Ptech Inc. (www.ptechinc.com
) is a leading provider of enterprise architecture
and business modelling, analysis and integration solutions to Global 2000 companies. Ptech’s software solutions allow organisations to model and construct enterprise architectures, enabling senior management and IT to better align strategic plans with actual operations.
By empowering management to make strategic decisions based upon a full understanding of operational impacts, organisations using Ptech’s solutions can seize market opportunities faster and respond to change more effectively. Ptech’s technology is based on a unique implementation of neural net and semantic technologies.
Ptech, founded in 1994, is privately held and based in Quincy, MA.
Articles by Ptech Inc
Professional Service Automation
* Maintaining agility in the face of change » Oussama Ziadé
Change has become today's business environment constant. The ability to proactively adapt is one of the most important criteria for organisations to survive.
____________________________________________________________http://www.business-int.com/categories/professional-service-automation/maintaining-agility-in-face-of-change.aspMaintaining agility in the face of change
Change has become today's business environment constant. The ability to proactively adapt is one of the most important criteria for organisations to survive.
The pace of change has accelerated dramatically - where business cycles cover a mere 12-18 month span, compared to the 5-7 year span of decades past. Nowadays, when a strategic plan has been set, it is predicted to change in 6-12 months, sending a domino effect upon all business operations and supporting capabilities and a clear need for strategic realignment.
Current management tools have not been altogether successful in solving this problem. Organisations have become like large ships, speeding along in the fog, using ineffective tools for spotting bad weather or icebergs, weakening their ability to avoid or circumvent disasters. Various organisational initiatives have also posed futile solutions, with their treatment of one-time dilemmas, while fundamental problems of predictability and response are faintly addressed.Ineffective and Untimely Response
Historically, if structural changes were needed for complex systems, such as metropolitan regions, architects examined blueprints to identify the impacts of proposed or developing changes and prepare timely responses. Similarly, large organisations need the same foundational blueprint from which to work. However, most organisations don’t possess a consolidated blueprint. Rather, most essential pieces are distributed throughout the business without a centralised focus, leaving fragments buried in processes, loosely referred to within departments or singly tied to automated applications.
Management teams rely heavily on external advisors/consultants for the delivery of narratives translating a blueprint to text format. They rely on these constituents to provide recommendations, based on their discovery process. As a consequence, they end up spending large sums on the effort of delivering static snapshots of the business and sparse explanations of interlinked relationships. This process often falls far short of delivering the real-time input needed to successfully run a dynamic operation as results become obsolete in a matter of weeks or months, are unavailable to stakeholders, and management is rendered an ineffective entity in timely prediction and response to change.A Dynamic, Real-time Approach
By investing in an electronic, dynamic organisational blueprint that truly integrates operations with strategy, management can provide a more comprehensive and continuous overview of performance against goals and objectives. This requires the business architecture to be pushed out to the entire enterprise, opening up information flows to all decision-makers, enabling a cross-sectional view of strategic goal levels, objectives, rules, and business drivers with the operation of processes, organisations, systems and assets.
Upon gaining this new perspective, an organisation can play “what-if” scenarios, trace processes to strategy, uncover orphan strategies or capabilities, and predict impacts on the business environment. In addition, both the management team and knowledge workers have access to bird’s-eye and magnified views of the associated processes needed to accomplish the goals presented. This places all strategic and operational concepts and functions in a streamlined perspective, setting control factors in their proper place.Continuous Alignment
Achieving this new angle requires true executive sponsorship; the ability to produce visible, incremental results that maintain stakeholder interest; investment value disclosed in a timely fashion; and documented assumptions revisited and re-analysed. By identifying decision-making capabilities upfront, modelling architects have a directed purpose, with value-chain analysis and process step modelling at their disposal. And they’ll uncover a dynamic and evolving blueprint that unleashes powerful decision-making capabilities and commanding proactive responses to changes as they occur.
Today’s business framework requires an interconnected, intelligent approach to survival. Those organisations able to leverage capabilities and maintain agility in the face of change will be among the most successful, as they continuously align operations to strategy.
"GoAgile is using a software modeling solution to develop a complete electronic blueprint for ENPO. Included in the GoAgile Team is Horizons Software, an Egyptian company with a focus on providing innovative business-driven support systems within an enterprise. Implementation of the ENPO ITSP began October 12. Completion is expected in March/April of 2005.
"Dr. Oussama Ziade CEO of GoAgile Inc.
Horizons Strategy Architect (SA)
is an automated software solution for implementing the Balanced Scorecard (BSC)
in a collaborative strategic performance management framework.http://www.horizonssoftware.com/newwebsite/s3.aspx
S3- Horizons Enterprise Architecture
Horizons Enterprise Architecture Service (HEAS) enables organizations control its operations and manage its transition plans. Organization knowledge is captured in a smart repository with holistic and interrelated business models of all business components. Using advanced technology based on semantic networks, logic, and set theory, Horizons consultants will help organization model its strategic, process, organization and resources. Standard EA frameworks
such as Zachman Framework
are used to organize and navigate EA components.
EA work products can be used to effectively improve process performance, build strategic and performance monitoring plans, and to improve human performance and utilize resources better. A variety of approaches can be used to build EA repository with Horizons providing guidance and methods in this regard.
EA work products can be delivered in variety of formats (smart repository, web portals, XML Files, word documents, or any other text-based format). Horizons can provide knowledge transfer for customer teams to maintain and evolve the EA.
1. Maintain a central repository in which all business components models can be integrated and updated using formal and visual methods.
2. Visually navigate the repository models with multiple points of views.
3. Use powerful visual models to communicate knowledge effectively.
4. Compute Impact of Change and manage change across the organization from the As-Is to the To-Be state.
5. Build analysis and computational reports.
1. Visual models and tools are used to build EA models.
2. Integrated models and multiple views for enterprise architecture elements, and single place update.
3. Enforcement of EA constraints and rules while building the models.
4. Support of EA Frameworks and methods.
5. Web Portal reports of all work products.
6. Textual and XML reports of EA components.
7. Analysis and computational reports.
8. Multiple ways of linking EA components and elements to existing documents and files.
9. Import of structured information from existing files and databases.
1. Customization of EA service is quite powerful and Horizons Team can customize the service to use customers own methods, standards or a combination of this and other standard approaches.
2. Customizable reports can be used to perform variety of tasks including visual navigation as well as computation and analysis reports.
3. EA work products such as portals can be linked to other applications running at the customers site.Lets Get Technical:Horizons EA service uses Ptech FrameWork Family of products to implement its EA solutions.
Customers with desire to maintain and update their EA models can acquire FrameWork licenses. FrameWork runs either in single mode or in TeamWork mode and can be installed on any PC with Windows 2000/XP and 256M RAM. Concurrent licensing schemes are also available Horizons Enterprise Architecture Service data sheet
About usWho Are We?
Horizons Software, established in 1999 is a leader in providing innovative, strategic-level business-driven, and architecture-focused solutions empowering customers to mange change and align their business strategies with operations. We use innovative products and state-of-the-art methods in our solutions.
Our Strategy Management solutions use our Strategy Architect
Software which supports the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) framework and the full strategic management cycle, while our Business Process Management (BPM) solutions use our Process Architect
Software to support business process capturing, analysis, design, automation, and monitoring. Our Enterprise Architecture
, Business Blueprinting
and Knowledge Management solutions use GoAgile MAP suite of products. All of our software systems natively support Arabic and Hijri Dates. Our software development process has been appraised at CMMI level 3 June 2006 ensuring high quality and international Software Engineering process compliance.
Our Mission reflects our business's goals and values which we are committed to while our Vision describes aspirations for the futureOur Partners and Channels
We have a wide network of experts in various fields at which we cooperate to achieve the best results to serve you. Our main office is located in Cairo. However, our wide network of partners & channels allows us to provide our services in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, and UAE.Our Customers
They are dynamic organizations looking forward to continuously improve their operations, control their strategy execution, avoid pains of growth, and reaching business excellence. We have deployed our solutions in many countries such as Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait, & Qatar in different sectors such as petroleum sector, governmental sector, construction sector, and industrial sector. In addition, We pride ourselves in our excellent after service support. Horizon's Software Company ProfileStrategy Architect overviewStrategy Architect data sheetProcess Architect overviewProcess Architect data sheetSolutions S1Business Strategy Development using BSC Framework S2-IT Strategy S2A-IT Architecture S2B-ITIL Assessment, Implementation, and TrainingHorizons Enterprise Architecture Service (HEAS) S4-Business Process Architecture, Analysis, and Improvement S5-Software Development Balanced ScorecardStartegy Map Design - November 2005IT ArchitectureA Comparative Analysis of Architecture FrameworksEnterprise_Architecture_and_Business_Continuity_PlanningTaking Enterprise Architecture to the Next LevelITIL foundationITIL GartnerBusiness Process Management SystemUnderstanding and Evaluating BPMS Suites
Welcome to the OWASP Top 10 2007! This totally re-written edition lists the most serious web application vulnerabilities, discusses how to protect against them, and provides links to more information. The OWASP Top 10 has been translated into French. Click Here for the French Translation!
The OWASP Top 10 for Java Enterprise Edition is available for download here
The primary aim of the OWASP Top 10 is to educate developers, designers, architects and organizations about the consequences of the most common web application security vulnerabilities. The Top 10 provides basic methods to protect against these vulnerabilities – a great start to your secure coding security program.
Security is not a one-time event. It is insufficient to secure your code just once. By 2008, this Top 10 will have changed, and without changing a line of your application’s code, you may be vulnerable. Please review the advice in Where to Go From Here for more information.
A secure coding initiative must deal with all stages of a program’s lifecycle. Secure web applications are only possible when a secure SDLC is used. Secure programs are secure by design, during development, and by default. There are at least 300 issues that affect the overall security of a web application. These 300+ issues are detailed in the OWASP Development Guide, which is essential reading for anyone developing web applications today.
This document is first and foremost an education piece, not a standard. Please do not adopt this document as a policy or standard without talking to us first! If you need a secure coding policy or standard, OWASP has secure coding policies and standards projects in progress. Please consider joining or financially assisting with these efforts.Acknowledgements
We thank MITRE
for making Vulnerability Type Distribution in CVE
data freely available for use. The OWASP Top Ten project is led and sponsored by Aspect Security
Project Lead: Andrew van der Stock (Executive Director, OWASP Foundation)
Co-authors: Jeff Williams (Chair, OWASP Foundation), Dave Wichers (Conference Chair, OWASP Foundation)
We’d like to thank our reviewers:
* Raoul Endres for help in getting the Top 10 going again and with his valuable comments.
* Steve Christey(MITRE)
for an extensive peer review and adding the MITRE CWE data
* Jeremiah Grossman (WhiteHat Security) for peer reviewing and contributing information about the success (or otherwise) of automated means of detection.
* Neil Smithline (OneStopAppSecurity.com) for comments and producing the Wiki version.
* Sylvan von Stuppe for an exemplary peer review.
* Colin Wong, Nigel Evans and Andre Gironda for e-mailed comments. http://cve.mitre.org/
CVE Editorial Board
Current Members | Past Members
The CVE Editorial Board includes numerous information security-related organizations including commercial security tool vendors, members of academia, research institutions, government agencies, and other prominent security experts. Through open and collaborative discussions, the Board identifies which vulnerabilities or exposures are included in the CVE List, then determines the common name and description for each entry.
The MITRE Corporation
created the CVE Editorial Board, moderates Board discussions, and provides guidance throughout the process to ensure that CVE serves the public interest. Archives of Board meetings and discussions are available for review on the CVE Web site. Other information security experts will be invited to participate on the Board on an as-needed basis based upon recommendations from Board members. See "Process for Adding New Members to the Editorial Board."
CVE Editorial Board roles and tasks vary by member. Some Board members participate actively in different Board functions. Other members act as observers or liaisons with other areas in the security community. See "CVE Editorial Board Roles, Tasks, and Qualifications."
Intrusion Detection Experts
General Dynamics Corporation Scott Lawler
Other Security Experts
Informed Security Inc. Adam Shostack (Emeritus)
National Security Agency (NSA)
Independent Tim Collins, Stu Green, Shawn Hernan, Tom Stracener
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Computer Associates International, Inc.
Internet Security Systems (ISS)
nCircle Network Security, Inc.
The Nessus Project
NFR Security, Inc.
Red Hat, Inc.
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Network Security Analysts
Security Services Vendors
Ernst & Young
Academic / Educational
UC Davis (University of California, Davis)
Incident Response Teams
CERT/CC (Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University)
DOE-CIAC (U.S. Department of Energy-Computer Incident Advisory Capability)
Information ProvidersNational Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
Steve Christey (Moderator)
The individuals listed below are former members of the CVE Editorial Board. We thank them for contributions, especially those with "Emeritus" status who have made particularly significant contributions to the CVE Initiative.
Last Updated: October 14, 2008
Thirty-eight minutes after American Flight 11 hit the World Trade Center, the FAA notified the Air Force Command (NORAD) that the plane was still airborne, headed toward Washington, D.C. The 911 Commission Report called it the “Phantom Flight 11 report,” but explored no further. In fact, there was not a single, accurate FAA report on any one of the four hijacked planes, until after they had all crashed.
There are many glaring questions, contradictions, and later discovered lies in official reports from that day that haven’t been pursued. It is clear, however, that the FAA’s central operating structure, its recently redesigned National Airspace System (NAS), not only failed that day, but contributed to the chaos.
Felix Rausch, among the global elite of computer wizards, was a lead designer of the NAS. For at least two years before 911, former FAA official Rausch was Government Service Director of a small company named Ptech, which had been contracted to upgrade the FAA system. Rausch’s major focus was crisis communication between the FAA and the Air Force.
Three weeks after 911, Ptech’s owner, Saudi banker Yassin Al-Qadi, was declared a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT). The charges were based on evidence officially presented to the FBI’s top brass three years earlier. The Chief of the Bureau’s terror finance unit, Robert Wright, had documented Al-Qadi’s funneling millions of dollars to Osama Bin Laden and other terror groups in 1998. Wright requested permission to arrest Al-Qadi and shut down his operations. He was denied, and warned to “back off.” When he refused, and filed his own civil charges against Al-Qadi, he endured years of harassment, false accusations and demotion.
Meanwhile, during those years before Al Qadi was finally charged in late September 2001, his company, Ptech, had not only been given control of the FAA’s computer system, but that of every vital US government agency. Those included the Departments of Defense, State, Energy and Justice. There has been no official inquiry into how that could have happened, or why.
Even less known is that Felix Rausch, Ptech’s Government Projects Director, was previously the Deputy CIO for the White House, as well as Chief of Technology at INTERPOL His later business partner, Beryl Bellman, was a consultant for Ptech, and had also been a top technology advisor at the White House.
Starting out at Lockheed Martin and Booz Allen in the 1970s, Rausch alternated between working for major contractors and government agencies including the FCC, INS and SSA. He was among the first to master a revolutionary software system called “enterprise architecture.”This technology was first employed in the early1980s as PROMIS, a super-powerful data management program for US Prosecutors, which merged, and also produced new levels of information, minutely detailed “blueprints” of the organizations behind the data. An enhanced version was actually able to improve itself, becoming the precursor of Artificial Intelligence.
The enhanced PROMIS was developed by a company named Inslaw, and leased to the Justice Department in 1982. Two years later, as confirmed in Federal courts and US Senate hearings, Attorney General Ed Meese
and other officials pirated the software for their personal gain. They withheld payments to Inslaw, forced it into bankruptcy, and the breakthrough “enterprise architecture” software was turned over to a White House connected (and later convicted) entrepreneur named Earl Brian.
Covert intelligence operatives then installed a hidden “back door” in the software, which could secretly transfer or alter the information being managed. In 1987, a bankruptcy judge ruled that Justice had stolen PROMIS through “trickery, fraud, and deceit.” However, after two decades of challenges and appeals, PROMIS’ rightful owners had still not been paid.
Through Earl Brian’s company, versions of PROMIS (with its hidden “back door”) were marketed internationally to financial institutions and government agencies. A freelance journalist named Danny Casolaro was about to release evidence of the murderous role played by rogue CIA operators in the PROMIS scheme, when he died suspiciously in 1991.
Around that time, Felix Rausch began working on “enterprise architecture” programs for the FAA, where he launched the National Aviation Safety Data Analysis Center, the government’s first data warehouse. In the later ‘90s he segued over to work on the NAS, and joined Ptech, a four year old company with fewer than 30 employees.
Along with being handed management of the government’s most sensitive systems, tiny Ptech was chosen by IBM to co-design the Unified Modeling Language (UML), which standardized notation techniques for all software engineering.
A 1999 report from Mitre Corp.—a major, quasi-government agency which, though listed as nonprofit, farms out contracts benefiting its directors’ interest in other companies—details a collaboration between Mitre, Ptech, and the FAA to adapt enterprise architecture to FAA airspace management using a Ptech “framework environment.”
Ptech’s own 1998 press release describes incorporating the “enterprise framework” developed by Rausch’s renowned colleague, John Zachman. By controlling the core of an agency’s information system, said Zachman, Ptech software would ” be able to know the access points, know its weaknesses, know how to destroy it.”
In December 2000, the Government Accountability Office released a report noting “serious, pervasive problems” at FAA in all types of security: information systems, facilities, personnel, and even intrusion detection. Specifically, FAA had not completed “peneration tests” on “critical FAA systems.” Furthermore, background searches of “foreign nationals” had been left undone, leaving critical information systems at risk. The “extent of exposure,” the report said, “is unknown.”
Several months after 911, enterprise architecture expert Indira Singh was heading up an advanced research project at JP Morgan -- the development of a next generation Artificial Intelligence system to guide crisis management in real time. She says she was told, by “enterprise framework” guru John Zachman, about Ptech’s ongoing operation. Despite Al-Qadi being declared a fugitive global terrorist six months earlier, there’d been no mention of his Ptech company, which was still managing IT systems at the most vital US agencies.
Singh invited Ptech’s executives to her office, but was alarmed by their blatant attempt to transfer JP Morgan’s software onto the computer they’d brought with them. She notified her superiors, and after doing some checking on her own, learned about fugitive Al-Qadi’s ownership of Ptech.
She contacted the FBI, but two months later, realizing that nothing was being done, Singh took the information to Boston TV station WBZ. Reporter Joe Bergantino developed the story, including Al-Qadi’s deep involvement a Virginia-based group of Muslim charities and businesses with documented, direct connections to terror-financing fronts and terror groups directly.
Al-Qadi was also among the group of Arabian bankers operating a New Jersey finance firm named BMI, which former counterterrorism chief Richard Clark belatedly described as a “who’s who” list of terror financiers.
Among the principals of both Ptech and BMI was Abdurahman Alamoudi, a regular guest of President George W and co-founder, with White House favorite (and former Jack Abramoff partner) Grover Norquist, of the Islamic Institute. Alamoudi’s exalted political status ended with his 2003 indictment and subsequent 23 year sentence for terror funding.
Ptech and BMI shared numerous other investors, officers and directors with White House connections going back all the way to the Carter years, who were later officially described, designated, or convicted as terror-financiers. (See Yassin Al-Qadi profile for a detailed list).
