER THREAT Répondre en citant


ISRAELI POLICE PULL NATIONAL COMPUTER SYSTEM OFFLINE OVER CYBER THREAT

Published: 25 October, 2012, 16:04
Edited: 26 October, 2012, 02:15


Israeli soldiers train with new high-tech weapons and computers at an undisclosed military base in Israel (AFP Photo / Yael Bar Hillal)

Israeli police pulled the national computer network from the civilian Internet on Thursday following an intelligence tip that a virus may have infected the central police system.

­Police ordered every district and officer to disconnect their computers from the civilian Internet, and advised officers to be careful when using police computers or software.

All offices for police district spokespersons have also gone offline, and are currently not sending or responding to emails.

National Police spokesperson Micky Rosenfeld said investigators are looking at the possibility that hackers broke into the national computer system, and are trying to determine the extent of the break-in, the Jerusalem Post reported.

Rosenfeld also said they were checking to see whether the breach involved a wide-scale cyber-attack, or a virus infecting only a few computers.

The intelligence tip did not indicate the culprit behind the attack, but it appeared to be an external organization. The police are still trying to identify the source.

It appears that a wide range of Israeli government agencies had experienced a cyber attack recently, caused by a "Trojan horse" virus sent into servers.

Allegedly the "Trojan" was sent as an email attachment with the subject line stating the Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Benny Gantz' name.

Anonymous sources told Haaretz that a warning was issued by the Foreign Ministry's defense department warning that a suspicious email has been targeting various delegations and embassies over the course of the last week, either from Gantz' mailbox or with the mention of his name. Government employees were advised not to open their emails or Facebook messages if such strange activity was noticed.
 

Hararetz notes that the messages contained comments made by different Israeli politicians, with some emails asking for Facebook endorsement or links to Gantz' website.

A connection between the police attack and the Gantz “Trojan” has not yet been established.

Earlier this month, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned his cabinet of "increasing attempts to carry out cyber-attacks on computer infrastructures in the State of Israel. Every day there are attempts, even many attempts, to infiltrate Israel's computer systems,” Israeli Globes reported.
 
He said that the appropriate response to the cybernetic threat was a digital Iron Dome.

"It was because of this that I established the National Cyber Bureau, and it is working to block these attempts by developing what I would call a 'digital Iron Dome' for Israel to defend against computer terrorism."

http://rt.com/news/israel-police-internet-computer-215/


Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Sam 27 Oct - 22:43 (2012)    Sujet du message: NEW UN WHITE PAPER DEFINES INTERNET USERS AS POTENTIAL TERRORISTS Répondre en citant


NEW UN WHITE PAPER DEFINES INTERNET USERS AS POTENTIAL TERRORISTS

“The Internet is a prime example of how terrorists can behave in a truly transnational way; in response, States need to think and function in an equally transnational manner.” — Ban Ki-moon Secretary-General of the United Nations





By Shepard Ambellas
theintelhub.com
October 27, 2012

 The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, (UNODC) in conjunction with the United Nations Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force, recently claimed in a white paper entitled The Use of the Internet for Terrorist Purposes that, “The use of the Internet for terrorist purposes is a rapidly growing phenomenon, requiring a proactive and coordinated response from Member States.”

The globalists backing this agenda “by the rule of law” (essentially a United Nations term that suggests US law can be circumvented by way of UN treaty) would love nothing more than to shut down key sections of the internet including alternative news and blogger sites that have the ability to release true and accurate information in near real time.

Richard Barrett, Coordinator of the Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team Co-Chair of the Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force Working Group on Countering the Use of the Internet for Terrorist Purposes wrote:

Citation:
“The Working Group is confident that the present report will help to identify the legislative areas in which the United Nations can assist in the implementation by Member States of the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy in combating the use of the Internet for terrorist purposes”.



Over the past decade the United Kingdom has led the charge to “counter the use of the internet for terrorism purposes” according to the white paper.

“The British Government therefore welcomes the opportunity to support UNODC”

However, this has really been a plot to incrementally hammer out strategic ground work to limit and censor yet even more information from the internet as the globalists propaganda streams have been bypassed by the alternative media, bloggers, and citizen journalists worldwide in what Hillary Clinton admitted really is an information war.

The UNODC white paper claims that:

“Technology is one of the strategic factors driving the increasing use of the Internet by terrorist organizations and their supporters for a wide range of purposes, including recruitment, financing, propaganda, training, incitement to commit acts of terrorism, and the gathering and dissemination of information for terrorist purposes.” broadly including or lumping in what some would say would be the equivalent to internet bloggers, avid readers, researchers or even smartphone users.

In fact, it gets even worse than that as essentially anyone that makes any type of economic transaction on the internet could be a potential terrorist.

Chapter 1, section 2 – Part 14 of the white paper states;

Citation:
Terrorist organizations and supporters may also use the Internet to finance acts of terrorism. The manner in which terrorists use the Internet to raise and collect funds and resources may be classified into four general categories: direct solicitation, e-commerce, the exploitation of online payment tools and through charitable organizations.

Direct solicitation refers to the use of websites, chat groups, mass mailings and targeted communications to request donations from supporters.

Websites may also be used as online stores, offering books, audio and video recordings and other items to supporters. Online payment facilities offered through dedicated websites or communications platforms make it easy to transfer funds electronically between parties.

Funds transfers are often made by electronic wire transfer, credit card or alternate payment facilities available via services such as PayPal or Skype.



This is extremely frightening as now the average American citizen is defined as a potential terror threat.

With cameras on almost every street corner, internet police, and cyber crime divisions, the “useless eaters” (as Henry Kissinger calls the general populace) could soon be restricted from accessing useful and god given information internet wide, with globalist propaganda being the only line of communication to the masses.

The UNODC also goes on to outline that terrorists are actually trained over the internet and how these platforms “act as a virtual training camp” for terrorists and terror organizations operations.

Citation:
“These Internet platforms also provide detailed instructions, often in easily accessible multimedia format and multiple languages, on topics such as how to join terrorist organizations; how to construct explosives, firearms or other weapons or hazardous materials; and how to plan and execute terrorist attacks”.




Chapter 1, Sections 18 reads;

Citation:
18. For example, Inspire is an online magazine allegedly published by Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula with the stated objective of enabling Muslims to train for jihad at home.

It contains a large amount of ideological material aimed at encouraging terror- ism, including statements attributed to Osama Bin Laden, Sheikh Ayman al-Zawahiri and other well-known Al-Qaida figures.

The fall 2010 edition included practical instructional material on how to adapt a four-wheel-drive vehicle to carry out an attack on members of the public and how a lone individual could launch an indiscriminate attack by shooting a gun from a tower.

The publication even suggested a target city for such an attack, in order to increase the chances of killing a member of the Government.14



This insinuates that any online publication including websites like theintelhub.com, infowars.com, and other popular alternative news websites are in fact being covertly targeted by counter-terrorism task forces.

Chapter 1, Section C – Part 30 outlines the “use of the internet to counter terrorist activity” calling for counter intelligence operations.

Citation:
30. Online discussions provide an opportunity to present opposing viewpoints or to engage in constructive debate, which may have the effect of discouraging potential sup- porters. Counter-narratives with a strong factual foundation may be conveyed through online discussion forums, images and videos.

Successful messages may also demonstrate empathy with the underlying issues that contribute to radicalization, such as political and social conditions, and highlight alternatives to violent means of achieving the desired outcomes.

Strategic communications that provide counter-narratives to terrorist propaganda may also be disseminated via the Internet, in multiple languages, to reach a broad, geographically diverse audience.



Section 30 describes how internet operatives will essentially target online comment sections, forums, and other valuable sources of real time information.

Although this is really nothing new as internet police and operatives have been providing counter intelligence operations on the American populace for years.

The UN would love to have everything read “by the rule of law” as referred to in a speech by George W. Bush.

Soon through international treaties there will be no more local law.

As a matter of fact, we have seen this already with the silent suspension of the US constitution under World Health Organization imposed pandemic level 6.

Starting back in 2009 with the H1N1 flu virus, this suspension continued until March of 2012 when the provision expired after being extended in late 2009 by president Obama thus allowing the illegal banker bailouts to take place.

The white paper also targets file-sharing networks, section (d) 191 in Chapter IV reads;
Citation:
(d) File-sharing networks and cloud technology

191. File-sharing websites, such as Rapidshare, Dropbox or Fileshare, provide parties with the ability to easily upload, share, locate and access multimedia files via the Inter- net.

Encryption and anonymizing techniques employed in connection with other forms of Internet communication are similarly applicable to files shared via, inter alia, peer- to-peer (P2P) and File Transfer Protocol (FTP) technology.

For example, in the Hicheur case (see para. 20 above), evidence was presented that digital files in support of terrorist activities were shared via Rapidshare, after being encrypted and compressed for security.

Some file-sharing networks may maintain transfer logs or payment information, which may be relevant in the context of an investigation.