After stalling WBZ for months, on grounds of “national security.” FBI and Customs agents raided Ptech’s offices in December ‘02, carting away a dozen truckloads of documents and computers. However, just hours after the raid, a National Security Agency official was able to assure the public that Ptech’s software was “completely safe.”
In May 2003, the FBI—the same agency that had originally dismissed allegations against Ptech—absorbed all terror financing investigations from U.S. Customs and the Department of Homeland Security’s Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
That same month, representatives of FAA and NORAD gave misleading testimony to the 9/11 Commission, saying that their reaction to the hijackings was swift and that they were ready to attack United Airlines Flight 93 if it came to Washington. In fact, for two years before the FAA/NORAD transcript was released in the 9/11 Commission report, NORAD and FAA provided false information to the public about their reaction to the attacks. One major general told the commission that NORAD started tracking United Flight 93 twelve minutes before it was even hijacked. In truth, the Pentagon didn’t even know about the flight until after it crashed.
By 2004, the Ptech story had largely disappeared from the news. That year, Ptech CEO Oussama Ziade was still bragging of White House contracts. Ptech ultimately changed its name to GoAgile and set up operations in the Middle East. In July 2004, GoAgile was named as a subcontractor on a U.S. Agency for International Development contract in Egypt. The company is teaming with Egyptian company Horizon Software to “develop a complete electronic blueprint” for the Egyptian National Postal Organization.
Felix Rausch has since founded the FEAC Institute in northern Virginia, where he is sharing his enterprise software knowledge with anyone hungry for federal dollars. FEAC claims to be “the Enterprise Architecture Training and Certification Institute offering hands-on Programs leading to Certification in the Enterprise Architecture for both the Department of Defense…and for the civilian Agencies as well as the Commercial sectors.” He and fellow Ptech (and White House) alumnus Beryl Bellman also run a companion venture called EA Werks Associates. Ptech’s credited oracle, John “Framework” Zachman, is a frequent lecturer at Rausch and Bellman seminars.
And the FAA? In 2005, the GAO issued a follow-up report. “In December 2000,” says the report, “we reported that FAA had not fully implemented a security awareness and training program.” The new report noted some progress, but identified “significant security weaknesses” that threatened the integrity of FAA systems. Other security problems increased “the risk that unauthorized users could breach FAA's air traffic control systems, potentially disrupting aviation operations.” In one case, GAO officials were able to access “sensitive security information” on the Internet. They alerted FAA, but eight months later, that information was back up on the Internet. It was labeled “internal distribution only.”
In September 2006, the Inspector General at the Department of Transportation recommended disciplinary action against two FAA executives for their misleading testimony to the 9/11 Commission. As of two years later, no action had been taken.
Defense | Homeland Security | Information Technology | Government Officials | International Finance
* felixrausch.cgpublisher.com/product/pub.28/prod.398 www.adsystech.com/text/clients/federal/FAA/faa.htm
* reprehensor.gnn.tv/blogs/11484/Indira_Singh_Ground_Zero_911_Blueprin t_For_Terror_Part_Two
* FAA Delay in Reporting 9/11 Hijackings Probed Commission also questions ex-chief on shooting report By Thomas Frank WASHINGTON BUREAU May 23, 2003
* < li> www.poynter.org/content/content_print.asp?id=13211&custom= www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/ericjsinrod/2005-10-05-faa-weakness_
* Black Ice: The Invisible Threat of Cyber-Terrorism By Dan Verton By Dan Verton: books.google.com/books?id=AAijfh5iIeIC&pg=PA112&lpg=PA112&am p;dq=%22mirza+was+acting+on+behalf+of+yassin+qadi%22&source=web&ots=JMUIWnKL 3S&sig=CXC6iSo5gfhVhoITSri8xRD_qVM
1498.html: IG report
* select.nytimes.com/search/restricted/article?res=F30E14FF345A0C718CD DA00894DE404482
Management TeamFelix Rausch
Felix Rausch is the co-founder and Executive Director of the FEAC Institute. The mission of the institute is to provide training programs and certification for EA practitioners in the US Federal (Civilian and DOD sectors) and State/Local Government sectors. Felix started his career in the aerospace industry working for Lockheed. He was a consultant for Booz Allen Applied Research and Westinghouse doing work for the Navy and DOT.In 1972, he joined the US Government and he became an expert in managing large projects in software conversion and systems reengineering at the Federal Communications Commission. At the Social Security Administration he was responsible for transitioning ten acres of computing infrastructure, software, and people to a new data center. He then became Assistant Commissioner for Systems Integration at the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
In the 1980's he was the CIO at Interpol and became Deputy CIO at the White House (Executive Office of the President) for 4 years during the second Reagan term. In 1990 he began development of the Federal Aviation Administration’s National Aviation Safety Data Analysis Center (NASDAC), the first data warehouse in government, before developing a National Airspace Space System Information Architecture.
After retiring from federal service, Felix became Director for Government Services for an EA consulting and modeling tool company for 2 years. Felix has a BS in Applied Math from the University of Alabama and an MS in Information Science from Georgia Tech and has worked on an MBA from Loyola Baltimore.
Mike Tiemann is an experienced Enterprise Architect
having lead EA Programs and Projects both from inside government and as a supporting consultant. Mike was a Senior Associate with Booz Allen Hamilton leading EA Projects at several major US Federal Agencies. He was previously with AT&T Government Solutions as its EA Practice Manager.
Prior to working in the private sector, Mike had 31 years of distinguished service in the U.S. Federal Government. His early career included environmental management at Army Material Command Headquarters and at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
He later joined the Department of Energy (DOE) at its headquarters as a Project Manager in the Office of Computer Services and Telecommunications Management. He was assigned the responsibilities for Information Resources Management Planning, headquarters-wide and was given responsibility for developing the Enterprise Information Architecture for DOE. Assembling a nationwide team from across DOE, with representatives from programs, offices, sites and laboratories, as the PM, he led the effort that published a comprehensive four volume Architecture for the Energy Department.
He served as the DOE Chief Architect until 1997. From then, almost until he retired in 2002, he served as the Director, Division of Architecture and Standards and during 2001, as Acting Associate CIO for Architecture, Standards and Planning within the DOE CIO’s Office. He was on the Federal CIO Council’s Architecture and Infrastructure Committee and was the founding Chair and later Co-chair of the Federal Architecture Working Group. Under his leadership several CIO Council Guidance documents on Enterprise Architecture were produced, approved and issued.
He assisted in the authoring of the first OMB Guidance on Information Technology Architecture, M-97-16 and the initial development of the GAO Architecture Maturity Survey. Mike has written and lectured on EA and related topics at numerous Federal and industry information management conferences including the Government CIO Summit, the Interagency Resources Management Conference and the National Defense University IRM College. He has received numerous performance awards and citations, including, Federal Computer Week’s Federal 100 Award, the CIO Council’s Citation and Special Recognition and Act Awards from the Secretary and Deputy Secretary of Energy.
Mike holds a Bachelors degree in Architecture from Texas A&M University and a Masters of Science in Systems Management from University of Southern California. He is a graduate of the Federal Executive Institute. Mike is a Professor at the FEAC Institute and he is an Associate Editor of the Association of Enterprise Architects Journal. He is Vice-Chairman of the Industry Advisory Council’s (IAC) Enterprise Architecture Shared Interest Group, the Enterprise Architecture Interest Group and he was recognized in the Year 2000 International Who’s Who of Information Technology.
David Epperly is the Managing Partner of Archangel IT. He is an entrepreneur and consultant who has held executive and senior level positions in sales and consulting management with leading technology companies including Oracle Corporation, SAP America and Analysts International Corporation (AiC)
, among others, over the past twenty years. He has an extensive track record of selling and implementing complex enterprise-level software systems, i.e., Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
, and custom development solutions in a variety of sectors (commercial and government).
David has received numerous sales and leadership awards for his accomplishments. He formerly held the position of CEO and Partner at Eastbanc Technologies, a small IT consulting firm in Washington, DC where he led a complete company turnaround producing a five-fold increase in annual revenues and first ever profitability within a period of two years. He has provided consulting support to many government agencies including the Peace Corps, the Government of the District of Columbia and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) where he recently co-managed an IV&V effort as part of a successful agency-wide ERP implementation and provided support for the project’s integration into the NIH enterprise architecture.
He is a graduate of the FEAC Institute, having earned his Certified Enterprise Architect (CEA) certification, and currently instructs classes there. David holds a Bachelors degree in Management from Radford University, College of Business and Economics. Among his areas of focus is the utilization of Enterprise Architecture as a best practice approach for the implementation of ERP and other enterprise level technical solutions.
Executive Director at FEAC Institute
Washington D.C. Metro Area
* Executive Director at FEAC Institute
* Executive Dir at FEAC Institute
* Georgia Institute of Technology
Felix Rausch’s Experience
(Educational Institution; 11-50 employees; Education Management industry)
Currently holds this position
(Educational Institution; 1-10 employees; Education Management industry)
March 2001 — Present (7 years 11 months)
FEAC Institute Ptech
Felix Rausch’s Education
Georgia Institute of Technology
MS, Information Science, 1968 — 1970
Felix Rausch’s Websites: My Company
Felix Rausch’s Interests:
Soccer -DC United and FC Bayern Jogging Traveling
Saturday, November 25, 2006
The Lexington Comair crash, part 25 return of the bluegrass conspiracy - Versailles
BY ALEX CONSTANTINE
The begging questions are back, rattling cups. What do the Saudi propaganda minister and terror from the skies on 9/11 have to do with an obscure race horse breeding farm in Lexington, Kentucky?
And the death of Marcie Thomason? You crave a long view – to unroll the invisible map of biographical coordinates on that doomed plane, take it all in at once. But that's not possible ... and every question you answer only tosses off ten more questions, like sparks from a grinding wheel ...
Thinking, in this investigation, is working ... Mill Ridge Farm is the nexus here ... Marcie Thomason's father ... (the late) Prince Bin Salman boarded his horses at the Mill Ridge stables ...
Mill Ridge is not far from the site of the crash, Bluegrass Airport.
Hal Price Headley
Dr. John Chandler and Alice Headley Chandler
The 484-acre breed farm, according to it's web site, was founded in 1962 by Alice Headley Chandler. The current owners are Dr. John Chandler and Alice Headley Chandler. Alice inherited the property from Hal Price Headley, her father – the founder of the famed Keeneland racetrack near Lexington, and its first president. Dr. Chandler is from south Africa.185 The Mill Ridge logo displayed at racing events is made of Hal Headley's old racing silks. His influence on the racing industry survives in the bloodlines of several champion broodmares, most notably Alcibiades.186
The Chandlers not only cared for Prince Ahmed bin Salman's horses, as widely reported – the family is VERY close to the Saudi royal family. In fact, Dr. Chandler oversees ALL horse-related business in North America for Khalid Abdullah, the cousin of bin Salman and Prince Turki – the focus of the aforementioned rage in England over the sale of torture implements to the Saudi rulers and a secret slush fund (part 23).187 Dr. Chandler RUNS Prince Abdullah's racing enterprise, Juddmonte Farms ... but that only raises ... more questions.
Beginning with: How is it this sleepy little horse farm in rural Lexington is in business with Saudi eminences tied to arms smuggling, BCCI, 9/11 psyops and the wretched Bush clan? These aren't just any eminences – they've long been financially symbiotic with the Bush family and Big Oil down in Houston and Dallas.
Alice Headley Chandler is their kind of woman.
The Breeders' Cup, where Marcie Thomason worked, is managed by a set of trustees, among them Alice Headley Chandler.
Two other trustees of the Breeders' Cup are old familiars in the history of the Bush clan:
• William S. Farish.
• William S. Farish Jr.188
Alice Chandler was born with her father's horse sense, not just his assets. And she's a very busy little woman. Ms. Chandler also chairs the University of Kentucky's Equine Research Foundation. On the board of directors, once again ...
• William S. Farish.189
Farish is a known unknown in Blue Grass country, but the Chandlers are old friends. Will's horse farm, Lane's End, is just down the road from Mill Ridge. On this map, The Headley-Chandler property is located immediately south of Blue Grass Airport (the airplane marker). Will Farish's ranch is to the north of Versaille Road, marked by the green stars. Flight 5191 crashed between the two horse farms:
"William S. Farish III (born March 17, 1939) is an American millionaire," says his Wikipedia entry, "a previous U.S. Ambassador to the United Kingdom (2001-2004) ... a horse-breeder, a chairman of Churchill Downs, major Republican Party donor, and family friend of President George W. Bush for several decades. He was awarded an honorary Doctor of Laws from the UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY in 2003. Farish was born in Houston, Texas in 1939. His father, William S. Farish Jr., was killed in an airplane accident during World War II. He is the grandson of William Stamps Farish II, who was President of Standard Oil from 1937 to 1942."190
Some basic Farish facts:
• Wife: Sarah
• Son: Bill Farish, Jr.
• Daughters: Mary Farish Johnston, Laura Farish Chadwick, Hillary Farish Stratton
• "Farish owns a trust company in Houston, Texas called W.S. Farish & Co.
• "An avid horse-breeder, Farish owns the 1800 acre Lane's End Farm near Lexington, Kentucky, which hosted Queen Elizabeth, a family friend, during her visits to Lexington.
• "Prescott Bush and William Farish Sr. were business partners in the 1930s and 1940s. Farish Sr. died of a heart attack on 29 November 1942; his son, William Farish II, died in a training accident in Texas six months later. William Farish III served on the board of GHW Bush's Zapata Corporation starting in 1966. Farish III was tapped in 1980 to manage Vice President Bush's blind trust.
• "Farish's grandfather, William Farish, on March 25th, 1942, pleaded no contest to conspiring with Nazi Germany while president of Standard Oil in New Jersey. He was described by Senator Harry Truman in public of approaching "treason" for profiting off the Nazi war machine. Standard Oil, invested millions in IG Farben, who opened a gasoline factory within Auschwitz in 1940. President George W. Bush appointed Farish American Ambassador to London.
• "Farish's contributions to the Republican Party include: $100,000 to the Bush-Cheney inauguration committee fund – $26,875 to Republican candidates and parties between 1999-2000, including the maximum $1,000 to President Bush's campaign – $5,000 to the Bush-Cheney vote recount – Farish's support for Democrats was limited to a single contribution of $1000 to the unsuccessful campaign of former Rep. Scotty Baesler (D-Ky.). Farish's wife Sarah has also contributed to Republican politicians: $11,000 between 1999-2000, $1,000 to President Bush's campaign.190d
• Farish, Sr. drips with Holocaust wealth, but – like his friend George Bush – he is deeply concerned about the world affairs:
Farish fears war might force cancellation of Dubai World Cup
"William S. Farish, the United States Ambassador to Great Britain and owner of Lane's End near Versailles, Kentucky, considers a war with Iraq all but inevitable and fears it may result in the cancellation of the Dubai World Cup (UAE-G1) program in the United Arab Emirates on March 29. Farish, a close friend of the family of President George W. Bush and an acquaintance of Dubai Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al Maktoum, said he thinks a decision on war is likely by the end of next week ... "191
East meets West at the oil well, at the racetrack and Mill Ridge Farm. This particular branch of the Fahd family may be Saudis, but they are are planted to both worlds. Prince Turki, for instance (from the 9/11Encyclopedia site):
"Prince Saudi Turki al Faisal has a long tradition of friendship with the US government." Among his associates, count "Bin Laden's cousin Sheikh Suhail Ibn Mustahil Ibn Salem," who in league with James R. Bath and Khaled bin Mafhuz, were business partners of George W. Bush "in the family's Zapata Oil and Arbusto Ltd. Bin Laden's family had invested in the Carlyle Group (Blackstone), specializing in buyouts of defense and aerospace companies, in which George Bush Sr. holds the position of Consultant. According to business magazine Forbes, the father of Khalid bin Mafhuz (part 20 on BCCI, Harken) [founded] the main Saudi bank, the Commercial National Bank, that created diverse companies in collaboration with the Sico, Swiss society of the Bin Laden Group....
"In December 2002, it was revealed, that Mahfouz' main business partner, YASSIN AL-KADI, was the secret owner of US-computer company PTECH." His business clients include Applied Materials, BoozAllenHamilton (Woolsey territory, the first witness called by the Kean Commission, name-dropper ((see parts 13, 21)), FBI, IBM Global Services, IRS, The Mitre Corporation, NATO, NAVAIR, PricewaterhouseCoopers, Sprint and the US Air Force.188 Ptech and the Mitre Corporation have been associated with 9/11 since financial analyst Indira Singh maintained that both "were in the basement of the FAA for two years prior to 9/11. Their specific job [was] to look at interoperability issues the FAA had with NORAD and the Air Force in the case of an emergency. If anyone was in a position to know [there] was a window of opportunity or to insert software or to change anything – it would have been Ptech along with Mitre."192
Al-Kadi, Mahfouz's partner, was a member of the World Anti-Communist League (WACL), but that's another story ...
[This continues ... ]
188.) "Breeders' Cup Limited Members & Trustees."http://188.8.131.52/search?q=cache:wLOdGVV1vd8J:www.ca.uky.edu/agcollege/vetscience/Spring99.pdf+keeneland+and+farish+and+chandler&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=6
191.) Thoroughbred Times archive, March 7, 2003.http://www.thoroughbredtimes.com/todaysnewsarchive/ttodaysnewsviewarchive.asp?ArchiveDate=3/7/2003#31104
192.) "Prince Turki al Faisal al Saud," 9/11 Encyclopedia.http://911review.org/Sept11Wiki/PrinceTurkiAlFaisalAlSaud.shtml
Last Updated: January 06, 2009
Since the early '80s, his close colleagues have been big-time money sources for both Bill Clinton
and George W. Bush
Three weeks after September 11th, Saudi banker Yassin Al-Qadi was declared a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT), charged with directly sending millions to Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, through US-based business and Muslim charity fronts.
For the previous six years, Al-Qadi was the major shareholder in a small startup company - Ptech – somehow given control of the U.S. Government’s most vital computer systems. Included, among others, were the Departments of Defense, State, Energy, Transportation and Justice.
Eerily unknown is the fact that this Bin Laden banker’s company developed the FAA’s National Airspace System, newly in operation on the morning of September 11. Even less known is that the Ptech computer chief who created and installed the new FAA software was Felix Rausch
, former Deputy IT Chief of the White House, and overall IT Chief of INTERPOL.
Al-Qadi could and should have been arrested several years earlier. In early 2002, Robert Wright
, head of the FBI’s Terror Finance Unit (“Vulgar Betrayal”), publicly charged that since 1998, his superiors had blocked him from arresting Al-Qadi.
From the outset he’d been ordered by FBI top brass to drop the case, despite direct evidence that Al-Qadi had already delivered millions of dollars into Bin Laden controlled bank accounts. When Wright refused, he endured four years of harassment, demotion, invented administrative charges and finally dismissal, before a federal judge ordered his reinstatement.
Al-Qadi was also among the group of Arabian bankers operating a New Jersey finance firm named BMI, which former counterterrorism chief Richard Clark belatedly described as a “who’s who” list of terror financiers.
Among the principals of both Ptech and BMI was Abdurahman Alamoudi
, a regular guest of President George W and co-founder, with White House favorite (and former Jack Abramoff
partner) Grover Norquist
, of the Islamic Institute. Alamoudi’s exalted political status ended with his 2003 indictment and subsequent 23 year sentence for terror funding.
Ptech and BMI shared numerous other investors, officers and directors later officially described, designated, or convicted as terror-financiers. They included:
* Soliman Biheiri
- BMI President and Ptech Board member. Convicted of perjury.
* Musa Abu Marzook - SDGT leader of Hamas, laundered miliions through both companies.
* Hussein Ibrahim - VP of both companies, and a director of the SAAR Foundation
, umbrella group for more than a dozen terror-linked charities in Herndon, Virginia. They were raided by the Treasury Department in March 2002.
* Yaqub Mirza, overall Executive of the SAAR Foundation charities, and a Board member of Ptech.. He’s also a Board Director of Amana Al-Qadi was Director of one of the largest charities “Blessed Relief”, funded by
* Khalid Mahfouz –billionaire bailout provider for George W Bush’s failing oil company in the ‘80s. He was also principle shareholder of the global outlaw bank BCCI
, Bush Sr’s Iran-Contra conduit, and after its $20 billion collapse, described by prosecutors as the “greatest financial fraud in world history.”
* Two of Osama BinLaden’s nephews.
* Saleh Kamel
(whose Saudi company provided a no-show job in San Diego for the man who housed two 9/11 hijackers. Kamel’s bank in the Sudan held millions in Osama Bin Laden’s accounts. Kamel and Mahfouz are both on the “Golden Chain” list of Al Qaeda’s top 20 funders, seized during a Bosnian anti-terror raid.
A group of “Muslim moderates” who protested the March ‘02 Virginia charities raids was provided a private meeting with Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill two weeks later.. It was arranged by the Islamic Institute, co-founded by George W’s Muslim money raising lobbyist Grover Norquist.. The group’s spokesmen were:
* Khaled Saffuri - the other co-founder of Norquist’s Islamic Institute, who formerly reported to Ptech investor (and imprisoned terror financier) Abdurahman Alamoudi.
* Talat Othman - Chairman of Norquist’s Islamic Institute, and former Board Director of George W’s Harken Energy company
. Othman gave a benediction at the 2000 GOP National Convention. He’s also a Director of Amana Mutual, part of Saleh Kamel's Al Baraka Bank, along with Trustee Yaqub Mirza
(head of the raided charities’ umbrella group).
The moderate Muslims’ leaders, according to Grover Norquist's Islamic Institute, were encouraged by their meeting with the head of the United States Treasury Department.
By mid 2002, as he later disclosed, Secretary Paul O’Neill was convinced the Bush administration lacked the commitment to go after all terror financiers, regardless of their business or political connections. He was asked to resign before the year’s end.
O’Neill was replaced by John Snow
, whose transport company had just sold its shipping line to George Bush Sr’s Carlyle Group. Snow’s company then did a billion dollar deal with Dubai Ports
, the same UAE-owned company that Secretary Snow later rubberstamped to manage the United States’ major ports
Ptech specialized in what is called enterprise architecture, widely reported as descendant of PROMIS software, the precursor of “artificial intelligence” developed in the early ‘80s. Federal courts and Congress later declared that PROMIS had been stolen from its rightful owners by then Attorney General Edwin Meese
and his business associates.
A hidden “back door” feature was then created, enabling those controlling the program to secretly remove, or even replace information in any system where its installed. John Zachman, considered the father of enterprise architecture, later will say that with Ptech software in control “You would know where the access points are, you’d know how to get in, you would know where the weaknesses are, you’d know how to destroy it.”
In October 2001, after Al-Qadi’s SDGT designation, several suspicious Ptech employees contacted the FBI but were ignored. Five months later, Indira Singh, a JP Morgan IT executive, met with Ptech representatives, and was alarmed by their immediate attempt to access the bank’s operating system. After learning about Al-Qadi, and his role in Ptech, she too contacted the FBI.
Still no action was taken until the Treasury Department learned that a WBZ-TV reporter in Boston named Joe Bergantino was pursuing the story. WBZ-TV held the story for three months at the request of federal authorities citing national security issues, as did ABC and NBC. In December 2002, just before Treasury Secretary O’Neill was fired, U.S. Customs (part of the Treasury) raided Ptech’s offices as part of its Operation Greenquest.
The FBI was furious, despite its recently revealed incompetence/indifference/ interference in genuine attempts to prosecute terror financiers. A turf war between Justice and Treasury soon resulted in Operation Greenquest being turned over to the politically compromised FBI.
Just hours after the Ptech raid, in which numerous carloads of documents were removed, White House and Homeland Security officials assured the public that Ptech’s software was “completely safe.” Never a word about its owner’s ability to transmit the nation’s secrets, along with funds, to the nation’s fanatic enemies.
In 2004, Ptech CEO Oussama Ziade was still bragging of the company’s continuing White House contracts.Ptech eventually changed its name to GoAgile and moved to Egypt, working with what it called “Horizon” software. In 2005, the USAID agency actually financed GoAgile/Horizon to improve Egypt’s technology. Perhaps coincidentally, White House favorite Grover Norquist's Palestinian born wife, Samah Alrayyes, is an official with USAID.NOTE: As of December 2008, Horizon Software's website identifies its United States operation as a company called Intelligile. It too has a website, Defense listed as the #1 industry it serves. A "Military Information Architecture" program is one of its major products. You can place orders, or ask for more information, by emailing them. That's all the information you get, however. No names, addresses or client list.
Al Qadi first met Osama Bin Laden in the 1980s, and Treasury officials accuse him of funneling $3 million to Bin Laden in the mid ‘90s through the Muwafaq Foundation, funded by magnate Khalid bin Mahfouz
. According to former counter-terror chief Richard Clarke, it was Mahfouz’s National Commercial Bank that al-Qadi used to transfer the money.
Billionaire Mahfouz’s former US financial representative was James Bath
, George W’s National Guard buddy, chosen despite being in his mid twenties, with no financial experience The Treasury Department also accused Al-Qadi of transferring nearly $1 million to Hamas through the “Quranic Literacy Institute,” and Hamas operative Mohammed Salah.
Since being declared a SDGT, Al Qadi has weathered a few international squalls.. Albania investigated him, along with Abdul Latif Saleh, for real estate fraud, and the U.N. designated him as a terror financier. Turkey designated him as such, too, although in 2006 an appeals court rejected it, allowing Al Qadi to “walk freely and conduct business” there.
As of early 2008, Al-Qadi was said to be doing those very same things in Saudi Arabia. The FBI put a gag order on Robert Wright, the FBI terror finance chief whose evidence from 1998 was finally used in October 2001. Wright wrote a book about his investigation being shut down, but the FBI blocked the its publication. One of the few things Wright has been able to say in public about the case is that he has a “whopper” of a story to tell.
* “Federal agents seize computer software company's records suspecting ties to al-Qaeda,” NBC Nightly News (6:30 PM ET), December 6, 2002 Friday
* “Software company tries to survive terrorism investigation,” Justin Pope, Associated Press, 01/03/03
* BBC Monitoring Europe – Political, September 24, 2006 Sunday, “US tells Turkey to comply over UN-listed terror suspect – paper”
* “U.S.: Money trail leads to Saudi; Financier denies sending funds to bin Laden,” David Jackson, Laurie Cohen and Robert Manor, Chicago Tribune, October 29, 2001
(wright and muwafaq)
* web.archive.org/web/20040603115237/http://www.tyndallreport.com/tw03 02.html
* web.archive.org/web/20030605101902/http://wbz4.com/iteam/local_story _343143121.html
RISK MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE FOR SOLDIERS!!!!!
NOW CHENEY CAN PUSH BUTTONS LIKE HE DID ON 9/11 TO HAVE SOLDIERS KILL CIVILIANS...
C4ISR Capabilities for the Future Forcehttp://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11053&page=137
Some of the anticipated operational capabilities to be afforded to the Future Force by C4ISR are listed below. Consistent with the rest of the report, this appendix is organized in the following groupings: command, control, and computers (C3); communications (C); and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR). The sections for C3 and communications are further divided under the subheadings “See First,” “Understand First,” and “Act First” and augmented by another important parameter, “Ensure Reliability.” Each capability is listed under the parameter that fits it best; however, it is noted that these capabilities usually support other parameters and components to some extent as well.
ANTICIPATED OPERATIONAL CAPABILITIES DERIVED FROM COMMAND, CONTROL, AND COMPUTERS
OCR for page 137
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR Appendix E C4ISR Capabilities for the Future Force Some of the anticipated operational capabilities to be afforded to the Future Force by C4ISR are listed below. Consistent with the rest of the report, this appendix is organized in the following groupings: command, control, and computers (C3); communications (C); and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR). The sections for C3 and communications are further divided under the subheadings “See First,” “Understand First,” and “Act First” and augmented by another important parameter, “Ensure Reliability.”
Each capability is listed under the parameter that fits it best; however, it is noted that these capabilities usually support other parameters and components to some extent as well. ANTICIPATED OPERATIONAL CAPABILITIES DERIVED FROM COMMAND, CONTROL, AND COMPUTERS See First Commanders will have access to a common operational picture (COP) with timely updates to ensure near-perfect situational awareness and to overcome the fog of war. Information will be automatically “pushed” to the commander as well as being “pulled” from the network in accord with immediate needs. The Future Force Warrior (FFW) will use forward sensor fusion and ubiquitous, assured network communications to enable improved battle management, command and control, and situational awareness.
OCR for page 138
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR Understand First Information will be fused at the commander’s level to avoid information overload and enable complete situational understanding.[exactly what happened on 9/11, info overload was taken out of the hands of humans that defend this country and put into systems like PTECH!]
Automated event-tracking capability will alert commanders to deviations from the operations plan or to unanticipated exigencies.
Commanders will be provided state-of-the-art collaborative, distributed, real-time decision aids to facilitate informed decisions. Computer systems will be designed to enable individual soldiers to be recognized by any system and to be uniquely identified with appropriate rank, priority, and information needs. The FFW will be integrated, interoperable, and interfaced with the unit of action systems and is capable of independent operations with joint assets and firepower. The FFW will have command and control of organic tactical mobile robots and can interface with Future Combat Systems (FCS) robotic platforms. Act First The operations plan will be continuously updated with inputs from higher and lower echelons as events unfold.
The command post will be wherever the commander is located, be that location mounted, dismounted, or airborne. Changes in leadership on the battlefield will be automatically accommodated on the fly to ensure continuity of command. Automated synchronization of maneuver, firepower, and reconnaissance, surveillance, and target acquisition (RSTA) will be provided.
Ad hoc sensor-command-shooter links will be automatically or semi-automatically established to maximize effective firepower.
Ensure Reliability Computer hardware will be robust and rugged for operations in the field. Computer system components will be modular for easy and rapid repairs in the field or for upgrades. Computers will be protected against hostile penetration with advanced firewalls and other security systems. Software applications will be robust and flexible to accommodate interruptions in network services and changes in data rates without crashing. Software will be readily serviced or upgraded in the field via the information network, without on-site technicians.
OCR for page 139
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR ANTICIPATED OPERATIONAL CAPABILITIES DERIVED FROM COMMUNICATIONS See First The network will utilize ground, airborne, and space communication line-of-sight and non-line-of-sight links to achieve continuous, uninterrupted connectivity on the move. Networks will provide continuous position and navigation functions of all blue (friendly) entities with minimum self-disclosure to enemy.
Entities (including individual soldiers) will be connected to the network to enable each warfighter to have access to needed information and to enable each system/sensor to contribute relevant data that it may collect to the knowledge pool. Understand First The network will facilitate battlefield Identification: Friend or Foe by providing local situational awareness to engaged tactical units. The network will provide reach-back through the global information grid (GIG) for national source information, as well as providing administrative and logistic support for all combat support and combat service functions. Connectivity will be provided to local military or civilian networks as required.
The network will be backward-compatible to extend to legacy systems. Above all, the communications system must be robust to ensure that critical information is provided to the warfighters when needed. Network management will be essentially built in, requiring little to no on-site support. Upgrades or servicing can be done remotely via the network itself. Act First The network will be ad hoc, that is, self-configuring, allowing entities and nodes to enter and leave automatically without operator involvement. The network will make maximum use of all available spectral bandwidth by dynamically adapting to battlefield exigencies and the commander’s priorities. Network capabilities will allow voice, data, and video in accord with the commander’s intent and priorities and the battlefield situation. The network is tied into the GIG to enable variable joint and coalition connectivity and operations.
OCR for page 140
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR Network protocols will facilitate multiple levels of security. Network protocols will accommodate temporary interruptions in connectivity (for example, if a vehicle passes under a bridge) without requiring resetting. Ensure Reliability The network will be robust against environmental effects such as rain, fog, foliage, buildings, and structures. The network will be robust against jamming countermeasures, taking automatic counter-countermeasures to minimize adverse effects.
Networks will be assured as well as secure, providing protection against insertion of specious data and denying access to hostile or unauthorized personnel or forces. To the extent possible, the network will preclude interception and network analysis by hostile forces. The network hardware and protocols will be commercially based to the maximum extent possible in order to facilitate technology insertions as they evolve. ANTICIPATED OPERATIONAL CAPABILITIES DERIVED FROM INTELLIGENCE, SURVEILLANCE, AND RECONNAISSANCE See First Manned and unmanned ground, air, and space systems will extend vision beyond the line of sight to provide continuous, ubiquitous battlefield monitoring through both passive and aggressive RSTA.
Sensors will be available to see through walls in urban operations. The ISR system will employ the full range of operational variables—terrain; weather; friendly and enemy forces; and noncombatants—and detect threat actions in all environments. The ISR system will manage the overall application of organic sensor assets in accord with the commander’s intent and needs. The ISR system will provide standoff means to detect mines, booby traps, and command-detonated munitions “in stride” so as to maintain operational tempo. Semiautomated pattern analysis will be performed to detect, locate, and identify enemy combatants and systems. Control of sensors and information collection, as well as analysis, will be distributed via the network to eliminate single-point vulnerability.
OCR for page 141
Army Science and Technology for Homeland Security: Report 2 - C4ISR The sensor system will be designed to operate in all weather and all terrain, against enemy entities that are dispersed, covered and concealed, masked, and fleeting. Joint combat identification measures will be integrated. Understand First Sensor data collected from both manned and unattended sensor networks will be processed, networked, and fused into an integrated COP for unprecedented situational awareness and understanding. Commanders will be able automatically or with software decision aids to sort out from a variety of enemy data entries which are most dangerous and which have higher payoffs for engagement at tactical standoff.
Highly precise data on targets will flow from sensor to shooter and enable reliable and timely battlefield damage assessment. Joint, Army, and coalition manned and unmanned air, ground, and space RSTA assets will be used synergistically to gain and maintain contact with enemy elements and to provide high-resolution combat information on terrain and weather. Near-real-time friend, foe, or noncombatant identification across the spectrum of operations will be achieved through platform-to-platform, platform-to-soldier, soldier-to-platform, and soldier-to-soldier interrogation. Means will be provided to sort through decoys, deception, and disinformation. Robotic systems will be employed for certain high-risk situations. Means will be provided to defeat the enemy’s ISR systems through the use of obscurants, jamming, signature reduction, deception, and pattern avoidance techniques in order to see, understand, and act first.
Is it a friend or foe? PTECH type software will soon control all soldier's actions. Who needs Blackwater when we got PTECH risk management software to control things?Intelligilehttp://www.intelligile.com/MIAA.htmMilitary Information Architecture AcceleratorIntelligile provides Departments of Defenses with its Military Information Architecture Accelerator (MIAA) which enables them to manage and analyze military operations. It is an enhancement of concepts introduced in the Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF) which also surpasses the Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) Architecture Frameworks.
MIAA addresses the four views of an architecture description defined by DoDAF: overarching all View (AV), Operational view (OV), Systems view (SV), and Technical Standards View (TV). Each view consists of its own set of architecture data elements that can be modeled and analyzed and then represented via graphic, tabular, or textual products.
The Benefits of MIAA
* Describe the baseline architecture, the current (As-Is) capabilities/requirements
* Describe future views of the architecture, future (To-Be) capabilities/requirements
* Enhance Budgeting and Planning activities
* Perform different analysis types (Gap analysis, Impact analysis)
* Understand the DoD as an enterprise
* Identify the operational requirements
* Rationalize IT investment decisions
* Improve the interoperability among various systems
* Build and manage Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF) views and work products, and automatically generate DoDAF compliant reports
* Customize your own DoD reports
Dollars of Terror
By Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld
FrontPageMagazine.com | Monday, April 18, 2005
When referring to the enemy’s money we are usually concerned with how the terrorists collect the funds they need. As we know, the government efforts to stop terrorists financing have not been very successful thus far. However, equally, if not more disturbing is the possibility that terrorists may be using their money to buy into our national infrastructure in order to undermine our economy and security from within. Was Ptech, the Massachusetts-based company, used in this manner?
The privately owned technology company, based in Quincy, Massachusetts, received at least $20 million in financing from Saudi investors between 1994, when it was founded, and 2001. Fourteen million came from Yassin Al-Qadi, who was listed as a specially designated global terrorist on October 12, 2001.
Ptech is used primarily to develop enterprise blueprints at the highest level of US government and corporate infrastructure. These blueprints hold every important functional, operational, and technical detail of the enterprise. A secondary use of this powerful tool is to build other smart tools in a short period of time. Ptech’s clients in 2001 included the Department of Justice, the Department of Energy, Customs, Air Force, the White House, the FAA, IBM, Sysco, Aetna, and Motorola, to name just a few.
Examples of information gathered utilizing Ptech’s capabilities would include the following:A complete blueprint of a nuclear waste disposal site would detail the security procedures required to access military bases during transfer of nuclear waste materials. It would also include security rules, revealing where tight security searches vs. random searches exist for conducting detailed identity screening and security checks. These are typically noted in the architecture process, and surely, would be of interest to terrorists.
A second example is a complete blueprint of food distribution patterns, which would include food suppliers, warehouse locations, distributors, vehicles and schedules. With this knowledge, fraudulent deliveries of contaminated food would not be difficult to accomplish.
Another example is Product specifications in the blueprint for Smartcards as implemented in various defense facilities. It would include enough information to provide templates for duplication, and for unauthorized production of fake Smart IDs, which are a basic tool in the arsenal of criminals and terrorists alike.
Ptech’s Middle East branch called Horizons, received projects directly from Ptech, and is used to outsource projects for Ptech’s US clients. Other clients come from the Middle East and include clients such as the Egyptian military, the Saudi Bin Laden Company, and the Afghan based BTC Bin Laden Telecom, which provided pre-paid telephone calls.
Among Ptech’s top investors and management in 2001 was Yassin Al-Qadi, who was listed as a specially designated global terrorist on October 12, 2001. His investment of $14 million in Ptech in 1998 made him Ptech’s major investor. Al-Qadi was the Director of the Saudi-based Muwafaq Foundation ("Blessed Relief") that fronted for, and funded, Makhtab Al-Khidamat (MK), Al-Qaeda, Hamas, and the Abu-Sayyaf organization, to name just a few. According to a Treasury Department letter to Switzerland’s Attorney General in November 2001, there was "a reasonable basis to believe that Mr. Kadi has a long history of financing and facilitating the activities of terrorists and terrorist-related organizations, often, acting through seemingly-legitimate charitable enterprises and businesses."