The bottom line is that we can all be lumped in as terrorists under these descriptions provided by the UNODC.

http://theintelhub.com/2012/10/27/new-un-white-paper-defines-internet-users-as-potential-terrorists/


Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Sam 27 Oct - 23:15 (2012)    Sujet du message: CANADA : POLICE NEED NEW INTERNET SURVEILLANCE TOOLS, SAY CHIEFS Répondre en citant

CANADA : POLICE NEED NEW INTERNET SURVEILLANCE TOOLS, SAY CHIEFS

The Online Police: Bill C-30 would give police access to internet communications without a warrant

VIDEO : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9u86yuI9CHg&feature=g-hist


Police need new internet surveillance tools, says The Canadian Association of Police Chiefs

VIDEO : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HXJ4jH_u2M&feature=g-hist

Bill C-30 would give police access to internet communications without a warrant

CBC News
Posted: Oct 26, 2012 2:02 PM PT
Last Updated: Oct 26, 2012 7:20 PM PT


The Canadian Association of Police Chiefs is calling on the federal government to pass its controversial internet surveillance bill so police can fight cybercrime more effectively.

Association president and Vancouver police Chief Jim Chu says he is concerned Bill C-30 will die on the order paper, meaning officers investigating criminal activity on cellphones and the internet will still have to get a warrant every time they want to intercept communications by cybercriminals.

"Law enforcement continues to be handcuffed by legislation introduced in 1975, the days of the rotary telephone," said Chu on Friday morning in Vancouver.

Bill C-30 was introduced by Public Safety Minister Vic Toews last winter and was immediately criticized by many groups concerned about the sweeping powers it would give the government to track the ordinary activities of citizens online without judicial oversight.

Bill C-30 stalled in the House

The legislation was tabled in the House but has not been debated since a massive public backlash when it was released.
But Chu insists it's not about spying — it's about getting timely information from telecommunications providers.

pullq a écrit:
'Right now there are gangsters out there communicating about killing someone and we can't intercept that.'—Vancouver deputy police chief Warren Lemcke


"If we don't take a strong stance on this issue Canadians won't appreciate the limitations that constrain law enforcement in the cyberworld," said Chu on Friday in Vancouver.

Chu said that if Bill C-30 passes internet and cellphone providers will have to release the name, address, phone number, email and IP information of suspects to police.

That's essential in this era of gangsters and cyberbullies, he said.

Deputy police chief Warren Lemcke agrees.

"Like the chief said, I can tell you right now there are gangsters out there communicating about killing someone and we can't intercept that," said Lemcke.

Critics question unchecked powers

Section 34 of the bill essentially would give any government appointed agents, who may or may not be a police or intelligence officer, the right to access and copy any information and documentation collected by internet providers and telecommunications companies, without the need for a warrant, judicial oversight or even a criminal investigation.

It would also require those communications companies to install the surveillance technology and software necessary to enable them to monitor and gather phone and internet traffic for the government.

Critics say the information will be more vulnerable to hackers and consumers will end up paying for the cost of the equipment needed for companies to implement the legislation.

Chu said he agrees that Section 34 is problematic.

"While the CACP endorses Bill C-30, we would like to make it clear there is one part of the bill that has posed concerns to some and we share that concern," Chu said in a release.

"It is easy to understand why some might conclude from that wording that inspectors would have unfettered access to Canadians' personal records when doing these inspections. While we realize that's not the intention of this section, this must be clarified."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/10/26/bc-jim-chu-internet-surveillance.html


Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Sam 27 Oct - 23:21 (2012)    Sujet du message: PARTENARIAT CANADA-ÉTATS-UNIS POUR LA CYBERSÉCURITÉ Répondre en citant

PARTENARIAT CANADA-ÉTATS-UNIS POUR LA CYBERSÉCURITÉ

Mise à jour le vendredi 26 octobre 2012 à 22 h 23 HAE

 

Photo : iStock

Le Canada et les États-Unis vont travailler de concert pour protéger leurs infrastructures technologiques contre des cyberattaques. Les deux pays ont annoncé vendredi le lancement d'un plan commun, qui sera placé sous la supervision du ministère de la Sécurité publique au Canada et du Département de la Sécurité publique aux États-Unis.

Le Plan d'action vise à améliorer la collaboration entre les deux pays sur la gestion des cyberincidents. Il s'agit de protéger les infrastructures numériques communes en permettant des interventions conjointes lorsque les évènements le dictent.

« Le Canada et les États-Unis ont intérêt à travailler en partenariat à la protection des infrastructures communes. Nous tenons à travailler ensemble afin d'assurer la protection des systèmes cybernétiques essentiels, de rétablir les services en cas de perturbation et d'améliorer la sécurité du cyberespace pour tous les citoyens. » — Vic Toews, ministre canadien de la Sécurité publique

Le Plan d'action comprend également un volet pour stimuler la participation du secteur privé et l'échange d'informations. En septembre, le ministre Toews avait déjà présenté un nouveau partenariat entre son gouvernement et une coalition d'entreprises privées, d'organismes gouvernementaux et d'organisations à but non lucratif afin de faciliter l'information du public quant aux mesures de sécurité pertinentes lors de la navigation sur Internet.

Cette annonce intervient peu après l'avertissement lancé au début du mois par les États-Unis à l'effet que des équipements de télécommunications fournis par les groupes chinois Huawei (OUA OUÉ) et ZTE pourraient être utilisés à des fins d'espionnage.

Plusieurs mesures déjà annoncées

Cette collaboration s'inscrit également dans le cadre du Plan d'action Par-delà la frontière pour la sécurité du périmètre et la compétitivité économique, annoncé par les deux gouvernements en décembre 2011. Des initiatives visant notamment la protection des renseignements personnels, la sécurité du fret maritime et la circulation des personnes entre le Canada et les États-Unis ont déjà été présentées.

Le ministre fédéral de la Sécurité publique, Vic Toews


Le gouvernement canadien a récemment annoncé un investissement de 155 millions $ pour la sécurité des réseaux informatiques, afin de permettre une meilleure coordination de la réponse des autorités fédérales et provinciales en cas de cyberattaque. Le Canada a également lancé depuis peu une campagne de sensibilisation sur le sujet, intitulée Pensez cybersécurité, destinée aux citoyens.

http://www.radio-canada.ca/nouvelles/Politique/2012/10/26/004-entente-cybersecurite-frontiere.shtml


Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Mar 30 Oct - 19:40 (2012)    Sujet du message: FBI STARTS NEW INITIATIVE TO NAME HACKERS Répondre en citant

FBI STARTS NEW INITIATIVE TO NAME HACKERS


 
Thinkstock
By Aliya Sternstein October 29, 2012

The cybercrime division of the FBI, under a new program, has retooled to focus on determining the identities of intruders at the other end of the keyboard, bureau officials announced.

Giving priority to the labeling of suspects follows claims by the Pentagon that the military now has the capability to single out and retaliate against hackers.

“A key aim of the Next Generation Cyber Initiative has been to expand our ability to quickly define the attribution piece of a cyberattack to help determine an appropriate response,” Richard McFeely, executive assistant director of the FBI Criminal, Cyber, Response, and Services Branch, said in a blog post on Friday.

He went on to describe the attribution piece as uncovering “who is conducting the attack or the exploitation and what is their motive.”

The FBI during the past year has deployed a corps of specially trained computer scientists able “to extract hackers’ digital signatures,” or the unique behaviors of a given malicious online campaign, the post explained.

Investigators can send findings to the FBI Cyber Division’s Cyber Watch command, a 24-hour station at headquarters, where specialists will look for patterns or similarities among cases, officials said. The watch center also feeds leads to partner agencies, including the departments of Defense and Homeland Security, they added.

“We are obviously concerned with terrorists using the Internet to conduct these types of attacks,” McFeely said. “As the lead domestic intelligence agency within the United States, it’s our job to make sure that businesses’ and the nation’s secrets don’t fall into the hands of adversaries.”

Earlier this month, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, during a landmark speech on cyber’s threat to national security, said a two-year investment in forensics to solve the attribution problem is paying off. “Potential aggressors should be aware that the United States has the capacity to locate them and hold them accountable for actions that harm America or its interests,” he remarked, in what news reports say was a signal to Iran.

Iran, or at least hackers thought to be sponsored by the nation state, is allegedly behind a spate of server attacks that have paralyzed major U.S. bank websites.

Still, some cybersecurity experts are cautious about assigning blame for computer assaults too quickly. Just last week, investigators told Bloomberg a strike on Saudi Arabian state oil company Aramco, which U.S. officials reportedly linked to Iran, now appears to be the work of a company insider.

“The mistakes in the virus’s code led investigators to the point of attack -- a USB stick that had been inserted in a computer on the internal company network -- and to the identity of the suspected attacker, an Aramco employee who was logged onto the machine at the time of the incident,” Bloomberg reported on Thursday.

http://www.nextgov.com/cybersecurity/2012/10/fbi-starts-new-initiative-name-hackers/59077/?oref=nextgov_today_nl


Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Mer 31 Oct - 16:05 (2012)    Sujet du message: #WARFIGHTING – THE NAVY'S CYBERWARRIORS Répondre en citant

#WARFIGHTING – THE NAVY'S CYBERWARRIORS

By Arif Patani

– October 30, 2012
Posted in: Uncategorized


The Information Dominance Warfare Device.