Al-Qadi’s businesses extended throughout the world, and included banking, diamonds, chemicals, construction, transportation, and real estate. It would be hard to find a more strategically placed individual to advance the agenda of Al-Qaeda, or any other terrorist organization. Last August, the Swiss government indicted Al-Qadi for financing terrorism.
The identities and connections of some other Ptech major investors and managers should have also raised a red flag: Suliman Biheiri, an Egyptian, is alleged by the government to have funneled $3.7 million from the Saudi funded charity, the SAAR Foundation, to Islamist terrorists through BMI, a now-defunct New Jersey-based Islamic investment firm of which he was the founder and president, and which fronted for and funded Hamas. Biheiri, who was convicted in October 2004, for lying about businesses with Hamas’ Mousa Abu Marzook, was already in prison for immigration fraud. He also had links to the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda’s money-laundering machine, the Al-Taqwa network. One of Al-Taqwa’s companies, which was designated as a terrorist entity, was used not only to fund Al-Qaeda, but also to launder Saddam Hussein’s money.
Yakub Mirza, a Pakistani, was not only a business partner with Yassin Al-Kadi in Ptech, but also the financial mastermind, Trustee, President and CEO of the SAAR Foundation, which according to the government is connected to the Safa Foundation, which the government claimed also provided material support to Islamist terrorist groups. Mirza was also a Trustee on the board of Sanabel, the investment arm of the Saudi International Islamic Relief Organization (IIRO), which shared the same address as the SAAR Foundation: 555 Grove Street in Herndon, Virginia.
He set up and was the Secretary/Treasurer of the US branch of the Muslim World League (MWL), another Saudi charity that also served as the fund- raising arm of the US branch of the IIRO. Over the last four decades, the MWL received more than $1.3 billion directly from King Fahad. Both organizations have been documented to support Islamist around the world. In addition, according to an alert employee, Mirza was a subscriber to Worldwide Flight Guide since 1987. One wonders why Mirza as well as these organizations are still missing from the US government designated terrorist list.
Abdurahman Muhammad Alamoudi was the President of the American Muslim Council (AMC) and the American Muslim Foundation (AMF); both received thousands of dollars from the Success Foundation. The Success Foundation also shared offices with the SAAR Foundation and provided the logistical and financial support for Islamist terror organizations. Alamoudi also served as the Secretary of the Success Foundation, and openly stated his support for HAMAS and Hizbollah. Like Mirza, he was a member of the IIRO. Alamoudi pled guilty in July 2004 on charges related to a Libyan plot to assassinate Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah.
He, too, is still missing from the US Government Designated Terrorist list.Suheil Laher, managed customer services for Ptech, and was closely associated with Care International, which acted as a branch office of the Al-Kifah Refugee Center in Brooklyn, NY from which Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman funded and plotted the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
Laher has also written many articles about Jihad, frequently quoting Abdullah Azzam, Bin Laden’s mentor, whose general philosophy is shared by all Islamist terrorists: "Jihad and the rifle alone! No negotiations; No conferences; and No dialogues." (emphasis added).
In October 2001, former Vice-President of Sales for Ptech approached the FBI Boston office with detailed information regarding possible links between Ptech and the 9/11 attacks. He was followed by Indira Singh, a risk consultant at J. P. Morgan Chase, in May 2002, who approached the Boston FBI office, the NY Joint Terrorism Task Force, the management of J. P. Morgan Chase and FBI headquarters with more documentation regarding possible Ptech penetration of US government agencies and corporations.
The FBI finally raided Ptech on December 6, 2002. However, no arrests were made and the company continues to operate, and according to Ptech’s CEO, Oussama Ziade, in May 2004, "Ptech still has government agencies as customers, including the White House."
Even the concerns, few as they were, with Ptech, after it was raided were misplaced. The few questions that were raised were regarding Ptech’s software, and not the information to which Ptech’s employees, management and investors had access. The possibility that Al-Qaeda or other Islamist terrorists have taken advantage of our free market system to undermine our economy and national security seems quite real when you identify the connections and affiliations of Ptech’s management, investors and employees.
So, how could a small, Saudi-financed company with questionable terrorist connections obtain significant government and business contracts, and who facilitated this? Was Horizons, its Egyptian branch, ever investigated? Why wasn’t Ptech shut down? Why is it still allowed to operate? And even more importantly, are there other Ptechs around?
Recently, Ptech changed both the name of the company and of its software to GoAgile.
Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld, a member of the Committee on the Present Danger, is Director of American Center for Democracy, and author of Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed – and How to Stop It (Bonus Books, 2004,2005).
_______________________________________________________________________Islamic Charities and the IRS
Finally, the former leaders of al Qaeda affiliated Boston "charity" CARE Int., were convicted. Not for funding al Qaeda, which they have, but for cheating on their taxes.
CARE Int. members not only funded al Qaeda, but also had access to U.S. top national secrets through Ptech, Yassin al Qadi's funded IT company in Quincy, Massachusetts. This connection, to the best of my knowledge was first exposed in my article Dollars of Terror , in FrontPageMagazine.co, April 18, 2005
On Saturday, Jan. 12, 2007, “Three former leaders of an Islamic charity were convicted on federal tax and fraud charges in Boston yesterday for using tax exemptions to hide support for religious militants and alleged terrorists overseas. The convictions marked a victory for the Justice Department , which has had limited success in prosecuting charity groups suspected of financial ties to al-Qaeda or other terrorist groups since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. The defunct group, Care International Inc., described itself as a charity for Muslim refugees, widows and orphans. Prosecutors said, however, that the organization distributed a newsletter in favor of jihadist causes and lent other support to Islamic militants since its formation in 1993.......
Emadeddin Muntasser, 43, the group's founder, and Muhammed Mubayyid, 42, a former treasurer, were convicted on all counts. Samir al-Monla, 50, a former Care International president, was convicted on all counts but one. He was acquitted on a false statement charge. Officials said the defendants could face 10 to 19 years in prison.....”
My June 2005 article, The Business of Terror details Care Int. and Ptech's pentration into the central nervous system of America's national security system:
On May 11, 2005, Muhamed Mubayyid was arrested and charged in Boston’s District Court for filing false tax returns on behalf of Care International, for which he acted as treasurer. Mubayyid was also the Customer Services manager of the company known as Ptech, a privately owned technology company based in Quincy, Massachusetts. Ptech, which recently changed its name to GoAgile, developed a software, also called Ptech, that was used primarily to develop enterprise blueprints that held every important functional, operational, and technical detail of a given enterprise.
Mubayyid is only the latest of Ptech’s top investors and managers to run afoul with the law. Mubayyid personifies the interlinks of the complex infrastructure, which were established by al-Qaeda and other Islamist organizations in the US.
But Mubayyid was not arrested for his connection with al-Qaeda. Rather, was charged for making false statements and conspiring to defraud the US by misrepresenting Care’s activities, which involved “the solicitation and expenditure of funds to support and promote the mujahideen and jihad, including the distribution of pro-jihad publications.”
Care International is the now defunct Muslim charity that was originally the Boston branch office of the al-Kifah Refugee Center in Brooklyn, New York, from which Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman funded and plotted the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
Care International was already publicly identified as supporting al-Qaeda back in 2002, yet it remained open, and several of its employees worked and/or were affiliated with Ptech.
Ptech was raided by the FBI on December 6, 2002, following a tip from an employee who suspected that the company was connected to the 9/11 attacks. Indeed, on October 12, 2001, Yassin al-Kadi, Ptech’s top investor at that time, was listed by the US government as a specially designated global terrorist for his support of al-Qaeda. Al-Kadi invested at least $18 million directly in Ptech, $5 million through the Isle of Man, and $9 million indirectly through BMI, a now-defunct New Jersey-based Islamic investment firm with connections to other members on Ptech’s management and investors. Al-Kadi also transferred $2 million USD to Ptech from Switzerland between 1997 and 2000, according to Swiss investigators.
Richard Clarke in his testimony before the Senate on October 22, 2003, said: “Qadi was the head of Muwafaq, a Saudi relief organization that reportedly transferred at least $3 million, on behalf of Khalid bin Mahfouz, to Usama bin Laden and assisted al Qida [sic.] fighters in Bosnia.” Moreover, according to the Treasury Department letter to Switzerland’s Attorney General in November 2001, Muwafaq fronted for, and funded Makhtab al-Khidamat (MK), al-Qaeda, HAMAS, and the Abu-Sayyaf organization, to name just a few. Yet, Muwafaq was not designated as a terrorist organization.
Al-Kadi’s businesses extend throughout the world, and included banking, diamonds, chemicals, construction, transportation, and real estate. It would be hard to find a more strategically placed individual to advance the agenda of al-Qaeda, or any other terrorist organization. Kadi is still at large, and according to recent media reports, expanding his business in Asia.
The identities and connections of some other Ptech investors and managers should have also raised a red flag. Even Ptech removed from its website the names of several board members and/or their affiliations after a WSJ exposé on December 6, 2002.
Take Hussein Ibrahim, who was Ptech’s chief scientist. According to former employees of Ptech and a whistleblower, he was introduced by Yassin al-Kadi to Ptech when the company was founded in 1994. Ibrahim developed the Arabic version of Ptech under the name Horizons. He was also BMI’s founder and President. After an expose about al-Kadi and BMI’s connections to HAMAS in the WSJ, Ptech removed any reference to al-Kadi and BMI from its website.
Ptech Board member Suliman Biheiri, also an Egyptian, is alleged by the US government to have funneled $3.7 million from the Saudi funded charity, the SAAR Foundation, to Islamist terrorists. He funneled the money through Hussein Ibrahim’s BMI.
Biheiri, who was already in prison for immigration fraud, was convicted in October 2004 for lying about businesses with HAMAS leader Mousa Abu Marzook. He also had links to the Muslim Brotherhood, and to a major al-Qaeda money-laundering machine, the al-Taqwa network. One of al-Taqwa’s companies, also designated as a terrorist entity, was used not only to fund al-Qaeda, but also to launder Saddam Hussein’s money.
Then, there was Yakub Mirza, a Pakistani, who was not only al-Kadi’s business partner in Ptech, but according to a government indictment on October 2003, was also the financial mastermind, Trustee, President and CEO of the SAAR Foundation. The indictment listed the SAAR foundation as connected to the SAFA Foundation, another Saudi sponsored foundation, which also provided material support to Islamist terrorist groups.
Mirza was a busy man. He was also a Trustee on the board of Sanabel, the investment arm of the Saudi International Islamic Relief Organization (IIRO), which shared the same address as the SAAR Foundation: 555 Grove Street in Herndon, Virginia. Mirza set up and was the Secretary and Treasurer of the US branch of the Muslim World League (MWL), another Saudi charity that also served as the fund-raising arm of the US branch of the IIRO. Mirza, along with these organizations, is still missing from the US Government Designated Terrorist list.
Abdurahman Muhammad Alamoudi, another Ptech founder, was the President of the American Muslim Council (AMC) and the American Muslim Foundation (AMF); both received thousands of dollars from the Success Foundation, which provided logistical and financial support for Islamist terror organizations. Alamoudi openly and frequently stated his support for HAMAS and Hizbollah. Like Mirza, he too was a member of the IIRO. Alamoudi pled guilty in July 2004 to charges related to a Libyan plot to assassinate Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah. Like Mirza, Alamoudi is also missing from the US Government Designated Terrorist list.
Suheil Laher, who was Ptech’s chief architect, was also closely associated with Care International. Laher has written many articles in support of Jihad, frequently quoting Abdullah Azzam, Bin Laden’s mentor, whose general philosophy is shared by all Islamist terrorists: “Jihad and the rifle alone! No negotiations; No conferences; and No dialogues.” (emphasis added). He was let go after the media reported about his affiliation with Care International. He now runs his own “Islam Site.”
The connections and affiliations of Ptech’s investors and management with known terrorists and/or terror funding organizations are especially worrisome when you consider Ptech’s clients in 2001, which included the Department of Justice; the Department of Energy; Customs; Air Force; FAA; the White House; IBM; Sysco; Aetna; and Motorola, to name just a few.
Examples of information gathered utilizing Ptech’s capabilities include the following:
A complete blueprint of a nuclear waste disposal site would detail the security procedures required to access military bases during transfer of nuclear waste materials. It would also include security rules, revealing where tight security searches vs. random searches exist for conducting detailed identity screening and security checks. These are typically noted in the architecture process, and surely, would be of interest to terrorists.
Another example is product specifications in the blueprint for Smartcards - as implemented in various defense facilities. It would include enough information to provide templates for duplication, and for unauthorized production of fake Smart IDs. Needless to say, these are basic tools in the arsenal of criminals and terrorists alike.
When Ptech was raided in December 2002, no arrests were made and the company continued to operate. Interviewed by a local newsletter, on May 2004, Ptech’s CEO, Oussama Ziade said: “Ptech still has government agencies as customers, including, the White House.” Repeated calls to GoAgile went unanswered, there was no voicemail, and communication by e-mail is possible only for clients.
Even the concerns - few as they were - with Ptech after it was raided were misplaced. On Jan. 22, 2003, Sen. Grassley wrote to FBI Director Robert Muller: “I am concerned…[with] vulnerabilities which might arise from using Ptech software.” However, no questions were raised regarding the information to which Ptech’s employees, management, and investors had access. Mr. Mubayyid’s recent indictment seems to provide the opportunity for reexamination of Ptech’s access to our national security infrastructure.
Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld, Director of American Center for Democracy (www.public-integrity.org
), is the author of Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed – and How to Stop it (Bonus Books, 2005) and a member of the Committee on the Present Danger.
 U.S. Dept. of Justice, Michael J. Sullivan, Press Release, “Former Officers of Care International Inc. Indicted,” May 12, 2005.
 “The I Team Investigates P-Tech,” CBS4, December 9, 2002. http://wbz4.com/iteam/local_story_343143121.html
 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (Crim. No.) v. MUHAMED MUBAYYID, and EMADEDDIN Z. MUNTASSER, May 12, 2005.
 According to the Wall St. Journal Dec. 6, 2002) and Newsday (December 7, 2002),
 On the Ptech Affair, see: Justin Pope, “Software company tries to survive terrorism investigation,” The Detroit News, January 4, 2003. http://www.detnews.com/2003/technology/0301/06/technology-51266.htm
 see: MATTHEW BARAKAT Muslim Banker Convicted of Lying About Business with Hamas Leader, AP Thursday, Mar. 31, 2005).
 see also, http://wbz4.com/iteam/local_story_343145212.html
 (according to Ptech’s website at that time, as well as the WSJ and other media reports)
Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld is author of Funding Evil; How Terrorism is Financed—and How to Stop It, Director of American Center for Democracy and a member of the Committee on the Present Danger. She is a noteworthy authority on international terrorism, political corruption, money laundering, drug trafficking, and organized crime. Most recently, she was a consult for the Department of Defense’s Threat Reduction Strategy.
Posted 13 Jan 2008, Analyst Networkhttp://www.analyst-network.com/article.php?art_id=1592
Last Updated: May 01, 2008
Amit Yoran is a cybersecurity wizard who moves at will among the highest echelons of corporate cyberspying technology and federal intelligence/security agencies.
He started his career at the Department of Defense, where he ran a program that tested the vulnerability of the Pentagon’s computer systems in the 1990s. He left in 1998 to start his own company with his brother. That firm, Riptech Inc.
, created a data-mining program so successful that it was bought out in 2002 by Symantec Corp., a corporate behemoth that is not only one of the largest U.S. defense contractors, but also the provider of the most popular line of anti-viral software, Norton Antivirus. Among its founders is Marvin Bush, the brother of President George W. Bush. In 2003 Yoran became the Director of Cyber Security for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. He quit abruptly in less than a year, without publicly revealing why he did so.
After quitting, he joined the boards of several cybersecurity companies, including Cyota, Inc., a privately held company that developed fraud and hacking-detection software for banks. In December 2005, 11 months after Yoran joined Cyota, RSA Security Inc. bought it for $145 million.
Yoran did not stay in the private sector for long. In early 2006, he was named CEO of In-Q-Tel, the firm created by the CIA reportedly to accelerate security solutions for the agency. Yoran quit after four months to “spend more time with his family.”
As of 2008, he continues to straddle the private and public sectors. In November 2006, Yoran became CEO of NetWitness, which sells software that conducts virtual stake-outs on computer networks. The company’s press material says that it developed its software “in collaboration with the U.S. Intelligence Community.” NetWitness is a subsidiary of ManTech International, which in 2006 was 21st on the Washington Technology list of Top 100 federal contractors, with deals worth $631,379,535.Yoran is also on the board of directors of Guidance Software, which makes a program that conducts digital investigations of computer networks, as well as individual personal computers.
Last Updated: October 13, 2008NetWitness, a subsidiary of defense contractor ManTech International, builds datamining programs that lurk undetected on computer networks, eavesdropping on their users and sorting the data.
The company unveiled in September 2007 its first commercial product, a $40,000 program that captures everything that happens on a computer network and analyzes it, even going so far to reconstruct the activities of a single user. The program is designed to help customers find spying and downloading threats that come not from outside hackers but from users inside the network.NetWitness has developed software for the Defense Department, and now boasts as its CEO former U.S. Cyber Security chief Amit Yoran. Yoran has worked at the highest levels of computer security and data collection, including stints as an executive for anti-virus behemoth Symantec; as CEO of In-Q-Tel, the investment arm of the CIA; and as the Director of National Cyber Security, in the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. His tenure as Cyber Security Chief lasted only 11 months.NetWitness also employs Shawn Carpenter, a cyber security specialist fired by Sandia National Labs after notifying the FBI that hackers based in China had penetrated the servers on the network where U.S. nuclear weapons are designed. (Sandia is owned by defense giant Lockheed Martin.) Carpenter is the principal forensic analyst at NetWitness.
ManTech International is a defense contractor with more than $1 billion in revenue, much of it in U.S. military intelligence contracts. It is at the center of a land swap scandal that got U.S. Rep. Rick Renzi, (R-Arizona) indicted in February 2008. Renzi, whose late father was a ManTech executive, announced in 2007 he would not run for re-election.
* Startup Led by Ex-DHS Cyberchief Rolls Out Forensics Tool, Dark Reading, September 10, 2007: www.darkreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=133432&WT.svl=news2_1
* Cyberspies Target Silent Victims, Forbes, September 11, 2007: www.forbes.com/security/2007/09/11/cyberspies-raytheon-lockheed-tech
* GOP Rep. Renzi Indicted, TPMmuckraker.com, February 22, 2008: tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/breaking_gop_rep_renzi_in dicte.php
____________________________________________________________ManTech International Corporation
Last Updated: October 14, 2008
In the first year following the attacks of September 11th 2001 – a watershed year for companies supplying anything remotely useful in defending the United States from terrorism – ManTech went public, increased its revenues nearly 16 percent and posted revenues of $500 million for the first time in its history. In 2001, it had $203 million in federal contracts; in 2006, it broke $1 billion in revenue and its CEO predicted it would soon reach $5 billion.
It also made an investment that would quickly pay off – backing a Senate candidate whose father was then a senior ManTech executive. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, ManTech's executives and PAC donated $14,700 to the 2002 campaign of Rick Renzi, Arizona Republican and the son of Eugene Renzi, then President of ManTech's Defense Systems division. (Eugene Renzi died in February 2008.)
Renzi won the election, and he proved himself invaluable to ManTech almost immediately. He wrote a special rider for a military training bill that allowed ManTech to wriggle out of a federal agreement to preserve the threatened San Pedro River in Arizona. ManTech has a contract worth $1.1 billion with an Army base on the river; Renzi’s rider preserved ManTech's contract, but not the river. It ran dry for eight days in 2005.
Renzi came under fire in late 2006 for this and other maneuvers. In 2008, he was indicted on charges of money laundering, fraud and extortion. Those charges say that Renzi abused his office to stuff money into the pockets of a friend and campaign donor, but he has also been investigated for favors he did for ManTech.
(Renzi also benefited from the politically-driven firings of at least eight U.S. Attorneys in 2006, many of whom were leading corruption investigations into Republican officials. Arizona’s U.S. Attorney, Paul Charlton, had been investigating Renzi for more than a year when he was fired, one month after an aide to Renzi called him up to ask about the investigation, an action that could be construed as attempting to intimidate the prosecutor, and is illegal.)
Renzi, in the face of these multiple investigations, announced that he would not seek re-election in 2008. But after his indictment, he refused to resign from Congress.
Before 2002, few people outside of the lucrative world of federal defense spending and contracting would have heard of ManTech. Not long ago, it was a relatively small company selling high-tech software systems to the military; by 2008, it was deploying its staff to work along side soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq; gathering and analyzing intelligence for the military; conducting background checks on people working for the National Security Agency; and developing sophisticated datamining software.
In addition to having its very own U.S. senator in Renzi, ManTech recruited many well-connected people to its staff and its board: former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage
is a director; one of its subsidiaries is run by Amit Yoran, the one-time head of U.S. cybersecurity; and more than half of ManTech's 5,000 employees have top-level classified security clearances. It acquires companies that have toeholds in lucrative areas of defense technology, allowing the company to expand its areas expertise: In 2005, it bought Gray Hawk Systems Inc., which was one of the primary contractors for the CounterIntelligence Field Activity agency. (Gray Hawk was investigated for its association with MZM Inc., a defense contractor whose CEO has pleaded guilty to bribery and corruption charges.)
A list of key companies that ManTech has acquired since 2002 is below.
And like all companies vying for government money, ManTech lobbies the politicians who can influence federal defense spending. It tends to favor the people who represent its home district of suburban Virginia. Rep. Jim Moran, D-Virginia, received $15,900 from ManTech's employees and its political action committee in 2006, and $40,500 in 2004, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Moran sits on the House Appropriations Committee.
ManTech also owns NetWitness Corp., which began as a division within the company. NetWitness builds datamining programs that lurk undetected on computer networks, eavesdropping on their users and sorting the data. NetWitness has developed the software for the Defense Department, and now boasts as its CEO Amit Yoran. Yoran has worked at the highest levels of computer security and data collection, including stints as an executive for anti-virus behemoth Symantec; as CEO of In-Q-Tel, the investment arm of the CIA; and as the Director of National Cyber Security, in the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
Acquisitions:Aegis Research Corp.
in 2002 for $70 million. Aegis had contracts to provide computer system security to Defense agencies like the Air Force and the Counterintelligence Field Activity agency. (CIFA, conceived with the help of a man working for MZM, a defense contractor at the heart of the U.S. Rep. Randall “Duke” Cunningham scandal, was plagued by scandal almost since its inception. The Pentagon closed it in 2008.) ManTech acquired Aegis about a year before the war in Iraq would make those contracts even more valuable.CTX Corp.
in 2002 for $35 million. CTX had contracts with several U.S. intelligence agencies, for whom it was developing and running datamining programs.Gray Hawk
in 2005 for $100 million. Gray Hawk designed and ran information technology systems for intelligence agencies. It won several contracts from CIFA shortly after its creation in 2003. Gray Hawk hired away three CIFA executives who had helped award contracts for the agency, won tens of millions in CIFA contracts, and passed many of them along to another defense contractor, MZM Inc. MZM’s founder and director Mitchell Wade later pleaded guilty to paying more than $1 million in bribes to Duke Cunningham. Gray Hawk has been under federal investigation because of its ties to Wade and MZM.Integrated Data Systems
in 2003 for $62.7 million. IDS designed software for sharing classified information on secure networks. Its clients included the National Security Agency and the CIA.MSM Security Services
in 2003 for $5.25 million. MSM performed background checks on prospective employees of sensitive agencies, including the State Department. MSM later turned out to be less profitable than ManTech hoped, so the company sold it four years later to ManTech's founder and CEO, George Pedersen.SRS Technologies in 2007 for $170 million. SRS had more than $750 million in federal contracts at the time of its sale, including some for support services for missile defense. SRS was a prime contractor for the infamous Total Information Awareness program, a project that proposed to gather and analyze everything stored on computer databases, including the personal information in credit card and medical records. Congress, in the midst of public uproar over TIA’s potential for privacy invasion, cut off its funding in 2003. SRS worked on TIA, and it also hired a subcontractor Torch Concepts, Acxiom that requested and received the personal information of millions of people who flew on the airline JetBlue.Sources
I found this interesting when you look a the current economic situation... No shortage of job openings at BAE, Raytheon or Mitre...http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Safari+Mitre+BAE&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=
All Lead Systems Engineer Jobs in Nashua, NH | Indeed.comRaytheon (172); BAE Systems (171); Mitre Corporation (31); Goodrich Corporation (21) ... Principal Systems Engineer -ESM Systems Bae Systems - Nashua, NH ...http://www.indeed.com/q-lead-systems-engineer-l-Nashua,-NH-jobs.html
Sort by: relevance - date
Senior EW Systems Engineer
Bae Systems - Nashua, NH and is the lead electronic warfare system integrator... Description EW Systems Engineer to support the design, integration and testing of an EW System. This...
From BAE Systems - 8 hours ago - save job -
block - email - more...
View all Bae Systems jobs in Nashua, NH
Salary Search: Senior EW Systems Engineer salaries in Nashua, NH
More information about Bae Systems
Related forums: Bae Systems - Nashua, New Hampshire
Principal Systems Engineer
Bae Systems - Nashua, NH +1 location and is the lead electronic warfare system integrator... Description EW Systems Engineer to support the design, integration and testing of an EW System. This...
From BAE Systems - 8 hours ago - save job -
block - email - more...
View all Bae Systems jobs in Nashua, NH
Salary Search: Principal Systems Engineer salaries in Nashua, NH
More information about Bae Systems
Related forums: Principal Systems Engineer - Bae Systems - Nashua, New Hampshire
Principle Engineer Systems Test Design
Bae Systems - Nashua, NH and is the lead electronic warfare system integrator... In Test systems and/or manages and coordinates the systems engineering process for these Test Systems. The...
From BAE Systems - 8 hours ago - save job -
block - email - more...
View all Bae Systems jobs in Nashua, NH
Salary Search: Principle Engineer Systems Test Design salaries in Nashua, NH
More information about Bae Systems
Related forums: Bae Systems - Nashua, New Hampshire
Senior Systems Engineer -Integration and EQT
Bae Systems - Nashua, NH and is the lead electronic warfare system integrator... capabilities. System Engineer, Integration and EQT General Description System Engineer position...
From BAE Systems - 8 hours ago - save job -
block - email - more...
View all Bae Systems jobs in Nashua, NH
Salary Search: Senior Systems Engineer -Integration and EQT salaries in Nashua, NH
More information about Bae Systems
Related forums: Bae Systems - Nashua, New Hampshire
Principal Aircraft Integration Systems Engineer
Bae Systems - Nashua, NH Systems Engineers to integrate our Aircraft Self-protection Systems
into rotary or fixed wing aircrafts. The candidate could work with other systems engineers...
From BAE Systems - 1 day ago - save job -
block - email - more...
View all Bae Systems jobs in Nashua, NH
Salary Search: Principal Aircraft Integration Systems Engineer salaries in Nashua, NH
More information about Bae Systems
Related forums: Bae Systems - Nashua, New Hampshire
BIT Senior Systems Engineer-Survivability and Protection Sys...
Bae Systems - Nashua, NH and is the lead electronic warfare system integrator... capabilities. Lead Built-In-test (BIT) engineer to support program engineering (primarily Systems and...
From BAE Systems - 1 day ago - save job -
block - email - more...
View all Bae Systems jobs in Nashua, NH
Salary Search: BIT Senior Systems Engineer-Survivability and Protection Systems salaries in Nashua, NH
More information about Bae Systems
Related forums: Bae Systems - Nashua, New Hampshire
Lead Research Engineer - Fusion Technology and Systems
Bae Systems - Burlington, MA knowledge-based systems. BAE Systems AIT is a fast... wide variety of sensor system efforts spanning passive and active EO and RF systems. The candidate should...
From BAE Systems - 3 days ago - save job -
block - email - more...
View all Bae Systems jobs in Nashua, NH
Salary Search: Lead Research Engineer - Fusion Technology
and Systems salaries in Burlington, MA
More information about Bae Systems
Related forums: Bae Systems
Lead Information Systems Engineer
The MITRE Corporation - Bedford, MA Job Title Lead Information Systems Engineer Location... Work For, as a Lead Information Systems Engineer to lead the design, architecture, and system integration...
From The MITRE Corporation - 2 days ago - save job -
block - email - more...
View all The MITRE Corporation jobs in Nashua, NH
Salary Search: Lead Information Systems Engineer salaries in Bedford, MA
More information about The MITRE Corporation
Related forums: Mitre
Lead Software Systems Engineer
The MITRE Corporation - Bedford, MA Req ID 11137BR Job Title Lead Software Systems Engineer Location MA: Bedford Profession Information... to reverse-engineer and analyze complex systems
From The MITRE Corporation - 2 days ago - save job -
block - email - more...
FSD = Full Spectrum Dominance for future reference if you weren't already keenly aware of the abbreviation.
IS = Infrastructure
The cliffs notes to this is: "We murdered 3,000 on 9/11 and murdered 1.5 million Iraqis to lay the foundation to recreate this planet in OUR IMAGE. You will live under OUR economy, the destruction of the industrial revolution is nearly complete. We dumbed you down so that you could never figure it all out, you stupid cattle. While you slave to pay off your eternal debts, we implement ways to dominate every single aspect of your life, and kill you off at our leisure. Our god, Lucifer, has promised us a New World Order, and we are preparing it for his arrival where we will reign supreme and pay back your God for the injustice he carried out in the Garden of Eden. There is no escape from our system."
The FBI on Tuesday selected Lockheed Martin for a $1 billion contract to build a database for fingerprints and other biometric information.
Lockheed Martin Corp., which built and maintains the FBI's current 10-fingerprint database, was the expected winner among analysts. Making good on its incumbent status, the nation's largest defense contractor will keep its hands on the Next Generation Identification system contract.
Lockheed Martin's Transportation and Security Solutions
branch won the one-year deal, which include nine one-year options, according to FBI spokesman Rich Kolko.
Bethesda, Md.-based Lockheed beat out teams led by Northrop Grumman Corp. and International Business Machines Corp.
The deal is a major upgrade to the FBI's Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System because it allows the agency to more easily share anti-terrorism information with domestic and international partners and may include other identifiers, including palm prints, iris scans and facial recognition.
It also will include data on known criminals and terrorists, as well as information on foreign visitors to the U.S. whose fingerprints and digital photographs were collected under a separate Department of Homeland Security program that monitors people entering the U.S. via air, land and sea.
"NGI will give us bigger, better, faster capabilities and lead us into the future," said FBI Assistant Director Thomas E. Bush III. "We have added additional capabilities to our current system and are working with the departments of Homeland Security, Defense, and State and the international law enforcement community in making our communities and nation safer."
Lockheed Martin will be the lead database integrator
, but a "biometric bake-off" conducted later this year will be an industry bellwether as Cogent Inc
., L-1 Identity Solutions Inc., Motorola Inc. and other providers line up to showcase their systems, said Stanford Group Co. analyst Jeremy Grant. The facial recognition work could begin early next year, while fingerprint upgrades should start by early 2010, he added.
But privacy advocates say Congress must ensure that the FBI system will not infringe on citizens' rights before the government spends more than a billion dollars on it.
Raytheon is a huge NWO player, it's not suprising considering that the company's name means "Light of the Gods"--"Light" of Lucifer's fallen angels that is (note: you have to read all of this to connect all the dots correctly):The Successful Adoption of Web-Based Collaborative Software REPORT 84http://www.trb.org/publications/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_84v7.pdfhttp://www.intelligile.com/sixsigma.htmSix Sigma Accelerator
Under the pressure of rigorous competition, customers’ higher expectations and change of market trends, businesses suffer from the inability to meet customers’ needs and to follow effective internal and external operation without defects. As a solution, Intelligile provides Six Sigma Accelerator that is a disciplined, data driven approach and methodology for eliminating defects in any process. It improves a company operational performance, practices and systems. MAP has implemented this methodology in form of an accelerator.
The Six Sigma DMAIC process (define, measure, analyze, improve, control) is an improvement system for existing processes falling below specification and looking for incremental improvement.
The Six Sigma DMADV process (define, measure, analyze, design, verify) is an improvement system used to develop new processes or products at Six Sigma quality levels. It can also be employed if a current process requires more than just incremental improvement.
The Benefits of SSA
* Reduce defects
* Improve efficiency of internal processes
* Build customer loyalty
* Resolve problem systematically
* Deliver safety performance
* Link between strategic and operational improvementst
* Allow specifying the priority of projects
* Ensure alignment of research and development with the customers’ expectationWhat a coincidence that the below article is from 9/11/01:http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Citadon+and+MatrixOne+Partner+to+Deliver+Product+Collaboration...-a078116330Citadon and MatrixOne Partner to Deliver Product Collaboration Solutions for the Engineering and Building Industries.
WESTFORD, Mass. & SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sept. 11, 2001
-- Citadon to build next-generation applications on MatrixOne's
eMatrix collaborative framework to extend its leadership in the $3.9
trillion industry --
MatrixOne, Inc. (NASDAQ NASDAQ
in full National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotations
U.S. market for over-the-counter securities. Established in 1971 by the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD), NASDAQ is an automated quotation system that reports on : MONE), a leading provider of product collaboration for the value chain(TM), and Citadon Inc., a leading provider of e-business services targeting the building and engineering industry (www.citadon.com
), today announced that Citadon has selected MatrixOne's eMatrix(TM) product collaboration platform An emerging category of computer software, collaboration platforms are unified electronic platforms that support synchronous and asynchronous communication through a variety of devices and channels. to deliver and launch their next-generation global project management and collaborative application offerings. Through eMatrix, Citadon's customers will gain the ability to seamlessly and globally manage both their most complex development projects as well as their core business processes across all their projects and capital works programs Noun 1. works program - a program to provide jobs on public works paid for by government funds
program, programme - a system of projects or services intended to meet a public need; "he proposed an elaborate program of public works"; "working mothers rely on the day .
"The building and engineering industries require complicated and detailed coordination, collaboration, and communication. However, the ever-changing locations of construction sites make it almost impossible to have the communication support systems that traditional manufacturing has expected and depended upon for day-to-day operations," said Jack Maynard, research director of the Aberdeen Group Aberdeen Group is a provider of business-related research services. It has its headquarters in Boston, Massachusetts and belongs to the Harte-Hanks group. Founded in 1988, Aberdeen's research is used by over 2. . "By embracing Web-centric strategies to improve connectivity, these complex communications problems can be solved, improving productivity and thereby enhance the organization's responsiveness and accountability. This will lead to a better competitive stance and ultimately improved customer satisfaction and profitability in this industry."
Citadon develops collaboration software See collaborative software. that enables enterprises in the engineering and construction industries to leverage the Internet to solve the complex project collaboration problems. The eMatrix infrastructure will provide the foundation for a high performance, scalable, and secure communication platform to manage complex global projects. The joint solution will provide customers with the ability to communicate, capture and leverage knowledge across their extended enterprise and value chain while minimizing risk and increasing operational efficiency.
"Citadon supports its clients in managing complexity in their projects. In so doing, project information needs to be managed from concept through obsolescence ob·so·les·cent
1. Being in the process of passing out of use or usefulness; becoming obsolete.
2. Biology Gradually disappearing; imperfectly or only slightly developed. with very high volumes of data, user interaction, and a solid sense of security even while geographically dispersed" stated Bernard Fried, CEO (1) (Chief Executive Officer) The highest individual in command of an organization. Typically the president of the company, the CEO reports to the Chairman of the Board. of Citadon. "The ability for our customers to network their suppliers and collaborate in real time to manage any given project is critical to lowering overall costs and delivering quality results. Teaming with MatrixOne(R) will allow us to extend our leadership in this area and introduce advanced services and efficiencies to our industry."
"MatrixOne has been a trusted partner in helping companies in the process industry solve their complex needs, and this relationship is a great fit with the application and domain expertise of Citadon," said Mark O'Connell, president and chief executive officer of MatrixOne. "The engineering and building industries engage in large complex projects that embrace multiple suppliers across the world. While this provides an enormous challenge, it at the same time offers a high return of value for customers including the opportunity to save significant time and money and yield more innovative results."
Citadon Inc. provides the $3.9 trillion global engineering and building industry with collaboration software that enables the delivery of integrated services In computer networking, IntServ or integrated services is an architecture that specifies the elements to guarantee quality of service (QoS) on networks. IntServ can for example be used to allow video and sound to reach the receiver without interruption. designed to reduce financial and legal risk, improve profitability and create accountability and predictability across global projects. Citadon's services help customers to conduct and manage core business processes, collaborate and communicate seamlessly, and capture and leverage knowledge across the extended enterprise.
Headquartered in San Francisco San Francisco (săn frănsĭs`kō), city (1990 pop. 723,959), coextensive with San Francisco co., W Calif., on the tip of a peninsula between the Pacific Ocean and San Francisco Bay, which are connected by the strait known as the Golden , Citadon's services are currently being utilized in over 30 countries, by more than 30,000 active subscribers on projects with a construction value in excess of $110 billion. Currently Citadon customers include Barton Malow, the Bechtel Group, Bidcom Ltd., The Chicago Transit Authority
For others use see Chicago Transit Authority (disambiguation)
Chicago Transit Authority, also known as CTA, is the operator of mass transit within the City of Chicago, Illinois. It is the second largest transit system in the United States. , Duke Energy, Fluor Corp., Gale & Wentworth, GE Power Systems, Gensler, IcFox International, and Swinerton Builders. Citadon is privately held.