This blog was written by Vice Admiral Michael Rogers, head of the Navy’s U.S. Fleet Cyber Command and TENTH fleet.
First and foremost, the men and women assigned to U.S. Fleet Cyber Command and U.S. TENTH Fleet (FCC/C10F) are warriors. I am proud of the work they do to defend the nation every day and the skills they bring to the fight.

While many Americans understand the importance of the network that connects them with the rest of the world, they may not be as familiar with our Navy cyber warfighters and what they do on a daily basis to maintain mission critical connectivity between our naval forces. Because the Navy’s combat power is drawn from a highly networked and electromagnetic spectrum dependent force, the Navy must continuously fight within cyberspace to preserve these networks to maintain our maritime superiority.

Think of it this way; cyberspace is the fifth warfighting domain that intersects the other four which are sea, land, air, and space. Commanding this domain is critical to the Navy’s core capabilities of forward presence, deterrence, sea control, power projection, maritime security and humanitarian assistance/disaster response. The U.S. Department of Defense defines cyberspace as “a global domain within the information environment consisting of the interdependent network of information technology infrastructures, including the Internet, telecommunications networks, computer systems, and embedded processors and controllers.” Controlling and defending this information flow is a warfighting imperative.
Just as the U.S. Navy dominates the sea domain, the FCC/C10F team of officers, enlisted, and civilian members fight each day to maintain our edge in cyberspace in defense and support of the Navy and Joint forces.
FCC/C10F warfighters contribute to the Navy’s overall mission by directing cyberspace operations to deter and defeat aggression while ensuring freedom of action in cyberspace. This means serving as the central operational authority for networks, cryptologic/signals intelligence, cyber, information operations, electronic warfare, and space capabilities for the Navy. We network widely dispersed forces to gain battle space awareness that extends our Navy’s operational reach to deliver massed and precision firepower at critical points – in other words, we fight the bad guys and empower our Navy and Joint partners in cyberspace by operating and protecting the networks that support the defense of our nation. To do this, we are continually striving to leverage technology and optimize our workforce through training and innovation to maintain our strategic, operational and tactical advantage in cyberspace.


We execute our mission set using the same traditional maritime warfighting organizations and mechanisms that the Navy uses in every other warfighting domain: a three-star numbered fleet that provides operational oversight and uses its Maritime Operations Center to execute command and control over its assigned forces, subordinate task forces that are organized to actually execute the actions necessary to achieving the mission within their assigned mission sets, and a highly motivated work force of uniformed and civilian teammates who are the cornerstone of our efforts in the cyber domain.

While networking our forces and cyber security is our focus every day, every military member and American citizen should understand the vulnerabilities in cyberspace and institute practical safeguards to protect their systems and information (from protecting your private information on social media sites to using unique and difficult-to-guess passwords). For that reason, October is National Cybersecurity Awareness Month and we invite you to learn more by visiting www.fcc.navy.mil.

As the FCC/C10F nears completion of its third year since standing up in January 2010, it is fitting to take a moment to reflect on the contributions our Navy cyber warfighters have made, because they have been the strength of our efforts over these years and they will continue to be the source of that strength. Well done and thank you for the hard work, FCC/C10F team.

Continued success in cyberspace requires a team effort across the entire Navy. Every Sailor, civilian and contractor must understand the vital role they play in safeguarding our networks and information. Cyber readiness and security is everyone’s responsibility and FCC/C10F looks forward to teaming with each of you.

http://navylive.dodlive.mil/2012/10/30/warfighting-the-navys-cyberwarriors/


Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Sam 3 Nov - 18:40 (2012)    Sujet du message: BIG BROTHER WANTS TO ISSUE YOU AN INTERNET PASSWORD TO HELL Répondre en citant

BIG BROTHER WANTS TO ISSUE YOU AN INTERNET PASSWORD TO HELL

“We’re from the government and we’re here to help.” Sure, and the fleas on rats didn’t spread the bubonic plague.

You know how hard it is to keep up with all those passwords to all of the internet sites you visit. You know it’s a pain. You can’t remember all of them. In fact, I keep a cheat-sheet in a book next to my computer where I’ve written them all down in case my “remember me” app fails or I have to erase my cookies. (uh oh, I probably shouldn’t have divulged that information to those who might possibly want to break into my cyber sphere.)

Ta da! Bring on the ruffles and flourishes! Never fear! Obama is here!!! What a great bunch of Czars he has assembled……armies of men and women who spend each day and night figuring out ways to make your life….uh, more beholden to “The One.” We are to be saved from our internet password hell by none other than those sweet, technologically savvy, folks at the White House. You know those compassionate people, who could not stop Wikileaks and want to tell your doctor how to practice medicine, now want to control your passwords. The same people who are shutting down the coal industry and forbidding drilling for oil want to keep a database of your password(s) to your information on the internet. Make a political contribution online? The White House will know about it. Pick the opposite political party? The White House will have the information. Buy a pocket Constitution? Hmmmmm….well Obama might not approve of that one.

In case you missed it, Obama’s Internet Czar put forth a “proposal” for a federal data base assigning each citizen a government approved internet password. They just want to make your life easier…..you know. The mob just wants to protect your neighborhood. Sure, Hansel and Gretel didn’t meet a cannibalistic old witch in the woods either.

entry-content a écrit:
“Sometimes, the word ‘voluntary’ is a little complicated…”
–Obama Regulatory Czar, Cass Sunstein

You think it can’t happen here?


entry-content a écrit:
“Efforts to place restrictions on the internet are unfolding apace in Australia where the government is implementing a mandatory and wide-ranging Internet filter modeled on that of the Communist Chinese government.”



From there to here


entry-content a écrit:
“The Obama administration is planning on handing over power to the U.S. Commerce department in a new effort to increase security on the Internet. The idea is to create an “identity ecosystem” for the Internet, while the government says this is not a “National ID Card” it does appear to be very similar but restricted only to Internet activities.”


From American Thinker, “The dangerous internet proposal” by Lee DeCovnick:

entry-content a écrit:
“Since this Administration never lets a crisis go to waste I thought it would be useful to dig out at least one significant announcement that the White House purposefully buried in the wake of the Tucson shootings. From the Washington Times editorial page, we find this evil spawn, courtesy of those delightful jackanapes at the White House. Note the use of the term “White House cybersecurity advisor.” That’s media speak for one of the more than three dozen unconfirmed Marxist -leaning czars appointed by Obama, his hand picked shadow government in-waiting.
Citation:
The White House cybersecurity adviser joined Commerce Secretary Gary Locke to announce what amounts to a national ID card for the Internet.

Their plan is straightforward. Instead of logging onto Facebook or one’s bank using separate passwords established with each individual company or website, the White House will take the lead in developing what it calls an “identity ecosystem” that will centralize personal information and credentials. This government-approved system would issue a smart card or similar device that would confirm an individual’s identity when making online credit-card purchases, accessing electronic health care records, posting “anonymous” blog entries or even logging onto one’s own home computer, according to administration documents.

Officials insist this would be a voluntary program and deliver significant benefits to the public.

Centralizing access to personal information only makes it easier for the bad guys because it means they only need to steal one key to unlock a vast wealth of financial and personal information. It’s likely that the real motivation for this is to ensure the feds always have backdoor access into what people are doing in the online realm.


Good Lord! If we allow these “internet passports” to become law, we will surely end up with health care passports, carbon credit passports and, of course, food and nutrition passports.

We know with 100% certainty that the government cannot keep these programs secure. We know with 100% certainty the government will gleefully track every web site you visit, every keystroke you send, every purchase you make, every deposit and withdrawal, every blog comment, and every Facebook and Twitter post. A simple algorithm will create lists of your acquaintances and friends and inform the government of your political affiliations, political donations, clubs, interests and hobbies.

This would not only be the end of personal privacy; we would have good running start at an authoritarian American gulag. Thanks to the socialist thugs appointed by Obama, American’s must now focus Congress’s attention on rejecting this cynical evisceration of our Constitutional protections of privacy, speech, press and association.”


Those on the left, who are Obama’s fan base, are the same people who had an apoplectic fit over George Bush’s wire tapping to defend us against terrorists. I guess one man’s oppression is another man’s cyber security? And, by the way, did you know we needed an “ecosystem” for the internet? Are you laughing yet? OMG! I’d prefer my own password hell, thank you very much. My little cheat-sheet book, at least, is mine and the government can’t have its hands on it.

http://freedomoutpost.com/2012/11/big-brother-wants-to-issue-you-an-internet-password-to-hell/


Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Jeu 8 Nov - 17:11 (2012)    Sujet du message: SECURITY EXPERTS PUSH BACK AT 'CYBER PEARL HARBOR' WARNING Répondre en citant

NEXT FALSE FLAG IN PREPARATION TO SHUT DOWN INTERNET

 SECURITY EXPERTS PUSH BACK AT 'CYBER PEARL HARBOR' WARNING

By Taylor Armerding, CSO
Nov 7, 2012 11:01 AM

The nation's top national security leaders have convinced President Obama and much of the leadership in Congress that the U.S. is at risk of a "Cyber Pearl Harbor" or "Digital 9/11" if it does not take drastic measures to improve both defensive and offensive cybersecurity capabilities against hostile nation states.

But the leaders, Defense (DoD) Secretary Leon Panetta and Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano have not, however, convinced every expert in the cybersecurity community, and there is now some increasingly vocal push-back from some of them.

Critics argue argue that not only is the threat of a catastrophic cyberattack greatly exaggerated, but that the best way to guard against the multiple risks they agree exist is not with better firewalls or offensive strikes against potential attacks, but to "build security in" to the control systems that run the nation's critical infrastructure.

Bruce Schneier, author, Chief Technology Security Officer at BT and frequently described as a security "guru," has not backed off of his contention made at a debate two years ago that the cyber war threat "has been greatly exaggerated." He said that while a major attack would be disruptive, it would not even be close to an existential threat to the U.S.


"This [damage] is at the margins," he said, adding that even using the term "war" is just a, "neat way of phrasing it to get people's attention. The threats and vulnerabilities are real, but they are not war threats."

Gary McGraw, CTO of Cigital, recently argued that while existing control systems are "riddled with security vulnerabilities" since they are outdated and were not designed with security in mind, trying to protect them with a preemptive attack against a perceived threat would be both dangerous and fruitless.

Build security in

McGraw, who has been preaching the "build-security-in" mantra for years, is highly skeptical of claims that government is now much better at "attribution"—knowing exactly who launched an attack.

"If they have solved it, they need to tell us hard-core security people how they did it, because we don't really believe them," he said, noting that a major retaliation against a party that didn't launch an attack could be more catastrophic than the initial attack.

"Proactive defense," by eliminating the vulnerabilities in the control systems, is a much better approach, McCgraw argues.

Besides the attribution problem, McGraw wrote that cyber-offense capabilities of an adversary are unlikely to be knocked out by an attack. Quoting estimates from Ralph Langner, the security consultant credited with cracking the Stuxnet malware, he said that while it takes $90 billion to develop a nuclear submarine fleet, a cyberweapons program aimed at hardened military targets would cost more like $1 billion. And a single-use attack against critical infrastructure might cost as little as $5 million, he said.

Creating such "cyber-rocks," he said, is cheap. "Buying a cyber-rock is even cheaper since zero-day attacks exist on the open market for sale to the highest bidder."

So, it makes no sense to, "unleash the cyber-rocks from inside of our glass houses since everyone can or will have cyber-rocks," he wrote.

Besides Schneier and McGraw, Jacob Olcott, principal at Good Harbor Consulting and past counsel and lead negotiator on comprehensive cybersecurity legislation to Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WVa.), pointed to a paper he authored in May that "suggests that owners and operators of critical infrastructure can achieve long-term cost savings and significantly reduce cyber risk by adopting secure development."

 All about the money?  

Why isn't that concept more persuasive to national security leaders in Washington?

Schneier has said for years, and said again this week, that cyberattack threats are "being grossly exaggerated for a reason" and "about money and power."

"There is an enormous amount of money in government contracts, and the real money is in scaring people," he said.

McGraw said that military leaders "are interested in offensive stuff because they think like the war fighters they are." In his paper, he contends that offense is sexier than defense.

"One of the problems to overcome is that exploits are sexy and engineering is, well, not so sexy," he wrote. "I've experienced this first hand with my own books. The black hat 'bad-guy' books, such as 'Exploiting Software' outsell the white hat 'good-guy' books like 'Software Security' by a ratio of 3:1."



 But Joel Harding, a retired military intelligence officer and information operations expert, said it may also be because not everybody in the security community agrees with the anti-offense view. "There is a giant chorus of cybersecurity experts clamoring for attention. It's a cacophony of opinions," he said. But he disagrees that defense alone is enough to defeat or even block an attacker.

"By its very nature, a zero-day exploit uses a vulnerability otherwise not defended against," he said. "Until we have artificial intelligence that predicts the nature and type of future attacks and offers ways to block them, a defense is at risk." But he does agree that attribution remains imperfect.

Olcott said the good news is that his and other voices are being heard in government. He points to a "Build Security In" page on the DHS website that advocates for building secure software, and even includes a citation of Schneier.

But Schneier said as long as "war" is the operative description, the hyperbole will continue and the response will be less effective. "When you use a war metaphor, a certain type of solution presents itself," he said, "while a police metaphor brings a different type of solution."

"Right now the dialogue dominated by the DoD and the spooks," McGraw said. "If you think about security as your hands, security engineering finger might be your right pinky—it's big enough to be a finger, but not a huge part of cybersecurity."

"What we really need to do is revisit security engineering," he said.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2013616/security-experts-push-back-at-cyber-pearl-harbor-warning.html


Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Jeu 8 Nov - 17:17 (2012)    Sujet du message: NSA DIRECTOR ON CYBERATTACKS: ‘EVERYBODY'S GETTING HIT’ Répondre en citant

NSA DIRECTOR ON CYBERATTACKS: ‘EVERYBODY'S GETTING HIT’



Nov 7, 2012 7:53pm


Gen. Keith Alexander, the commander of U.S. Cyber Command and director of the National Security Agency, today bluntly addressed widespread cyberattacks hitting major corporations and the damaging loss of intellectual property being harvested from their computer networks.

“From my perspective, this is huge,” Alexander said at a symposium sponsored by the computer security firm Symantec. “When we look out there – the companies that have been hit – you look across the board: Everybody’s getting hit.

“In 2012, just some of them — Nissan, MasterCard and Visa: That should make all of us concerned,” Alexander said. “[In] 2011, RSA, COMODO, Epsilon, L-3, Sony, Citi, Lockheed Martin, Northrup Grumman, Google, Booz Allen, DigiNotar, Mitsubishi, Sony, Adidas – I had to bring that one in for our allies -Stratfor, Visa, [US] Chamber of Commerce.

“We see the biggest amount of theft going to intellectual property for most of these companies,” he added. “And when you look at it, the theft that’s going on hits in two directions, either directly hitting the company that they’re trying to steal the information from, or they’re stealing the certificates and keys to get into that company to steal the intellectual property. Either way, they’re getting it.”

According to U.S. intelligence officials, in 2009 U.S. companies suffered losses of about $50 billion from their research and development efforts.

Alexander addressed a series of disruptive “denial of service” attacks on Wall Street and U.S. banks that have been going on since September. During a denial of service attack, computer systems are intentionally overloaded and become unable to function properly, often crashing a website or slowing it to a crawl.

He also mentioned a cyber attack against Saudi oil company, Saudi Aramco, that resulted in vast amounts of company documents and emails being digitally vaporized by a malicious computer virus.

“What we have is a huge concern: theft by crime, theft of intellectual property, and now disruption, destruction coming on these networks. And we’ve got to address that.” Alexander said.

The destruction of data could have massive implications for financial institutions and global stock markets, according to security officials. In 2008, then-Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell warned Congress about the threat in congressional testimony.

“Our experience to note that when people break into a network, they’re often there for six to nine months before we detect them,” Alexander told the conference. “Six to nine months, you’re allowed to roam freely about that network. You own it. You can take all the intellectual property you want.”

Ironically, as Alexander was addressing the Symantec Government Symposium, there were reports circulating that a hacking group called Hack the Planet had allegedly hacked into Symantec’s network and compromised a database of more than 3,000 Symantec employee e-mail addresses and passwords.

Symantec, in a prepared statement said it was aware of the claim.

“We take each and every claim very seriously and have a process in place for investigating each incident,” it said. “Our first priority is to make sure that any customer information remains protected. We are investigating these claims and have no further information to provide at this time. ”

Describing the Internet traffic and infrastructure that creates the cyber domain, Alexander addressed privacy concerns as he advocated a way for the private sector and the government to come together to work on cybersecurity issues.

“The government is not looking at the traffic; industry’s looking at the traffic, and they have to do that to own and operate these networks. We’re going to help them with signatures and other things,” Alexander said, addressing the issue of identifying when companies have become vulnerable. “They need to tell us when they need our help. But it’s got to be done in time for us to help.”

Following Congress’ failure to pass cybersecurity legislation this year, according to federal officials, a draft executive order being circulated by the White House would allow intelligence agencies, including the NSA, DHS and the FBI, to share information about cyber threats with critical infrastructure entities such as water plants, the energy sector and financial institutions.

In his remarks today, Alexander also addressed the need for education of the public on issues relating to cybersecurity.

“Most of the people do not technically understand the network and what we’re talking about,” he said. “And so there’s a lot of paranoia out there. You know, we have to help them understand – everyone understand in the United States and our allies – actually what we mean by operating in cyberspace a secure area where we protect our civil liberties and privacy. We can do both.”