MatrixOne, Inc. (NASDAQ: MONE) is changing the way the world brings products to market(TM). The company's eMatrix(TM) product collaboration platform and out-of-the-box Value Chain Portfolio(TM) applications enable online collaboration across global value chains and secure access to independent trading communities in private and public Net markets. A trusted partner to innovative companies, MatrixOne(R) helps customers accelerate the right products to market. MatrixOne's more than 575 global customers represent the high-technology, aerospace/defense, automotive, communications, consumer, mechanical, machinery, medical equipment, and process industries, including GE, John Deere, Procter & Gamble, Nokia, Siemens, JDS Uniphase JDS Uniphase Corporation (JDSU) NASDAQ: JDSU is a company that manufactures and designs products for fiber optic communication and test equipment. It is headquartered in Milpitas, California, USA. , and Honda. Headquartered in Westford, Massachusetts Westford is a town in Middlesex County, Massachusetts, United States. The population was 20,754 at the 2000 census. History
Westford was first settled in 1635. Originally a part of neighboring Chelmsford, West Chelmsford soon grew large enough to sustain its own , MatrixOne (www.matrixone.com
) also maintains offices in North America North America, third largest continent (1990 est. pop. 365,000,000), c.9,400,000 sq mi (24,346,000 sq km), the northern of the two continents of the Western Hemisphere. , Europe, and Asia, with additional distributors in South America South America, fourth largest continent (1991 est. pop. 299,150,000), c.6,880,000 sq mi (17,819,000 sq km), the southern of the two continents of the Western Hemisphere. and Australia.
MatrixOne is a registered trademark, and eMatrix, Changing the Way the World Brings Products to Market, Leading Provider of Product Collaboration for the Value Chain, and Value Chain Portfolio are trademarks of MatrixOne, Inc. All other trademarks and service marks are the property of their respective owners.
Forward-looking statements forward-looking statement
A projected financial statement based on management expectations. A forward-looking statement involves risks with regard to the accuracy of assumptions underlying the projections. in this release are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause our actual results to differ materially from those anticipated. Such statements may relate, among other things, to our plans, objectives and expected financial and operating results. The risks and uncertainties that may affect forward-looking statements include, among others: poor product sales, long sales cycles, difficulty developing new products, difficulty in relationships with vendors and partners, higher risk in international operations Internal Operations (I.O., IO or I/O) is a fictional American Intelligence Agency in Wildstorm comics. It was originally called International Operations. I.O. first appeared in WildC.A.T.S. volume 1 #1 (August, 1992) and was created by Brandon Choi and Jim Lee. , difficulty assimilating future acquisitions, difficulty managing rapid growth, and increased competition. For a more about the risks and uncertainties of our business, see our periodic and other S.E.C. filings.
___________________________________________________________http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=108043Citadon introduces business process design application: Citadon BPD
San Francisco, California, September 11 /PRNewswire/ -- - Citadon BPD(TM) gives businesses the flexibility to define and automate business processes that match the way they do business
Citadon Inc., the leading provider of project collaboration software announced today the introduction of Citadon BPD(TM), a business process design tool that gives companies the flexibility to define custom business processes that reflect their proven best practices. Forms and workflows that are created using Citadon BPD(TM) are imported into Citadon CW(TM) as automated business processes aimed at streamlining critical business initiatives to achieve increased efficiency, lower costs, and reduce time and effort. Citadon CW(TM) is Citadon's Web-based enterprise application that provides online document management, team communication, and business process management through secure, hosted collaboration workspaces for owners, operators, and other key participants in the design, construction, and operation of capital projects.
With Citadon BPD(TM), customers now have an easy to use, graphical design tool that puts the power of customization into the hands of business users and project managers, allowing them to quickly create and deploy proprietary processes in Citadon CW.
Citadon BPD gives businesses the ability to:
-- Build custom business processes that reflect the way they do business,
both internally and with their business partners.
-- Easily create custom forms and workflows using a graphical interface
that is designed for business users with no programming experience.
-- Quickly modify the business process templates included with Citadon CW
to reflect their own work practices and company terminology.
-- Design workflows that automatically exchange data between Citadon CW
and their enterprise systems using XML.
-- Document their business process to provide support for their ISO 9000
and Six Sigma initiatives.
"The key driver behind the development of Citadon BPD was to give customers the flexibility to automate any business process in Citadon CW," describes Bobby Jadhav, Citadon's VP of Engineering and Product Management. "Citadon BPD allows users with no IT experience to quickly build custom business processes, including forms and workflows, through an easy to use graphical interface, much as they would draw out their processes on a white board. Since Citadon CW already includes a number of commonly used business process templates, customers can use Citadon BPD to modify those processes to match their own, or they can create entirely new, custom processes from scratch."
Customers, such as Transport for London, are already using the flexibility of Citadon BPD in conjunction with Citadon CW for automating their own business processes. Says Mr. Mike Clarke, Project Director of the Thames Gateway Bridge Project for Transport for London: "We are using Citadon BPD to model our own change control process and after importing our procedures and forms, Citadon CW now automatically forwards a request to review and approve a change based on the cost and schedule impact of the change. The system also sends a notification to the recipient by email that their action is required to sign off on the approval thus additionally saving us cycle time. Since Citadon BPD gives us the ability to capture our existing best work practices, we will automate more of our mission critical business processes in Citadon CW which provides us with the opportunity to use this on other major projects."
Bernard Fried, Citadon's President and CEO, says: "Since introducing our first product in 1997, Citadon has focused on leveraging the Internet to help our customers increase efficiency, reduce risk, and drive standardization across all of their capital works programs. Now, with the introduction of Citadon BPD, customers can bring virtually any process online, providing improved speed, control, and accountability on all of their business processes, including those that extend beyond the enterprise to include their clients, consultants, contractors, and vendors."
The introduction of Citadon BPD capitalizes on Citadon's experience in delivering collaboration based Web services. Citadon's suite of robust solutions, a blue-chip customer list, and a profitable business model attracted recent funding from a group of investors led by Insight Venture Partners.
__________________________________________________________http://www.purchasing.com/article/CA482302.html?industryid=2150&nid=2419Integrating logistics into your supply chain
David Hannon -- Purchasing, 11/18/2004
With a greater focus corporate-wide on systems integration work and less of a focus on traditional manufacturing work, Raytheon knew that it needed a new supply chain strategy for the new millennium.
After all, the Waltham, Mass.-based company, at one time largely a defense contractor, has grown and diversified over the years through acquisitions of divisions of companies like Hughes Aircraft, Texas Instruments, and E-Systems. But that strategic diversification strategy had complicated the overall supply chain systems, as each business unit continued in its own silo without sharing knowledge or data with other similar business units. Indeed, at one point, Raytheon had as many as 69 purchasing systems, a similar number of logistics and receiving systems, and multiple MRP and enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems functioning in various business units.
That's why, under the direction of Tim Wholey, vice president of supply chain, it's been revamping its entire supply chain. One area of focus: logistics, where Raytheon hopes to save $45 million over the next five years, largely through inventory reduction, where the company estimates that it now has an extra $1 billion on its books.
In a recent presentation at the Northeast Supply Chain Conference entitled "Logistics Success through Communities of Practice," Raytheon's George Ellis, director of integrated logistics, detailed the transformation in the company's logistics strategy and how it fits in with overall supply chain plan at Raytheon.
Historically, the work in streamlining logistics goes back to 1997 when a logistics council was created within Raytheon with the primary goal of leveraging freight contracts across the company's disparate business units where possible. While that was a step in the right direction, it was just a small one.
In 2003, the company took a much larger step and created its Raytheon Integrated Logistics Community of Practice (RILCOM) organization to support the corporate wide Integrated Supply Chain initiative and Wholey picked Ellis to lead the new Integrated Logistics organization at Raytheon. (Ellis holds a Harvard MBA and worked for logistics provider Penske for a number of years as general manager of supply chain engineering. He was also CEO of logistics technology start-up, Eggworks Logistics in Wellesley, Mass.)
Under Ellis' leadership, RILCOM identified six drivers of logistics excellence: collaboration, optimization, connectivity, execution, speed and visibility. It also targeted knowledge management as a focus area. "Common technology enables easy knowledge sharing and collaboration," asserts Elllis. To that end, Raytheon not only named a corporate knowledge management champion to drive the process, but it also implemented a knowledge management portal and best practice database to help share and retain the expertise and work completed in RILCOM.
The best example of technology supporting knowledge management in RILCOM is in its freight payment systems. As a result of its acquisitions and growth of various business units, Raytheon was using up to 38 different systems for freight payment, according to Ellis. RILCOM decided to consolidate on one technology to simplify the processes, enforce stronger business rules and gain more visibility into its spend. According to Ellis, RILCOM is in the midst of a "freight payment process blitz" that is expected to save the company $5 million in the reduction of duplicate invoices over three years.
RILCOM selected the PowerTrack system from U.S. Bank as its technology of record for freight payment (see results in sidebar). According to U.S. Bank, the PowerTrack product can store contract, pricing, and catalog information and electronically submit invoices and purchase orders. In his presentation, Ellis said the PowerTrack system pays carriers and then bills Raytheon. Jaime Bohnke, director of supply chain management at Raytheon's Missile Systems division, said in a presentation at the Council of Logistics Management, that under the previous system, it took an average of 52 days for Raytheon to pay its logistics services suppliers and carriers, but with the PowerTrack system, that time has been reduced to 20 days.
Another area where RILCOM pushed to apply technology to improve its existing processes was in material tracking. According to Ellis, Raytheon's disparate material and property tracking systems were labor-intensive and too reliant on paper, which resulted in limited visibility and poor connectivity across the enterprise and contributed to that $1 billion in extra inventory. At the same time, as a major government and defense contractor, Raytheon has to comply with a U.S. Department of Defense mandate to incorporate RFID (radio frequency identification) technology.
This time, instead of selecting a tool off the shelf, RILCOM developed the web-based MTrak material tracking system internally. The system leverages barcode technology and helps internal and external customers track shipments better. The result is fewer lost shipments, improved inventory and materials visibility, and better use of logistics personnel and resources overall across the entire company. The company is now working to integrate the MTrak system into its SAP enterprise resource planning system.
Going forward, says Ellis, RILCOM plans to focus on technology-heavy areas such as transportation optimization, asset management and optimization, import/export technology, and development of both the people and communication within the RILCOM team.
________________________________________________________http://www.mywire.com/a/PRNewswire/Raytheon-APKWS-II-Team-Demonstrates/1109202?&pbl=15Raytheon APKWS II Team Demonstrates Fuze and Warhead Technology
Dec 8, 2005
TUCSON, Ariz., Dec. 8, 2005 -- A Raytheon Company-led team completed a series of sled and arena and fuse sled tests, successfully demonstrating a low-cost lethality solution for its Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System II (APKWS II) design.
Testing was performed from August to November by the Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center, a division of the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology in Socorro, N.M. These tests validated that the Raytheon team's APKWS II design meets the performance and lethality requirements using an "off the shelf," non-development fuse for initiation of the non-development "off the shelf" warhead -- a key cost savings for the U.S. Army customer.
"This test validated the initiation and lethality of the current 2.75-inch rocket fuse and warhead with a laser seeker on the front end," said Raytheon APKWS II capture manager Richard Janik. "This critical technical accomplishment significantly reduces our APKWS II risk and highlights the Raytheon team's readiness to deliver this much needed capability to our nation's warfighters."
APKWS II will be a multi-service, multi-user, multi-platform system designed to engage and destroy stationary, re-locatable and moving targets, ranging from buildings and bunkers to tactical vehicles. The weapon is also optimized to fight in today's urban and complex terrain environment and to destroy small naval targets such as patrol craft.
Raytheon Company ( NYSE = RTN ) , with 2004 sales of $20.2 billion, is an industry leader in defense and government electronics, space, information technology, technical services, and business and special mission aircraft. With headquarters in Waltham, Mass., Raytheon employs 80,000 people worldwide.
10.05.2006 15:13Raytheon Awarded $61 Million Contract to Support NOAA's R&D High Performance Computing System
RESTON, Va., May 10, 2006 /PRNewswire/ -- Raytheon Company (News) has been awarded the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) research and development (R&D) high performance computing system contract to maintain, operate and upgrade high performance computing platforms. The contract award is valued at $61 million; the total ceiling value, inclusive of all options, is $368 million during the next eight years.
Under the terms of the agreement, Raytheon Information Solutions (RIS) will lead a team effort to improve the cost-effectiveness and organizational alignment of the R&D high performance computing resources for NOAA's three primary weather and climate research labs.
"Our team looks forward to leveraging our extensive experience and our innovative capabilities to support NOAA's mission of delivering timely, accurate and often life-saving weather and climate information to our citizens," said Ron Ross, vice president of RIS. "NOAA's selection of Raytheon underscores the strong partnership we've established throughout our 30-year relationship and its confidence in our ability to deliver mission-critical solutions."
The new high performance computing system program will enhance the current high performance computing systems at NOAA's main facilities at the National Centers for Environmental Prediction in Camp Springs, Md.; the Earth Systems Research Laboratory in Boulder, Colo.; and the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory in Princeton, N.J.
Raytheon Intelligence and Information Systems is a leading-edge provider of government information and intelligence technology solutions, providing the right knowledge at the right time enabling our customers to make timely and accurate decisions to achieve their mission goals.
Raytheon Company, with 2005 sales of $21.9 billion, is an industry leader in defense and government electronics, space, information technology, technical services, and business and special mission aircraft. With headquarters in Waltham, Mass., Raytheon employs 80,000 people worldwide.
________________________________________________________http://cimdata.com/newsletter/2005/44/02/44.02.15.htmNanoSpheRx Embraces Citadon CW as a Secure Collaboration Platform for Effective Biopharma R&D Technology Transfer
NanoSpheRx, Inc., the leader in protein/peptide stabilization solutions announced at the Citadon Customer Forum that it has signed a licensing agreement with Citadon, a provider of integrated Web-based collaboration, document management and business process management solutions. Under the terms of the agreement, NanoSpheRx will use the Citadon Collaboration Workspace (CW) platform to manage the NanoSpheRx virtual enterprise with a collaboration solution designed to mitigate the technology transfer risk and reduce time to market for pharmaceutical companies that leverage biotech companies as outsourced R&D partners.
NanoSpheRx, an emerging biopharma company based in the Bay Area, plans to integrate the Citadon CW solution into its management practices. Specifically, NanoSpheRx expects the Citadon CW's security features to pass the scrutiny of cautious biopharma companies forced to strike a balance between their need for collaboration with outside biotech partners to facilitate the technology transfer and the commercialization process on the one hand and their need to maintain a competitive confidential advantage in the marketplace on the other hand.
Biotech companies are increasingly serving as outsourced R&D partners for large pharmaceutical companies, which has increased the need for these companies to share confidential data. Biopharma customer collaborations via the Citadon solution will mitigate the technology transfer risk and reduce the time-to-market by licensing with NanoSpheRx. "NanoSpheRx's business model calls for it to provide ongoing technical support services to its licensees. The Citadon CW solution will provide NanoSpheRx with the ability to manage and direct its technical support program. This in turn will lead to the successful integration of NanoSpheRx's protein stability solution into licensees' commercial manufacturing practices", said Bill Southard, CEO of NanoSpheRx, Inc.
"Citadon was the clear choice", according to Dr. Rod Heisterberg, the Managing Partner of Rod Heisterberg Associates, who serves as project manager for NanoSpheRx. "When we were engaged by the Senior Management Team, we analyzed the NanoSpheRx virtual enterprise management requirements. We evaluated several alternative products in terms of features, advantages, and benefits. The Citadon CW platform provided the most scalable and extensible collaboration environment to enable the success of the far flung virtual team including customers and suppliers."
"In the biopharma industry, hundreds of millions of dollars are at stake to deliver new products quickly," says Howard Koenig, President and CEO of Citadon. "The NanoSpheRx virtual enterprise solution, powered by Citadon CW, will enable pharmaceutical companies to collaborate securely with outside R&D partners and accelerate the commercialization of new technologies."
NanoSpheRx, headquartered in Larkspur, California, manufactures particle engineering equipment that stabilizes protein therapeutics and licenses the equipment and technology to biopharma companies. The proprietary process known as Imprex® SFL was discovered and patented by researchers at the University of Texas at Austin under a grant from Dow Chemical. NanoSpheRx later acquired the exclusive rights to all water soluble drugs such as proteins, peptides, RNA, DNA, monoclonal antibodies, and vaccines. NanoSpheRx's Imprex® SFL technology prevents protein aggregation during freezing and drying, preventing immunogenic response, a principal concern for the FDA. Over 14 papers have been published demonstrating the consistent ability of the Imprex SFL process to stabilize protein therapeutics during the freezing and drying process without the need for additional excipients and stabilizers. By reducing the need for these additives, formulation teams can focus their efforts on formulating needle-free protein delivery systems and on achieving room temperature protein stability, thereby increasing patient access and compliance. For more information, please visit: http://www.nanospherx.com
They've been predicting the end of address space now for quite some time, presumably to prepare us for a time when they WILL just push us over to IP6. It's all about controlling information and squeezing you for your last dime for the pleasure. How convenient that they wait until we can barely pay for food and rent before these little "problems" come to the forefront.http://cimdata.com/newsletter/2005/40/02/40.02.10.htmEC Harris Standardizes on Citadon CW for Global Construction and Civic Projects
Small, localised networks, meshnets, or something along that line are needed NOW. Remember, large corporations, and therefore governments, own the backbones worldwide, the underlying infrastructure to the internet. Level 3, Cogent, AT&T, Sprint, etc. We aren't going to be able to stop anything they choose to do with their business model, no more than we can stop changes in the food prices and availability of that worldwide. All the smaller ISPs can have all the good intentions in the world as far as remaining free and unrestricted, but how are packets routed from their systems to yours? Over a backbone connection, most likely....
All of us are dependent on food though, just as we rely on communications, UNRESTRICTED communications, to spread ideas through society nowadays. The answer to both problems is the same: Get as independent as possible before problems arise, so at least on a localized level, you are able to take care of yourselves. Enjoy what we've got left, because we all know what's coming.
Small, independent networks are an awesome way to keep in touch. We'd better start designing them now.What about relay stations, using directional antennas to communicate between routers? Or what about using the same kind of a relay system using 2 way radios?
Citadon®, a provider of integrated web-based collaboration, document management and business process management solutions, has signed a new contract for Citadon Collaboration Workspace (CW) with EC Harris, a leading global consultancy in the real estate, infrastructure, industrial and civic sectors with headquarters in London. EC Harris will use Citadon CW to drive collaboration on new construction projects throughout Europe, the Middle East, and Asia.
Under the terms of this global agreement, EC Harris is licensed to use Citadon CW for up to 50 projects. These licenses will be used to bring together diverse stakeholders worldwide in construction and property management projects, including construction contractors, equipment and materials suppliers, architects, and others. It enables EC Harris to take on large and complex construction and capital works projects.
EC Harris directs a number of long-term, large-scale projects, such as urban planning and regeneration projects that span large areas of city real estate and have long term programs. These large-scale projects have extensive document management requirements, and require data exchanges from one contractor or supplier to another throughout the lifespan of the project. Standardizing on Citadon CW allows EC Harris to centralize and scale the data repositories, making data available instantly and securely to new project managers across a vast number of stakeholders. Citadon CW has already proven its value by improving data flow, reducing cost and time to completion, and mitigating risk by assuring that all the partners have the latest plans and data at their fingertips.