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/11/nsa-director-on-cyberattacks-everybodys-getting-hit/


Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Jeu 15 Nov - 17:22 (2012)    Sujet du message: OBAMA DIRECTIVE WOULD ALLOW PREEMPTIVE CYBER STRIKES Répondre en citant

WAR

OBAMA DIRECTIVE WOULD ALLOW PREEMPTIVE CYBER STRIKES


Charles Dharapak/AP

By Aliya Sternstein November 14, 2012
  • President Obama reportedly issued a secret military directive to defend U.S. networks, bypassing Congress and the American public to advance the administration’s security goals.

The new policy directs the Defense Department on how to act against adversary networks when federal or private computer systems are in jeopardy, The Washington Post reports.

The directive, which was signed in mid-October, apparently addresses gaps in legislation, lexicon and departmental jurisdictions.

It authorizes the military to make “a distinction between network defense and cyber operations” -- which are aggressive actions -- when confronted with a computer threat, the Post reports.

What it does, really for the first time, is it explicitly talks about how we will use cyber operations,” a senior administration official told the Post. “Network defense is what you’re doing inside your own networks. . . . Cyber operations is stuff outside that space, and recognizing that you could be doing that for what might be called defensive purposes.”

Congress is logjammed on legislation that would help companies -- which operate 80 percent of U.S. critical infrastructure -- defend themselves against breaches.

Cyber intrusions cost the United States hundreds of billions of dollars a year and are capable of disrupting vital services, such as electricity and transportation.

In the meantime, federal agencies are vetting an executive order that would direct the private sector on specific steps to secure its networks, but the document wouldn’t carry much enforcement weight. Industry is reluctant to participate in sharing information about threats without liability and privacy protections.

Monday’s report indicates that the new directive addresses some privacy concerns. The policy “also lays out a process to vet any operations outside government and defense networks and ensure that U.S. citizens’ and foreign allies’ data and privacy are protected and international laws of war are followed,” the Post writes.

It’s unclear whether the directive would shift more responsibility for protecting networks from the departments of Homeland Security and Justice to the Pentagon.

Now Defense is finalizing new rules of engagement for cyberspace that apparently will be informed by the new directive. According to the Post, these rules “would guide commanders when and how the military can go outside government networks to prevent a cyberattack that could cause significant destruction or casualties.” Defense Secretary Leon Panetta in October said that the rules “will make clear that the department has a responsibility not only to defend DoD’s networks, but also to be prepared to defend the nation and our national interests against an attack in or through cyberspace.”

A separate presidential directive in 2003 designated Homeland Security to be “a focal point” for the security of cyberspace, but since that time the department has lacked the authority to fulfill its mission, some lawmakers argue.

http://www.nextgov.com/defense/2012/11/obama-directive-would-allow-preemptive-cyber-strikes/59522/?oref=nextgov_today_nl





Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Lun 19 Nov - 17:16 (2012)    Sujet du message: TALIBAN ACCIDENTALLY CCs EVERYBODY ON ITS MAILING LIST Répondre en citant

TALIBAN ACCIDENTALLY CCs EVERYBODY ON ITS MAILING LIST

Yeah, sure accidentally!!!

Posted By Uri Friedman
Friday, November 16, 2012 - 1:10 PM


Living in fear of "replying all" to your company-wide emails? Hey, it could be worse. ABC News reports:


Citation:
In a Dilbert-esque faux pax, a Taliban spokesperson sent out a routine email last week with one notable difference. He publicly CC'd the names of everyone on his mailing list.
The names were disclosed in an email by Qari Yousuf Ahmedi, an official Taliban spokesperson, on Saturday. The email was a press release he received from the account of Zabihullah Mujahid, another Taliban spokesperson. Ahmedi then forwarded Mujahid's email to the full Taliban mailing list, but rather than using the BCC function, or blind carbon copy which keeps email addresses private, Ahmedi made the addresses public.

"Taliban have included all 4 of my email addresses on the leaked distribution list," tweeted journalist Mustafa Kazemi, a prolific Kabul-based tweeter with more than 9,500 followers. "Quite reassuring to my safety."

The list, made up of more than 400 recipients, consists mostly of journalists, but also includes an address appearing to belong to a provincial governor, an Afghan legislator, several academics and activists, an ... Afghan consultative committee, and a representative of Gulbuddein Hekmatar, an Afghan warlord whose outlawed group Hezb-i-Islami is believed to be behind several attacks against coalition troops.





Where's AOL's old "unsend" button when you need it? On the other hand, perhaps this is an opportunity to establish a listserv for Afghan peace talks?


Update: Looks like the Taliban's e-mail blunder has inspired a hashtag on Twitter: #TalibanSubjectLines. Here are some of the proposed e-mail subject lines:


twt-o twt-tweet hentry twt-always-show-actions twt-pinned twt-standard a écrit:
Leigh Caldwell@leighblue
LinkedInfidel Network Updates #talibansubjectlines
16 Nov 12




twt-o twt-tweet hentry twt-always-show-actions twt-pinned twt-standard a écrit:

Brian Fung@b_fung
"A video we can't stop watching" #talibansubjectlines
16 Nov 12


Garance Franke-Ruta

https://twitter.com/thegarance




https://twitter.com/thegarance
https://twitter.com/thegarance
twt-o twt-tweet hentry twt-always-show-actions twt-pinned twt-standard a écrit:
@thegarance



twt-o twt-tweet hentry twt-always-show-actions twt-pinned twt-standard a écrit:

What not to wear this holiday season. #talibansubjectlines
16 Nov 12


Alex Seitz-Wald@aseitzwald






twt-o twt-tweet hentry twt-always-show-actions twt-pinned twt-standard a écrit:

"Can I count on you to contribute $3 to death of America?" #talibansubjectlines16 Nov 12
http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/11/16/taliban_accidentally_ccs_everybody_on_its_mailing_list





http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/11/16/taliban_accidentally_ccs_eve…

Dernière édition par maria le Lun 19 Nov - 17:20 (2012); édité 1 fois
Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Lun 19 Nov - 17:18 (2012)    Sujet du message: BREAKING NEWS ALERT _ ANONYMOUS LEAKS PERSONAL INFO OF 5,000 ISRAELI OFFICIALS (GAZA-ISRAEL) Répondre en citant

BREAKING NEWS ALERT _ ANONYMOUS LEAKS PERSONAL INFO OF 5,000 ISRAELI OFFICIALS (GAZA-ISRAEL)



VIDEO : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrNgOteHcMg


Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Lun 19 Nov - 22:32 (2012)    Sujet du message: GOVERNMENT HAS SHUTTERED 64 DATA CENTERS SINCE AUGUST Répondre en citant

GOVERNMENT HAS SHUTTERED 64 DATA CENTERS SINCE AUGUST



kubais/Shutterstock.com

By Joseph Marks November 16, 20122 Comments


The government has shuttered 382 data centers since 2010, 64 of them in the past three months, according to updated figures the Office of Management and Budget released Thursday.

Agencies plan to close 315 more centers by the end of September 2013, according to a spreadsheet posted to the government open data platform Data.gov.

The government had closed 318 data centers as of the last update in August. The latest update included all data centers closed as of Oct. 26.

OMB plans to shut down about 40 percent of the government’s original stock of roughly 3,100 data centers by the end of 2015. The program is expected to save $5 billion, though those savings won’t all have accrued by the 2015 deadline, federal Chief Information Officer Steven VanRoekel has said.

The initiative is aimed at modernizing the government’s computer storage by shifting to more efficient consolidated data centers and to computer clouds.

http://www.nextgov.com/cloud-computing/2012/11/government-has-shuttered-64-data-centers-august/59598/?oref=nextgov_today_nl




Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Jeu 22 Nov - 18:30 (2012)    Sujet du message: OBAMA'S NEW "DICTATORSHIP" EXECUTIVE ORDER Répondre en citant





OBAMA'S NEW “DICTATORSHIP” EXECUTIVE ORDER

Executive Order -- Assignment of National Security and Emergency Preparedness Communications Functions
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/07/06/executive-order-assig…


by Right March on November 14, 2012

ALERT: Get ready to be BLOWN AWAY by the latest OUTRAGEOUS news: While the whole country was distracted with a Killer Storm and a Killer Presidential Election, Barack Hussein Obama was continuing with his plans to initiate MARTIAL LAW!

The latest headlines are almost unbelievable:

“Just before Hurricane Sandy, Obama signed executive order merging Homeland Security with private sector to create VIRTUAL DICTATORSHIP”

The news article only gets worse: “While all eyes were on Hurricane Sandy in the days leading up to the storm’s breach on the mainland of the Northeast, the White House was busy devising new ways to enslave Americans under the guise of protecting national security. On October 26, 2012, Barack Obama quietly signed an Executive Order (EO) establishing the so-called Homeland Security Partnership Council, a public-private partnership that basically merges the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) with local governments and the private sector for the implied purpose of giving the Executive Branch complete and limitless control over the American people.”

THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT WE’VE BEEN WARNING YOU THAT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA HAS BEEN PLANNING FOR!

It’s more and more obvious that Barack Obama is preparing to DECLARE MARTIAL LAW — we MUST STOP HIM NOW!


SEND A MESSAGE TO EVERY SINGLE U.S.  
 
CONGRESSMAN, DEMANDING THEY STOP BARACK OBAMA’S “EMERGENCY POWERS” MARTIAL LAW EXECUTIVE ORDERS:SEND YOUR MESSAGE NOW! = It will not change the agenda. Congress is the one who pass the Constitutional Act 1871 (corporate)
 
This new Executive Order goes further than any other in conflating federal power structures with local governments and the private sector. Based on the unbelievable language contained in the EO itself, the federal government “appears ready to begin rapidly expanding its command and control operations at the local level,” according to a story in Natural News, by establishing a vast network of homeland security “partnerships” throughout the country, which will be tasked with reporting back to the central command center and feeding “intelligence” information as requested by federal officials.

“[W]e must tap the ingenuity outside government through strategic partnerships with the private sector, nongovernmental organizations, foundations, and community-based organizations,” says the EO. It goes on to add that the merger between the federal government and the private sector is necessary to facilitate the government’s desire to better “address homeland security priorities,” which includes things like “responding to natural disasters … (and) preventing terrorism by utilizing diverse perspectives, skills, tools, and resources.”

An official “Steering Committee” will be established with representatives from virtually every single federal agency, and this committee will be guided by a separate council on how to best incorporate the federal government and DHS into every nook and cranny of American society. Once established, this council will maintain control over presumably all aspects of society by overseeing a secret police force comprised of spies from schools, community groups, churches, and various other local institutions.



“[W]e must institutionalize an all-of-Nation effort to address the evolving threats to the United States,” adds the Executive Order, which has YET to be covered AT ALL in the mainstream media.

But why would we be surprised at that? The media STILL hasn’t covered one of the biggest bombshells in recent weeks:

One of the leading global magazines of politics, economics, and ideas, Foreign Policy Magazine, posted a bombshell on their website recently:

“Gen. Boykin: U.S. economy close to collapse, could result in martial law”

You read that right: retired Lt. General William Boykin, a former CIA Deputy Director of Special Activities, has said that the U.S. economy “is just about the break” and collapse. And when the dam gives way, severe food shortages and pervasive violence throughout America will result in an executive declaration of martial law.

Those “in the know” are trying to WARN us: Barack Obama is preparing to DECLARE MARTIAL LAW — we MUST STOP HIM NOW!
 
This former CIA General’s warning is HUGE!!! “I’ll be very honest with you; the situation in America could be such that martial law is actually warranted, and that situation in my view could occur if we had an economic collapse,” says Gen. Boykin:
yiv1300280832format_text yiv1300280832entry-content a écrit:
“The dam is just about to break on our economy, and I think when it does, there’s going to be a major disruption of the distribution of
food,” he added. “And I think what you’ll see particularly in the inner cities is you will see riots, civil unrest that ultimately might justify MARTIAL LAW… I think those people that are not in the major cities are going to be far better off, but it could actually justify martial law,” Boykin continued. “And I’m praying that we will not see that kind of collapse, we won’t see a disruption of the distribution of food in America. That’s probably the single biggest problem.”




BUT OBAMA’S MINIONS MIGHT NOT WAIT UNTIL THEN! Reports are erupting all over the Internet, of threats of RIOTS if Barack Hussein Obama loses the presidential election on November 6th — which would be the perfect excuse for Obama to finally implement MARTIAL LAW. A list of examples are listed at the “Twitter-watcher” website Twitchy. As blogger Michael Snyder notes:

yiv1300280832format_text yiv1300280832entry-content a écrit:
“The election is nearly four weeks away, and many Obama supporters are already threatening to riot if Obama loses. The following are some very disturbing messages that were posted on Twitter recently that have been reposted on Twitchy….” “If Romney wins I’m Starting a Riot….Who’s WIT ME???”
“I Hope The USA Is Well Aware That If In The Event This Character Romney Wins The Election, The People Will Start A Country Wide Riot! #Power”

“If Romney is elected president, its gon be a riot its gon be a riot.”

“If ROMNEY GETS IN THE WHITE HOUSE …U MIGHT AS WELL KILL ME NOW …..CAUSE ITS GONNA BE A ************ RIOT !!!”

“If Romney became President and took away welfare Downtown Cincinnati would become a riot”

“If Romney takes away food stamps 2 Chainzz in this bit IMMA START A RIOT”

“If Romney wins. (which i highly doubt) THERE WILL BE A RIOT-”





RIOTS ARE A GREAT EXCUSE FOR OBAMA TO FINALLY IMPLEMENT HIS “EMERGENCY POWERS” EXECUTIVE ORDERS FOR MARTIAL LAW… WHICH HE’S OBVIOUSLY ALREADY PLANNING FOR — UNLESS WE STOP HIM NOW!And it IS obvious what Obama is planning for! Not only has ordered for his Department of Homeland Security (DHS) 1.2 billion rounds of ammo and armored checkpoint booths… now reports are coming in that DHS has now been given fully-armored APCs — the same standard used by our military:

yiv1300280832format_text yiv1300280832entry-content a écrit:
“To the list of recent unsettling developments at DHS and other federal agencies — such as… massive DHS ammo buys, a creepy new biometric surveillance system just being rolled-out by the FBI, and drones buzzing our backyards with cameras — we can now add the appearance across the country of not just heavily-armored military grade Humvees, but ‘GLS’ armored personnel carriers (APC’s) — 2500 of them to be exact. According to reports the Department of Homeland Security… already have thousands of heavily armored vehicles in DHS ‘Police/Rescue’ livery, resplendent in either a dashing Gulf War tan or menacing stealth-anthracite…”


Once again, it’s obvious that Barack Obama is preparing to DECLARE MARTIAL LAW — we MUST STOP HIM NOW!This latest news of preparations for a police state came after we had already learned that Barack Hussein Obama is planning to sign ANOTHER
“martial law” style Executive Order — this time to enable him to take over America’s “critical infrastructure,” such as the POWER GRID and FINANCIAL INDUSTRIES!



Federal News Radio is reporting that the Obama regime is preparing to sign off on this new Executive Order, since patriots like YOU AND I have been able to STOP Obama’s so-called “cybersecurity” bill so far:


yiv1300280832format_text yiv1300280832entry-content a écrit:
“The White House so far has failed to get a bill passed by both houses of Congress to improve the cybersecurity of the nation’s critical infrastructure, so it wants to take an alternative approach. The administration has created a draft executive order detailing how, within its authority, it would improve the information assurance of the nation’s critical infrastructure, such as the power grid and financial industries… The draft EO, which Federal News Radio viewed a draft copy of, closely follows the second version of comprehensive cyber legislation introduced by Sens. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Susan Collins (R- Maine) in July.”


DID YOU GET THAT? These people failed to get their Martial Law bills passed in Congress, so Obama is ready to BYPASS our elected officials and do it himself — AGAIN!This LATEST outrageous action by Barack Obama comes not long after he announced his plans to sign yet ANOTHER Executive Order, which will enable him to take over the INTERNET!

As WorldNet Daily reported,


yiv1300280832format_text yiv1300280832entry-content a écrit:
Obama has signaled his intention to push through his Internet agenda via executive order. This, after last week’s failed attempt to bring the Democrat-supported Cybersecurity Act of 2012 to a full vote in the U.S. Senate. The bill would have given federal regulatory agencies the ability to mandate cybersecurity recommendations on critical infrastructure power and utility companies.


As reported in The Hill, responding to a question about whether President Obama was considering advancing his party’s cyber-plan through an executive order, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney didn’t rule out the possibility. “In the wake of congressional inaction and Republican stall tactics, unfortunately, we will continue to be hamstrung by outdated and inadequate statutory authorities that the legislation would have fixed,” Carney said. And John Brennan, Obama’s counterterrorism adviser, said at an event at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington, “If the Congress is not going to act on something like this, then the president wants to make sure that we’re doing everything possible.”DO YOU GET THAT? OBAMA AND HIS MINIONS WANT FULL CONTROL OF THE INTERNET… AND OBAMA IS ONCE AGAIN WILLING TO SIGN EXECUTIVE ORDERS TO TAKE POWER!

He just doesn’t seem to stop! THAT new threat came hot on the heels of another Executive Order, signed by Obama on July 6th, which ONCE AGAIN brings America a step closer to finding itself under MARTIAL LAW — this time by giving him dictator-type powers over ALL communications during any so-called “crisis” that he might declare!

As reported by “Tea Party Economist” blogger, Dr. Gary North:

yiv1300280832format_text yiv1300280832entry-content a écrit:
“Obama has signed an executive order outlining the nationalization of the entire communications system. It is written in bureaucratese. I have no doubt that it was not understood by Obama. It is too detailed. It sets up a powerful new bureaucracy. The language is limited to a national emergency. But an emergency on this scale is almost inconceivable. The government never discusses what could justify an executive order this comprehensive. If such a threat to the nation (and the world) really exists, the voters should be given a detailed description of its nature. Congress should debate this. Solving it should be a high national priority. If the answer is, “discussing this would create panic,” then democracy is a sham. If the answer is, “we don’t know what might happen, so we are asserting total control in advance,” then this executive order should never have been signed. It transfers too much power to bureaucrats to determine when to implement it.


As Dr. North declares, “This is no longer a nation run by the Constitution.” The executive order itself is long, and very few people will actually bother to read it. But what it does is very clear: it authorizes the White House to take over the entire communications system, simply on “the authority of the President.”

The bottom line is this: Obama thinks that this power belongs to the President.

It’s more and more obvious that Barack Obama is preparing to DECLARE MARTIAL LAW — we MUST STOP HIM NOW!

 
We’ve seen this coming. We even reported on how, just recently, a government “whistleblower” inside the Obama regime blew the lid off of why Barack Hussein Obama has recently signed Executive Orders that give him the power to declare martial law across America!
Obama, through the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and other agencies and “czars,” is plotting a major “Reichstag” event to generate racial riots and produce the justification for martial law, delaying the November 2012 elections… possibly indefinitely!

A DHS whistleblower informed the Canada Free Press “that the DHS is actively preparing for massive social unrest inside the United States. He then corrected himself, stating that ‘a civil war’ is the more appropriate term. ‘Certain elements of the government are not only expecting and preparing for it, they are actually facilitating it.’”

A “Reichstag event” refers to a fire started in Germany’s legislature during Hitler’s rise to power. The fire allowed him to grab emergency powers and eliminate his opposition. While he blamed it on Communists, historians have long believed that Hitler started the fire himself.

According to the anonymous “whistleblower” inside Obama’s DHS, this “Reichstag event” would take the form of a staged assassination attempt against Barack Obama, “carefully choreographed” and manufactured by Obama operatives. It would subsequently be blamed on “white supremacists” and used to enrage the black community to rioting and looting, the DHS source warned.

The Obama administration would then use the violence and chaos they created as justification for the imposition of martial law in major urban cities in America, the creation of DHS checkpoints, restriction of travel, and the indefinite delay of the November 2012 elections:

yiv1300280832format_text yiv1300280832entry-content a écrit:
“The DHS takes their marching orders from the Obama administration, from Obama himself, but mostly from his un-appointed czars. And Jarrett, especially Valerie Jarrett. Don’t think for a minute that the administration is doing anything to stabilize events in the U.S. They are revolutionaries, and revolutionaries thrive on chaos,” he added.

This is getting TOO BIG to hide — now, even the MEDIA is starting to pick up on the shocking news:

Barack Hussein Obama has signed Executive Orders giving him the power to declare MARTIAL LAW in America!

On a recent episode of his Fox News show, Sean Hannity himself declared:

yiv1300280832format_text yiv1300280832entry-content a écrit:
“Tonight… we shine the spotlight on an executive order that the White House was hoping that you would never learn about. Now, the President signed the National Defense Resources Preparedness [NDRP] executive order late Friday afternoon. And since that time, now the measure has been virtually ignored by the mainstream media. Now, the order essentially gives the president of the United States absolute power over any and all American resources during both times of peace and national crisis. Now, this includes, but it’s not limited to food and livestock, water, plants, energy, health resources, transportation and construction materials and gives the government the ability to, quote, ‘control the general distribution of any material, including applicable services in this civilian market.’”


Hannity then went on to discuss how “this would give the President of the United States the authority to declare basically Martial Law during times of peace. And to be sure, this is simply the latest string of actions taken by the administration that ignore the basic principles of our constitution.”Barack Obama is OUT OF CONTROL — we MUST STOP HIM NOW!

Of course, that Executive Order was only the BEGINNING. Obama’s preparations to institute MARTIAL LAW IN AMERICA are coming together quickly.FIRST, he signed an Executive Order, for so-called “National Defense Resources
Preparedness” — that would give him DICTATOR POWERS whenever he decides he “needs” them.

THEN, he signed ANOTHER “Executive Order”, this time to take control of America’s domestic natural gas production.

NOW, he’s done it AGAIN — Barack Hussein Obama has signed YET ANOTHER Executive Order… declaring INTERNATIONAL LAW for the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!

As reported by blogger Henry Shivley:

yiv1300280832format_text yiv1300280832entry-content a écrit:
“On May 1, 2012, our Glorious Leader, Premier Barack Obama AKA Barry Soetoro AKA Barry the Rat, signed yet another Executive Order – Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation. This dictate is designed to standardize regulations between the United States and its so-called trading partners.What is a regulation? A law. So what is actually being attempted here is a standardization of international law. It is an absolute violation of the Constitution for the United States to legislate our law outside of our borders.”


And what exactly can this latest unconstitutional Executive Order lead to? As Shivley states, “Considering the many international security agreements the traitors occupying our highest seats of power have entered into, this latest executive order can absolutely be used to institute gun confiscation laws/regulations, without any consent by our Congress or our Judicial. And once these foreign laws are brought to the United States under the various security agreements, foreign troops will be brought in to enforce the foreign laws upon the people of the United States.”This new Executive Order came hot on the heels of the recent one that Barack Obama signed to take control of America’s domestic natural gas production. As columnist Mac Slavo reports:

yiv1300280832format_text yiv1300280832entry-content a écrit:
“While Americans focused their attention on the Colombian controversy involving U.S. Secret Service agents, prostitutes and excessive drinking, President Obama quietly signed his latest Presidential Executive Order. The Supporting Safe and Responsible Development of Unconventional Domestic Natural Gas Resources Executive Order
seeks to create what amounts to a Presidential super committee that will oversee the regulation and development of the ‘unconventional’ natural gas industry for the purpose of ensuring a long-term natural gas supply for the United States, as well as to do so in a safe and environmentally responsible manner.”




So now, by Presidential decree alone, the federal government can “coordinate action” through thirteen core federal agencies against any domestic natural gas production facility — all according to standards determined to be “appropriate” not by law, but because of political agenda.Moreover, because a key stated purpose of this latest Executive Order is to “ensure long-term supplies,” Barack Obama’s new decree gives the federal government the ability to shut down gas production operations as THEY see fit, which can lead directly to government price fixing and centralized control of an essential natural energy resource.

While Obama’s Executive Order aims to curtail some of the practices of the hydraulic


fracturing, or “fracking,” industry, it further expands government control over our lives through more centralization of power and bureaucracy.

THINGS ARE GETTING WORSE. As experts start to dig deeper into Barack Hussein Obama’s recently-signed Executive Order, for so-called “National Defense Resources Preparedness,” they are reporting just how bad this really is: OBAMA IS PREPARING TO DECLARE MARTIAL LAW IN AMERICA.

As detailed in this report from the Canada Free Press:


yiv1300280832format_text yiv1300280832entry-content a écrit:
Under this order the heads of these cabinet level positions; Agriculture, Energy, Health and Human Services, Transportation, Defense and Commerce can take food, livestock, fertilizer, farm equipment, all forms of energy, water resources, all forms of civil transportation (meaning any vehicles, boats, planes), and any other materials, including construction materials from wherever they are available. This is probably why the government has been visiting farms with GPS devices, so they know exactly where to go when they turn this one on. Specifically, the government is allowed to allocate materials, services, and facilities as deemed necessary or appropriate. They decide what necessary or appropriate means.

THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS! BARACK OBAMA IS TRYING TO VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION, BECOME A DICTATOR, AND TAKE AWAY OUR RIGHTS! It’s up to YOU AND ME to STOP HIM NOW!
We’re not alone in reporting this. It’s starting to be reported in more and more media sources:BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA HAS SIGNED A MARTIAL LAW EXECUTIVE ORDER!

The latest report comes from the Russia Times:


yiv1300280832format_text yiv1300280832entry-content a écrit:
“As folks headed out to happy hour last Friday evening, President Obama signed an executive order that could potentially give him the power to institute martial law in the United States in times of peace or during a national threat… Many Americans were shocked to find out that this order gives the president practically unlimited power over US citizens and their property. All in the name of national security of course.”

IT’S TRUE! As we said, Barack Hussein Obama has signed a Presidential Executive Order,



which would give him the powers of a DICTATOR — whenever HE thinks it’s “necessary” to institute MARTIAL LAW!

According to press reports, “A White House order updating federal emergency powers has raised alarm among some conservative commentators, and U.S. Rep. Sandy Adams, that President Barack Obama is attempting to grab unconstitutional powers.”

yiv1300280832format_text yiv1300280832entry-content a écrit:
A columnist with The Washington Times declared the mid-March order — an update of a 60-year-old document outlining the president’s authority in a national emergency — “stunning in its audacity and a flagrant violation of the Constitution.” The conservative Drudge Report website linked to it with the headline, “Martial Law?“And Adams, R-Orlando, said it “leaves the door open for the president to give himself control over American resources during both times of peace, and national crisis.”