Geoffrey Hawkings, head of IT Consulting for EC Harris, explains that while EC Harris has its own development team and extranet strategy, the company uses Citadon CW for collaboration in conjunction with other data processing tools offered through a common Web portal. While EC Harris' internal resources are primarily functional tools to assist with project delivery, such as cost and time management, they look to Citadon to support collaboration and document management between the project teams.
"Whenever possible we standardize on Citadon CW because it gives us a robust platform for collaboration that is easy to use, easy to scale, and easy to customize when necessary," said Hawkings. "It's also available to our collaboration partners around the globe any time, which speeds approval of critical plans and documents. And because we have a strong relationship with the Citadon technical support team, we know that Citadon CW can be readily adapted to any project or requirement. It's the perfect extension to our own web based service delivery tool."
"With this agreement, EC Harris has validated the power and value of our Web collaboration technology for large-scale construction projects," said Mike Brooksbank, Vice President & Managing Director of EMEA, for Citadon. "More of our European customers are coming to Citadon because Collaboration Workspace provides the most robust solution available for e-collaboration-it is secure, fast and easy to deploy, and completely customizable."
EC Harris is a leading international consultancy working in the real estate, civic, infrastructure and industrial sectors. This consultancy can advise on the initial investment through each stage of construction to occupation and day-to-day operations. EC Harris has 45 wholly owned offices worldwide employing over 2,500 people and an annual group turnover of £140 million. For more information, please visit: http://www.echarris.com
Citadon is the provider of on-demand Collaboration and Business Process Management solutions for distributed and project-oriented organizations. Citadon provides web-based solutions that enable customers and their constituents to share and manage a wide variety of document types, automate complex business processes, collaborate, and communicate without barriers while providing a secure mechanism for capturing and leveraging knowledge.
More than 60,000 subscribers in over 60 countries rely on Citadon to deliver business-critical automation and management. Citadon customers include Shell Oil Products, Transport for London, Chicago Transit Authority, GM, Alcoa, ICA Fluor, Ameren, Parsons Iraq Joint Venture and Novo Nordisk Engineering. For more information, please visit: http://www.citadon.com
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htmurph/articles/20080309.aspxWeaponizing PlayStation 3
March 9, 2008: The U.S. Air Force is buying 300 PlayStation 3 game consoles. Not to play games, but because it's the cheapest way to get the powerful processors that create the photorealistic graphics for PlayStation games. Air force researchers want to use these processors (similar to the ones found in high end video cards) to build faster computers for military use. The CPU manufacturer was not willing to sell the PlayStation processor separately, at least for a reasonable price. So it was easier to just buy PlayStation 3s.
This use of video game electronics, for other purposes, is nothing new. Military researchers began doing this sort of thing in the late 1990s with graphic processors. This led to the introduction last year of modified graphic cards, which produce supercomputer type results, but at a very low cost. These were basically Nvidia 8800 graphic cards tweaked to just crunch numbers (one card equals half a teraflop of computing power). Each of these PCI cards costs about $1,500. For under $20,000 you have yourself a four teraflop supercomputer, and it looks like just another PC. By building this kind of computing power into weapons systems (like sonars and radars), you can improve their performance (speed and accuracy) enormously. This kind of computing power also makes UAVs and other robotic systems much smarter, even when they are under the control of a human operator.
Predefined commands for computers tend to overlook unforeseen circumstances that would render such commands ineffective. Cognitive computing solves this problem by programming military systems to operate autonomously using learning and reasoning to function in a sustainable manner.
Future military systems must operate and interact at the semantic level if they are to perform increasingly complex and integrated functions in the network-centric battlespace. Ontology-driven interpretations and cognitive processing are critical enablers of semantic operation and integration.
Predefined computation is insufficient for fully autonomous systems, where unforeseeable and potentially catastrophic events may occur. Complex, cognitive processing for real-time, autonomous systems requires run-time, adaptive discovery, composition, and execution of appropriate behaviors in a computably sustainable manner.
We are developing prototype applications for ontology-driven interpretations and cognitive processing. Our key focus areas include:
* Polymorphous cognitive agent architecture to:
o Reduce complexity using a cognitive layer to dynamically and adaptively map applications to cognitive components.
o Improve scalability through a reconfigurable agent virtual machine layer that can adaptively and efficiently reconfigure massively parallel processors.
o Enable efficient processing of heretofore prohibitively complex cognitive computation.
* Ontology translation protocol (Ontrapo) provides:
o Automated processes for aligning meta-data descriptions of heterogeneous information resources.
o Alignment algorithms to dynamically and automatically discover semantic correspondences between the elements of ontologies and schemas.
o Leadership in the research community by organizing ontology conferences and workshops.
* Analogical experience sharing ontological protocol (AESOP) for:
o Techniques for transferring expertise between agents to accelerate learning in new environments.
o Distributed multi-agent configuration optimmziation in multiple domains.
Applications and Transition Opportunities
Cognitive-computing technology will lead to a new generation of computing hardware and software that will enable revolutionary advances in cognitive-information processing for real-time defense and intelligence applications. This area will be a significant technology for us in the next three to seven years. Potential technology transfer-targets include:
* Unmanned Combat Armed Rotorcraft
* Joint Unmanned Combat Air Systems
* Intelligence Analysis.
_____________________________________________________________http://www.atl.lmco.com/lab/dp.phpDistributed Systems Laboratory
The Distributed Systems Laboratory (DSL
) creates innovative, distributed, secure and trusted, highly flexible infrastructures for next- generation command, control, communication, computer , and intelligence systems, including assured real-time systems and Quality of Service. We are applying domain-specific information, transforming technology into scalable and evolving frameworks, and enhancing the performance and capability requirements of decision-driven systems. Domain knowledge allows us to understand user requirements so that we can develop and apply the best technology solution to meet their needs. We establish computing architectures that are pliable and evolve with our customer's changing objectives, and we improve technology to meet the stringent operational requirements of decision-driven systems.
We are creating solutions for next-generation systems for the Department of Homeland Security and for unmanned systems; intelligent systems; and command, control, communication, computers, and intelligence systems. Our software innovation includes neuromorphic computation/learning, polymorphic computation, middleware, ontology translation, reasoning/learning, and data mining/exploitation.
Our laboratory focuses on four business areas:
* Cognitive Computing
* Dynamic, Adaptive Reconfigurable Systems
* Information Exploitation
* Network Mission Assurance
We leverage our university and industry partnerships to cultivate the basis for our cognitive-computing technologies. We are in the forefront of research, development, and evaluation of technologies that automate ontology translation and generation for the semantic integration of heterogeneous information systems and advanced, cognitive-processing architectures, algorithms, and virtual machines.
With the influx of new systems and the rapid cycle of obsolescence, sharing and interoperability between new and legacy systems and between systems of different data formats are important aspects of next-generation warfare. By bridging multiple ontologies, we are able to integrate databases and knowledge bases from contemporary and legacy information sources. Our software automatically determines associations between heterogeneous systems, which will help the military collect and translate information faster and more easily from diverse information systems.
Our advanced, cognitive-processing technologies combine the performance of specialized architectures and the portability of general-purpose architectures to enable linear scalability and efficient processing of computations. We are building demonstrations and technology-transition capabilities so that autonomous, unmanned aerial vehicles can plan missions and analyze intelligence.
Dynamic, Adaptive Reconfigurable Systems
We develop infrastructures for large-scale, mission-critical systems to support guaranteed real-time and robust operations. We create computer systems that adjust to support changing missions, sensor configurations, hardware failures, and operation constraints during missions and over the life of platforms. These systems guarantee real-time, reliable, and secure operations, while performing complex functions under dynamic mission and environmental conditions.
With reams of intelligence information pouring into our nation's intelligence agencies and stored in databases worldwide, analyzing and processing terabytes of data each day is extremely time consuming. The result is a lack of time-critical intelligence analysis available to decision-markers. Further, not all of this data is outwardly valuable or understandable, so translating each piece into meaningful information is time consuming and unnecessary. Other difficulties include information links that may be hard to discern and the value hidden within those links hard to uncover. The purpose of our intelligence-exploitation software is to find patterns or links that will help intelligence analysts.
Social-network-analysis technologies uncover evidence in massive amounts of data by "finding the needle in a stack of needles," and they ensure that data processing is scalable and efficient. By paring information to what is relevant, it makes complex computing tractable. After determining relevance, it evaluates the truth of that information. These capabilities allow intelligence agencies to significantly reduce the time it takes to process information.
Network Mission Assurance
As threats to computer networks and transmission of information increase, we are focusing our efforts on protecting critical infrastructures. Being able to send and receive accurate, un-tampered information across the battlespace has always been an integral part of warfare. Yet, even in these modern times, opposing forces can easily intercept messages. we are developing technologies to protect information with respect to mission-critical applications. We are working to enable future systems for dynamic coalitions and network-centric warfare by developing our holistic vision of information assurance. Our vision includes asset/trust identification, infrastructure model and control, threat prediction and analysis, and response coordination.
______________________________________________________________http://www.keystonesandrivets.com/kar/2007/09/the-models-and-.htmlUnderstanding Enterprise Architecture complexity
Nick Malik of Microsoft
posted recently that
“For years, we've been living with Zachman and now TOGAF as commercially available EA frameworks, but honestly, they don't address the problems faced by large organizations with respect to complexity.”
This got me thinking about some of the pros, cons and limitations of the traditional frameworks used in Enterprise Architecture (EA).
This isn’t a comprehensive review but I’m going to briefly discuss three frameworks and their limitations in this blog, before I talk a little about OBASHI™ - my company’s own framework for capturing Business and IT related information. Each framework details how information can be categorized, organized and presented to form the basis for governance and change. The three traditional frameworks have some key differences which I’ll highlight below.
Zachman provides the ability to define an enterprise in a highly structured way, by using a 6x6 two dimensional matrix to classify components of the enterprise:
Horizontal: The horizontal cells of the framework are based around common questions: What, relating to data; How, relating to function; Where, being the Network or location; Who, identifies people or identities; When, pertaining to times; and Why covering motivation.
Vertical: The vertical cells relate to the stakeholder groups: Planner, details the scope (Contextual); Owner, defines the Business Model (Conceptual); Designer, documents the System Model (Logical); Builder, the Technology Model (Physical); Implementer/Subcontractor, shows detailed representations (out-of-context); and Worker, detailing functioning enterprise instances.
When filling in the framework each cell must be aligned with the cells immediately above and below it, and all horizontal cells must also be integrated. This gives the immediate indication and assessment of the alignment between the IT portfolio that is currently being analyzed and the business.
Several software solutions are available to assist with the storing and manipulation of the information gathered by consultants. The output from such solutions is generally formed around the Zachman model itself.
Zachman, unfortunately, is reliant on a high degree of subjective data which is very granular in it analysis, and that is never a great combination. Trying to obtain a consistent model from multiple architects is a problem commonly summed up as: one architect’s “How?” is another architect’s “Why?”The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF)
TOGAF is “a detailed method and a set of supporting tools for developing an Enterprise Architecture”, developed by members of The Open Group Architecture Forum. TOGAF centers around four types of architecture which it sees as subsets of an overall enterprise architecture:
Business Architecture: defining the business strategy, governance, organization and key business processes.
Data Architecture: describing the structure of an organisation’s logical and physical data management resources and data assets.
Applications Architecture: describing a blueprint for the applications systems deployed, their interactions and their relationships to the core business processes described in the Business Architecture.
Technology Architecture: a description of the logical software and hardware capabilities which are required to support the Business, Data and Application architectures. For example, Networks, IT infrastructure, middleware, standards, etc.
The Open Group is a non-profit organization, but is backed by some major companies within the IT world. IBM, EDS and HP are all members of TOG and seek to promote tools and services based around TOGAF, thus raising its profile within the EA arena.
What is unclear, however, is how TOGAF fits with other frameworks endorsed by these companies. Much of the work currently being advocated by these companies, such as SOA, is inherently “bottom-up” and how the “top-down” nature of TOGAF fits with this model is ambiguous. (Personally, I believe SOA should be pursued through a top-down approach – but that’s a subject for another blog).
TOGAF requires tailoring to suit a particular enterprise and therefore requires strong knowledge of the methodology and the business model. Finding a team with such qualities can be difficult. Obtaining sanction to bring such a team onto the project requires much political will by a key influencer at a senior level within the organization.
Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF)
DoDAF is a framework used by the US Department of Defense as a standard way to organize EA or SA (Systems Architecture) into consistent and complementary views. The US DoD insists that this framework is used on all major weapons or technology system procurements.
Central to the classification of artifacts (objects) within DoDAF is the concept of interoperability which is organised into a series of levels.
There are four basic views which can be applied to the artefacts:
All View (AV): provides descriptions of the entire architecture, and defines the scope, purpose, intended users, environment etc.
Operational View (OV): this view is unique to DoDAF systems and describes everything necessary to achieve a DoD mission such as tasks, activities, I/O, rules, command–control-coordination relationships.
Systems View (SV): provides system components, networks, logical data models, sequence activity timelines etc.
Technical Standards View (TV): allows for extraction of current standards and future standards.
DoDAF has been developed to deliver an incredibly rich environment of documentation. In order to evaluate tendors submitted during the procurement process every known item about an artifact must be cataloged and quantified in terms of speed, performance, interface requirements and applicability to a given task. Due to the nature of the types of systems to be specified for the DoD, DoDAF is an extremely complicated and rigorous framework to adopt.
There are a number of tools available which allow you to gather and report the wealth of data required to fulfill the DoDAF specification.
Conforming to DoDAF can be extremely man-hour intensive and therefore costs can prove a barrier to adoption into the business. Where DoDAF is a necessity for business development, such as in the defense industry, costs must be factored into the specific project which requires adoption of the framework.
I have discussed these frameworks because they highlight how Enterprise Architecture is split into three camps:
a) Static Models: Zachman is a structural framework which is static and can be used to classify artifacts.
b) Dynamic Models: TOGAF is a process model which is dynamic and requires to be configured to each implementation.
c) Hybrid models: DoDAF and derived frameworks are extended to cover artifacts of special interest to a particular vertical market.
Adoption of any of these three frameworks requires buy-in from the business in order to succeed. Enterprise Architecture is an ongoing process, not just a one-off exercise and as such there has to be a healthy commitment shown by the business. And this is where there can be a problem with these and other frameworks. There requires such an initial investment of not only money, but corporate will to succeed, that often other corporate prizes are within easier reach. Enterprise Architecture is just too much of an overhead.
What is needed is a lighter weight framework which is easy to apply, which can be focused as necessary at particular target areas of the business, and which provides a rapid payback to the organization ... the so called “low hanging fruits”, ripe and ready to be picked.OBASHI™
My company’s framework OBASHI™, combines essentials from all three of the frameworks discussed above. It provides a static modeling environment based around six layers into which artifacts (or elements as they are known within OBASHI™) can be placed.
In order to take full advantage of the simplicity of the OBASHI™ approach my company had to design a new modeling technology. This Stroma® software automates the six types of relationships that exist within OBASHI™:
1) Connection: elements can be explicitly connected to show a direct and bi-directional coupling.
2) Dependency: elements can be explicitly connected uni-directionally to show how one element is dependent on another.
3) Layer: An implicit relationship which exists between all elements within a particular layer (for example, Ownership, Systems, Business Processes).
4) Spatial: an implicit relationship which is formed between elements which are placed above or below each other, such as Business Processes placed under a particular Owner.
5) Sequential: an explicit relationship denoted by a list of elements in which adjoining elements in the list have a connection relationship, i.e. a string of connected elements.
6) Zone: elements within a prescribed geographic area are implicitly related to each other.
The entire model can be formed from one or more (usually many) diagrams created using the OBASHI™ methodology. We term them Business and IT diagrams (B&ITs).
The horizontal and vertical position of elements within a B&IT diagram shows alignment, much in the same manner as Zachman, but with a more flexible relationship modeling capability. Elements can exist on any number of B&ITs, and thus form complex relationships with many other elements while still being easy to understand on each individual diagram.
Process modeling, work flow and data flow can be superimposed onto and across the OBASHI™ layers using sequential relationships to show how business processes utilize and are underpinned by IT.
As each element in OBASHI™ is based on an object, hybrid items can be created to reflect the needs of any particular vertical market. Each element can reference external documentation and core information about the physical or logical item it represents.
The models and methodologies used by Enterprise Architects tend to reflect the scale, complexity, breadth and depth of the Enterprise being modeled. For this reason there are often different views which can project the model in a meaningful way to different stakeholders. OBASHI™ only requires two such views.
Firstly, the B&IT View, where the Business and IT diagram input mechanism also serves as the graphical output. Secondly, the Dataflow Analysis View, which highlights the interaction between all of the artifacts used to perform a task (or sub task).
OBASHI™ facilitates diagrams which are clear and simple to understand by all levels of an organization, not just the trained architects which created them.
Using OBASHI™ and Stroma® it is easy to see and communicate complexity and how IT supports any part of the business. This allows business and IT to talk the same language – a prerequisite to bridging the understanding gap between business and IT.
CrossTalk May 2004
ArticleAdvanced Software Technologies for Protecting America
Gregory S. Shelton, Raytheon CompanyRandy Case
, Raytheon Company
Louis P. DiPalma, Raytheon Company
Dan Nash, Raytheon Company
Advanced software technologies are required for the success of homeland security, missile defense, intelligence/surveillance/reconnaissance, and precision engagement. State-of-the-art software technologies for system architecture development such as model-driven computing, reference architectures, and supporting technology enablers are needed for these critical systems.The events of 9-11 in America and the ongoing actions throughout the world have keenly focused our thoughts on issues of protection and homeland security.
Portions of the solutions to these problems will be in better human intelligence, greater diligence, and resources applied to traditional security. However, technology driven solutions are needed to better increase the use of in-place resources and meet newer threats.
Four system areas are vital to protecting America: homeland security, missile defense, intelligence/surveillance/reconnaissance (ISR), and precision engagement. These all require advanced software technologies that will enable the development of integrated mission systems. These technologies go beyond existing software technologies traditionally focused on stovepipe software component or platform solutions. Technologies supporting system architecture development are important for mission success.
The threat of terrorist attacks in the United States brings into vivid focus the need to harness technology to detect threats and protect against and respond to them. Table 1 presents a list of some recent initiatives directly related to homeland security; the applicable enabling advanced software technologies are also listed. In some stand-alone activities such as bomb detection or airline missile protection, no new software technologies are needed. More work in domain-specific algorithms may be required, but fundamental software techniques are adequate for these programs to succeed.
Table 1: Software Technologies Needed for Homeland Security
Common to many homeland security programs is the need for searching, mining, and analyzing large databases (for example, visa tracking, biometric pattern matching, and analysis of foreign language materials). The fundamentals of these types of database technologies exist and upgrades in technologies are ongoing, particularly in enhancements to speed and accuracy.
New needs to integrate communication systems from agencies that formerly did not use common equipment (police, fire, etc.) and the need to fuse information such as weather data and models of chemical/ biological agents requires the integration of existing system architectures. Tools and techniques to develop these software-intensive system architectures such as using ontology for information definition/retrieval and using reference architectures are needed for the successful development of these systems.