It’s almost unbelievable what Barack Hussein Obama is trying to do — BUT IT’S TRUE. According to a bombshell article in the Washington Times, “President Obama has given himself the powers to declare martial law — especially in the event of a war with Iran. It is a sweeping power grab that should worry every American.”
yiv1300280832format_text yiv1300280832entry-content a écrit:
On March 16, the White House released an executive order, “National Defense Resources Preparedness.” The document is stunning in its audacity and a flagrant violation of the Constitution. It states that, in case of a war or national emergency, the federal government has the authority to take over almost every aspect of American society. Food, livestock, farming equipment, manufacturing, industry, energy, transportation, hospitals, health care facilities, water resources, defense and construction — all of it could fall under the full control of Mr. Obama. The order empowers the president to dispense these vast resources as he sees fit during a national crisis.




In short, according to the Times, the order gives Barack Obama the ability to IMPOSE MARTIAL LAW: “He now possesses the potential powers of a dictator. The order is a direct assault on individual liberties, private property rights and the rule of law. It is blatantly unconstitutional. The executive branch is arrogating responsibilities precluded by the Constitution without even asking the permission of Congress. The order gives Mr. Obama a blank check to erect a centralized authoritarian state.” But why this — and why now?

SIMPLE — because he’s about to provoke a confrontation with IRAN, which could give him the excuse to implement martial law in America:

yiv1300280832format_text yiv1300280832entry-content a écrit:
“Obama may be ready to launch devastating airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. If that should happen, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has promised massive retaliation. American troops will be targeted by Iranian proxies in Iraq and Afghanistan. American embassies will be struck across the Middle East and North Africa. Most ominously, Iranian-backed Hezbollah cells could launch devastating terrorist attacks in major U.S. cities, killing numerous citizens. The war may well come home, triggering domestic chaos. These are the very real risks of a major conflict with Iran.”


As columnist Jeffrey Kuhner notes, “The president does not – and should not – have the authority to subordinate the entire private economy to the government, especially without the consent of Congress and the American people. It is national socialism masquerading as military security. This is why conservatives — those who are serious about defending our constitutional republic – should demand that the executive order be repealed immediately.”THAT’S EXACTLY WHAT WE NEED TO DO — RIGHT NOW!


SEND A MESSAGE TO EVERY SINGLE U.S.  
CONGRESSMAN, DEMANDING THEY STOPBARACK OBAMA’S “EMERGENCY POWERS”MARTIAL LAW EXECUTIVE ORDERS:SEND YOUR MESSAGE NOW!
 
Thankfully, there are Members of Congress who are standing UP for the U.S. Constitution. Rep. Sandy Adams (R-FL) has introduced H. Con. Res. 110 in response to President Obama’s blatant attempt to go around the Constitution and institute martial law if HE thinks it’s “necessary.”


In introducing her bill, Rep. Adams stated, “President Obama issued a National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order on March 16, 2012 that raises some serious concerns in its wording and intent. The order has historically been based on the Defense Production Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. App. 2061 et seq.).

However, unlike previous presidents, President Obama’s executive order broadens the definition of ‘national defense.’ This leaves the door open for the president to give himself control over American resources during both times of peace, and national crisis. In response to the order, I have introduced a resolution to make it clear the president cannot use this as an excuse to abuse his executive power.”

Rep. Adams’ bill presently has 37 co-sponsors — but she needs a lot more to get the bill to the floor.

THAT’S WHERE YOU AND I COME IN!

If we can FLOOD the offices of all of these Congressmen, demanding that they SUPPORT H. Con. Res. 110, we CAN put a stop to Obama’s attempt to circumvent the Constitution and lay the groundwork for martial law. But we need YOUR help.

Send your Blast Faxes to every single U.S. Congressman and Senator NOW!

Sincerely,


William Greene, President
RightMarch.com


P.S. As Rep. Adams stated when introducing her bill to stop Barack Obama’s attempt to put in place the ability to institute martial law on his own whim, “Each of us in Congress began our service to our friends, neighbors, and communities with the knowledge it was our responsibility to uphold the Constitution. We were elected to protect the values that make our nation great and to be a line of defense against the growing interjection of government into the everyday lives of the American people. I will continue to defend the principles on which our nation was founded and I will continue to uphold our Constitution.”

YOU AND I need to JOIN IN and force the REST of Congress to uphold our Constitution! TAKE ACTION NOW!

SEND A MESSAGE TO EVERY SINGLE U.S.  
CONGRESSMAN, DEMANDING THEY STOPBARACK OBAMA’S “EMERGENCY POWERS”MARTIAL LAW EXECUTIVE ORDERS:SEND YOUR MESSAGE NOW!




Dernière édition par maria le Jeu 22 Nov - 18:56 (2012); édité 1 fois
Revenir en haut
maria
Administrateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 24 686
Féminin

MessagePosté le: Jeu 22 Nov - 18:51 (2012)    Sujet du message: EXCEPTIONALLY GRAVE DAMAGE: NSA REFUSES TO DECLASSIFY OBAMA'S CYBERSECURITY DIRECTIVE Répondre en citant

EXCEPTIONALLY GRAVE DAMAGE: NSA REFUSES TO DECLASSIFY OBAMA'S CYBERSECURITY DIRECTIVE

Published: 21 November, 2012, 01:46




Reuters / Adrees Latif


The National Security Agency has shot down a Freedom of Information Act request for details about an elusive presidential order that may allow the government to deploy the military within the United States for the supposed sake of cybersecurity.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) reports on Tuesday that their recent FOIA request for information about a top-secret memo signed last month by US President Barack Obama has been rejected [PDF]. Now attorneys for EPIC say they plan to file an appeal to get to the bottom of Presidential Policy Directive 20.

Although the executive order has been on the books for a month now, only last week did details emerge about the order after the Washington Post reported that Pres. Obama’s signature to the top-secret directive could allow the White House to send in recruits from the Pentagon to protect America’s cyber-infrastructure.

Because Presidential Policy Directive 20 is classified, the exact wording of the elusive document has been a secret kept only by those with first-hand knowledge of the memo. For their November 14 article, the Post spoke with sources that saw the document to report that the directive “effectively enables the military to act more aggressively to thwart cyberattacks on the nation’s web of government and private computer networks.”

In response to the Post’s report, EPIC filed a FOIA request to find out if the policy directive could mean military deployment within the United States, especially since the sources who have seen the memo say it allows the Pentagon to pursue actions against adversaries within a vaguely described terrain known only as “cyberspace.”

“What it does, really for the first time, is it explicitly talks about how we will use cyber-operations,” a senior administration official told the Post. “Network defense is what you’re doing inside your own networks. . . . Cyber-operations is stuff outside that space, and recognizing that you could be doing that for what might be called defensive purposes.”

“We’d like to see what the language says and see what power is given,” EPIC attorney Amie Stepanovich told RT this week — a matter that will now have to be appealed before any details can be determined.

News of the directive comes just as lawmakers in Congress failed once again to approve a cybersecurity legislation that would provide new connections between the federal government and the private sector in order to supposedly ramp up the United States’ protection from foreign hackers. With the defeat of that bill, though, members of both the House and Senate now say they expect Pres. Obama to sign a separate executive order that will lay down the groundwork for a more thorough cybersecurity plan to be established.

Meanwhile, the commander-in-chief has already signed a secret order — Presidential Policy Directive 20 — that might remain classified unless EPIC can win in court.

“We believe that the public hasn’t been able to involve themselves in the cybersecurity debate, and the reason they can’t involve themselves is because they don’t have the right amount of information,” Stepanovich tells RT.

Responding to the FOIA request, the NSA says releasing information on the directive cannot occur because “disclosure could reasonably be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security.”

“Because the document is currently and properly classified, it is exempt from disclosure,” the NSA writes.

http://rt.com/usa/news/nsa-directive-epic-foia-192/


Revenir en haut
Contenu Sponsorisé






MessagePosté le: Aujourd’hui à 20:21 (2016)    Sujet du message: RÉFORME DES MÉDIAS - MEDIA REFORM - CYBERTERRORISM & HUMAN CONTROL (PARTIE 2)

Revenir en haut
Montrer les messages depuis:   
Poster un nouveau sujet   Répondre au sujet    LE VOÎLE DÉCHIRÉ (1) Index du Forum -> NOUVELLES LOIS ANTITERRORISTES/NEW ANTITERRORIST LAWS -> RÉFORME DES MÉDIAS - MEDIA REFORM - CYBERTERRORISM (PARTIE 2) Toutes les heures sont au format GMT + 2 Heures
Aller à la page: <  1, 2, 3, … 12, 13, 14  >
Page 2 sur 14

 
Sauter vers:  

Portail | Index | Creer un forum | Forum gratuit d’entraide | Annuaire des forums gratuits | Signaler une violation | Conditions générales d'utilisation
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Traduction par : phpBB-fr.com