Recent developments in world events and national policy have renewed the dialogue on missile defense. The mission of missile defense is to defend successfully against missiles of all ranges (short, intermediate, and long) in all phases of flight (boost, midcourse, and terminal). All components must be fully networked to assure coordinated operations with very short timelines. An operational missile defense system must have three fundamental technical capabilities and associated software technologies: sensors, interceptors, and battle management, command, and control (BMC2), as shown in Table 2.
Table 2: Software Technologies for Missile Defense
The sensor components (radar, infrared, and electro-optical) have been developed and will continue to be matured. We are seeing model-based software techniques used to support the definition of architectures and generation of executable code for some of these applications. The interceptor components of these systems require software data fusion approaches and system architectures to better enable the data fusion. The most software-intensive portion of missile defense is the BMC2 component. The need for handling large volumes of information accurately and within very short timelines places demands on the development of effective system architectures. This area requires a host of advanced software techniques to develop effective system architectures, as used in software techniques to aid human decision making (intelligent agents, cognitive computing techniques, etc.).
The ISR programs cover the full spectrum of information management, providing the ability to task, collect, process, exploit, and disseminate national and tactical target data (see Table 3). These abilities are crucial for warfighters to achieve information dominance throughout the entire battlespace. The ISR activities are typically composed of tasking, collection, and activities related to processing/exploitation/ dissemination.
Table 3: ISR Systems Software Technologies
A key attribute of ISR is the system integration of multiple sensors, platforms, and networks. This system of systems is characterized by the need for well-defined system architectures to support the needed interoperability and integration. New software technologies common to all tasks in ISR include ontology for information management, reference architectures, and model-driven computing architectures. Advances in data mining and intelligent agents will expedite handling of large information volumes in real time. Interoperability and information dissemination to various users will require new techniques to handle multi-level security issues.Precision Engagement
Precision engagement systems enhance America's defense by providing warfighters with highly accurate, adverse weather, rapid sensor-to-shooter capabilities required on today's battlefields (see Table 4). Precision engagement works in conjunction with ISR to provide a wide range of capabilities.
The information from ISR that is needed to provide targeting for precision munitions requires using software techniques that support the development of system architectures (ontology, reference architectures, and model-driven architecture development). In particular, shorter sensor-to-shooter timelines require a system architecture construction optimized for time sensitivity.Software Technologies for System Architecture Development - A Common Theme
Systems being deployed and developed for protecting America require advanced software technologies. In some cases, where the particular system architecture is standalone or composed of mostly point-to-point connections and limited broadcasting, the software approaches of today are sufficient. There will still be needed development of more capable algorithms and processors to support those algorithms, but the underlying software tools, paradigms, and enablers do not require further extensive research and development to be successful.
Table 4: Precision Engagement Software Technologies
In many of the other above cases, we find as a common theme the need for existing software capabilities to be extended so that large-scale systems/platforms can work together to achieve the required missions. We believe that success in the new system-of-systems environment is enhanced by using software that will be more intelligent and developed as a direct offspring of modeling and simulation activities within the context of executable enterprise reference architectures. These technologies are being developed today at Raytheon, other defense contractors, and university/research organizations.
Table 5: Mature and New Software Technologies
The left column of Table 5 shows mature deployed software technologies used in defense applications today. The right column summarizes the software advances needed for the system types previously described. While these technologies are in various states of maturity (including some such as data mining, which are fairly robust), they have not been widely deployed in key systems. Technologies for the development of system architectures are common to many of the systems needed for protecting America.
Looking at the key areas for defending and protecting America, we find that support for development of large, integrated mission systems is needed. The need for well-defined context-sensitive architectures is paramount for achieving these systems of systems such as Common Operating Picture (COP), DDX Destroyer, Future Combat System, or Joint Strike Fighter
. The semantics
[INSERT: Ptech’s technology is based on a unique implementation of neural net and semantic technologies.
] of these large amounts of information are captured using ontological tools. The reference architectures are defined within the contexts of architecture frameworks. Finally, the architectures themselves are actually executable models supported by model-based, architecture-driven software development. Other enabling technologies such as cognitive computing and intelligent agents are all focused toward the software system development.
Figure 1 illustrates the relationships of several key software technologies that will help realize the system architectures needed in the future. Figure 1: Key Software Architecture Technologies Interact to Support Large Mission SystemsInformation Organization/ Retrieval Using Ontology
The initial step in developing large-scale system architectures is managing largescale information semantics. Military knowledge workers are immersed in data smog. We have far more capability to create information than to find and retrieve relevant information. The result is huge amounts of amorphous, unstructured data that overwhelm us when we need pertinent, actionable data for informed decisions.
Technologies to help manage, search, and retrieve data include metadata
for data descriptions, taxonomies for data categories, and ontology for data relationships (see Figure 2). Applications have been driven by commercial needs to identify information on the semantic Web and to provide Web services that deliver the right information to consumers. The value of such technologies to military applications is recognized by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), who sponsored development and deployment of a machine-processable ontology description language called the DARPA Agent Markup Language (DAML)1.Figure 2: Ontology-Based Information Retrieval
Military information users must make life-critical decisions based on large amounts of time-sensitive, rapidly changing inputs from multiple sensors and sources. Having a single, consistently applied meaning for concepts, categories, and relationships reduces confusion, misinterpretation, and mistakes. Cognitive overload is reduced by supplying users with information that is relevant to their location, situation, and responsibilities.
Ontology can be used to support both improvements. An example of where this applies is the Common Operating Picture (COP), which is a distributed database. Currently it is packed with disparate and incompatible data. In the future, human operators and software agents marking up information from sensors or sources in accordance with military standardization will generate it.
The Common Relevant Operating Picture is obtained by consumers (humans or software agents) subscribing to relevant information specified in accordance with the same ontology used in the creation of the COP.Context-Sensitive Reference Architectures
Reference architectures (see Figure 3) bridge the gap between processes addressing the development of contingency operations for future systems and the implementation of domain-specific architectures that build on legacy systems while incorporating new technologies and capabilities. Modeling and simulation is a key tool to support evaluating the effectiveness of the reference architectures and the resulting domain-specific architectures.Figure 3: Reference Architecture Application to Domain-Specific Instances
The results of modeling and simulation analysis provide metrics that can be used to eliminate, aggregate, or validate the key components and relationships with the family of architectures, using information organized via taxonomies and associated ontology. The reference architecture is continually updated and refined based on this feedback loop. The reference architecture is not the final blueprint for implementing systems-specific design and integration, but rather a reference of concepts providing the enabling cornerstone upon which systems can be empowered with large-scale mission capabilities. It is up to the organization accomplishing a software systems task to engineer and build an instance of the reference architecture to suit the needs of a particular domain, while maintaining compatibility with the overall standard reference architecture.
Reference architecture can be considered to have four abstract aspects: social, cognitive, information, and physical. Each aspect provides the context upon which to view system instances. Collections of systems instances change over time. The dynamics of a real-world environment necessitate the flexibility inherent in reference architecture to take into account changing elements over time.
The combination of the reference architecture and the four domain aspects provides the basis for examining mission systems in three dimensions instead of the traditional two as presented by the Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF)2. This three-dimensional view provides the basis for systems interoperability in a logical and meaningful way. Further analysis makes apparent the relationships between data, information, knowledge, and understanding required for combined systems operations and efficient management of available communications resources.
The mission-system reference architecture has the following properties:
* Provides the conceptual framework for specifying the four aspects (social, cognitive, information, and physical) of systems within the bounds of operational, system, and technical views prescribed by DoDAF.
* Acts as a template to guide domain specific implementations of distributed network-centric systems while allowing a variety of design solutions.
* Defines the ontology for discussion and analysis purposes.
* Defines a complete set of architectural elements with well-defined interactions, functionality, and relationships with themselves and the external context.
* Defines how the elements communicate with each other, the basic operations associated with each element, and the nature of the communication.Enterprise Reference Architecture ProcessesThe U.S. government has established direction and expectation for how complex systems of the future will be developed and integrated - via an ever-increasing emphasis on the importance of formalized architecture and enterprise architecture. Many aerospace and information technology companies are now developing and maturing their architecting processes to meet their business needs.
Lockheed Martin deploys its Architecture-Based Design and ARQuest Blueprint. Northrop Grumman has its Information Systems Architecture Analysis Continuum. IBM has the Enterprise Architecture Method. Boeing and General Dynamics promote their open systems architecture frameworks, Bold Stroke and OpenWings, respectively. Government, industry, and academia are establishing consortia, certification programs, and graduate curriculum to address the educational needs of this new discipline.
The system architecting process that Raytheon uses is known as Raytheon Enterprise Architecture Process (REAP) . It extends a traditional focus on technical architecture to include business architecture, providing a comprehensive view across the enterprise. The REAP defines an end-to-end architecture process based on industry and government standards, including The Open Group Architecture Framework3 Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance/Department of Defense Architecture Framework4, Zachman Framework for Enterprise Architecture5, and the Software Engineering Institute's Architecture Trade-off Analysis MethodSM (ATAMSM)6.
There are established industry and government standards to help address enterprise- wide architectural alignment among customer mission, business rules, data, application systems, organization, and technology. The primary standards unified within Raytheon's architecture process and other architecture processes to fulfill the components noted above are the following:
* Methodology: The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF), Enterprise Edition.
* Products: DoDAF, final draft Zachman Framework for Enterprise Architecture.
* Formats: Unified Modeling Language7, Integrated Computer- Aided Manufacturing Definition8, DoDAF templates.
* Validation: ATAM.
It is important to note that although there are several integrated frameworks, they each address very different elements of the overall architecting process and their interrelation is both necessary and complementary.
Architecture processes are comprised of five primary activities: enterprise understanding, architecture planning, business architecting, technical architecting, and architecture validation. These activities are iterative in nature, internally and externally to the other.
In Raytheon's case, the five activities act as a wrapper around the phases of TOGAF's Architecture Development Method (ADM), providing supplemental guidance and describing its relationships to other standards. These subprocesses extending the TOGAF ADM include those for customer-focused architecting, quality attribute analysis, architecture concordance/ configuration/consolidation, DoDAF product generation, ATAM, and quality attribute assessments. The completion of these activities results in a validated architecture package describing the enterprise from a variety of viewpoints or perspectives.
Model-based computing is the term for system and software development that is driven and centered on models. These models are used to specify systems and software architecture, and low-level system design details. The models provide the means to translate the specified systems architectural artifacts defined via system architecture development processes into constituent platform-specific and platform-independent components. The concept of developing platform-independent models, followed by platform-specific models is quite powerful and allows our programs to migrate models to new computing hardware with minimal impact. Platform-independent models can also be used in multiple environments such as simulations, using the same system model.
This concept has been standardized via the Object Management Group (OMG)9 in the Model-Driven Architecture initiative. The OMG is working to standardize these concepts in order to promote tool development and interoperability. Recently, the OMG has also formed an interest group specifically focused on standards for model-driven development of embedded software. This interest group will leverage recent significant advances made possible in large part via the leadership, insight, and funding support from DARPA. These new tools and technologies are laying the necessary foundations upon which the systems of the future will be specified, developed, tested, and maintained.
DARPA has been advancing the stateof- the-art application of model-driven computing to distributed, real-time, and embedded (DRE) systems. DARPA, via the Model-Based Integration of Embedded Systems (MoBIES)10 program, is establishing an open-source, standards-based tool suite needed to accomplish the program's objectives. One MoBIES technology developer is the Institute for Software Integrated Systems (ISIS) at Vanderbilt University11. ISIS, as well as being a major contributor to the MoBIES program, is working to see that DARPA-funded efforts migrate into the mainstream. They are working to migrate DARPA-funded tools to the Eclipse Open-Tool Integration Framework via sponsorship from IBM.
Raytheon and the aerospace industry are actively involved with the development of standards that impact the future of model-driven computing within the OMG. These standards may be impacted by the further evolution of DARPA-developed tools and technologies from MoBIES and other DARPA programs. The maturation of those tools is being supported via membership in the newly formed Embedded Systems Consortium for Hybrid and Embedded Research.
Model-driven computing has had some noteworthy successes despite being used in limited domains. Two popular examples are The Mathwork Company's Matlab/ Simulink®12 and National Instruments' LabVIEW13.
These pioneering tool suites demonstrate that model-driven computing is effective in limited application domains. Until recently, modeling of the entire system, middleware, and application, needed to be accomplished for each system. This made it cumbersome, time-consuming, and expensive to develop effective models. It was not until the separation of the application from the middleware, and models of the middleware could be shared and leveraged, that model-driven computing has come into its own.
Additional advances in model-driven computing are necessary before it can become commonplace in DRE systems development. Scalability in both breadth and depth of model-based computing must be addressed. When proved successful, model-driven computing has the potential to revolutionize the current means of systems specification, development, testing, and maintenance. We expect that the most significant impact will be realized in system verification. With complete and executable system models that are independent of the hardware platform, system verification will move forward in the development process, reducing the cost and risk of errors, and facilitating the final system verification effort.
William Gibson once stated, "The future is already here; it is just unevenly distributed" . The successful implementation of the large systems of systems needed for America's protection will be expedited by using emerging, but not yet widely deployed, software approaches that support the development of robust system architectures. The key technologies of ontology, context-sensitive reference architectures, architecture definition processes, and model-based computing are beginning to be integrated to develop robust systems that are key for America's defense. More research is required to make these approaches scalable and capable of integrating with existing systems, but the foundations exist today.
We would like to acknowledge the contributions of Steve Ignace, Rolf Siegers, Mike DaBose, Chris Grounds, Ralph Woods, Tom Flynn, Bryan Lail, Edwin Lee, Bhatra Patel, Doris Tamanaha, Ron Williamson, and Don Wilson.
1. Siegers, R. "The Raytheon Enterprise Architecture Process." INCOSE 2003, Crystal City, VA., July 2003.
2. DeLong, J. Bradford. "The Real Shopping-Cart Revolution." Wired War. 2003 www.wired.com/archive/11.03/view.html?pg=5
1. See www.daml.org
2. See http://deskbook.dau.mil/software/gen/comparch-def.html
3. See www.opengroup.org/architecture/togaf
4. See www.dod.mil/comptroller/bmmp/pages/arch_arch_home.html
5. See www.zifa.com
6. See www.sei.cmu.edu/ata/ata_
7. See www-306.ibm.com/software/rational/uml.
8. See www.idef.com/default.html
9. See www.omg.org
10. See www.rl.af.mil/tech/programs/MoBIES
11. See www.isis.vanderbilt.edu
12. See www.mathworks.com
13. See www.ni.com/labview
Gregory S. Shelton is vice president of Engineering, Technology, Manufacturing, and Quality for Raytheon Company. He is responsible for developing and implementing enterprise engineering, quality and program management processes and tools, and integrating technology strategies, road maps, and competitive assessments. In 2002, he was elected associate fellow for the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. Shelton has a bachelor's degree in electrical engineering from California Polytechnic University and a master's degree in engineering and management from the University of California, Los Angeles.
Raytheon Global Headquarters
870 Winter ST
Waltham, MA 02451Randy Case
[INSERT: http://www.raytheon.com/technology_today/archive/2004_Issue2.pdfPROMIS/Ptech makes compartmentalization obsolete. Key to total tyranny & C2http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php/topic,79470.msg447386.html#msg447386
Randy Case is technical area director at Raytheon Company for Architectures and Systems Integration, Garland, Texas. He was the architect of the Raytheon Integrated Product Development System. Case has worked on projects that span the entire life cycle from independent research and development to operational support. He is co-chair of the International Council on Systems Engineering Standards Technical Committee, and has contributed to a number of systems-related standards. Case has a Bachelor of Science in electrical engineering from the University of Texas at Arlington.
Raytheon/Intelligence and Information Systems
1200 South Jupiter RD
I found this interesting when you look a the current economic situation... No shortage of job openings at BAE, Raytheon or Mitre...http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Safari+Mitre+BAE&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=Lead Software Systems Engineer
The MITRE Corporation - Bedford, MA Req ID 11137BR Job Title Lead Software Systems Engineer Location MA: Bedford Profession Information... to reverse-engineer and analyze complex systems and...
From The MITRE Corporation - 2 days ago - save job -
block - email - more...
Principal Aircraft Integration Systems Engineer
Bae Systems - Nashua, NH Systems Engineers to integrate our Aircraft Self-protection Systems into rotary or fixed wing aircrafts. The candidate could work with other systems engineers...
From BAE Systems - 1 day ago - save job -
block - email - more...
View all Bae Systems jobs in Nashua, NH
Salary Search: Principal Aircraft Integration Systems Engineer salaries in Nashua, NH
More information about Bae Systems
Related forums: Bae Systems - Nashua, New Hampshire
L O L, you can't make this stuff up. Let's play a game of: Put 2 and 2 together. How do you "increase and foster internet security?" Why of course you specifically hire people to reverse engineer all software used by businesses, militaries, corporations, banks, et.al worldwide, and use Ptech AI software to blueprint everything amongst your already compartmentalized employees, then YOU write all the viruses, trojans, rootkits, malware, spyware (and package any of the aforementioned as "middleware" enterprise architecture software that all the companies get sold on because of it's power and capabilities.) THE FOX GUARDS THE HEN HOUSE EVERYWHERE I SWEAR.
MITRE/DHS: "We need to be in charge of all security so that no one can discover real security vulnerabilities which WE exploit (and we have our LAWFIRMS SUE YOU if you manage to find REAL SECURITY VULNERABILITIES, SELECTIVELY ENFORCED.) We have hundreds of companies under our umbrella selling the world on our massive problem reaction solution model where we write all the malicious code, and then pose as the savior by selling you computer/internet security software packages!"
___________________________________________________________________________________________http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/23496.wssIBM X-Force Security Report: Web Browsers Under Siege From Organized Crime
ARMONK, NY - 11 Feb 2008: IBM (NYSE: IBM) today released the findings of the 2007 X-Force Security report, detailing a disturbing rise in the sophistication of attacks by criminals on Web browsers worldwide. According to IBM, by attacking the browsers of computer users, cybercriminals are now stealing the identities and controlling the computers of consumers at a rate never before seen on the Internet.
The study finds that a complex and sophisticated criminal economy has developed to capitalize on Web vulnerabilities. Underground brokers are delivering tools to aid in obfuscation, or camouflaging attacks on browsers, so cybercriminals can avoid detection by security software. In 2006, only a small percentage of attackers employed camouflaging techniques, but this number soared to 80 percent during the first half of 2007, and reached nearly 100 percent by the end of the year. The X-Force believes the criminal element will contribute to a proliferation of attacks in 2008.
Using these techniques, cybercriminals can infiltrate a user's system and steal their IDs and passwords or obtain personal information like National Identification numbers, Social Security numbers and credit card information. When attackers invade an enterprise machine, they could steal sensitive company information or use the compromised machine to gain access to other corporate assets behind the firewall.
"Never before have such aggressive measures been sustained by Internet attackers towards infection, propagation and security evasion. While computer security professionals can claim some victories, attackers are adapting their approaches and continuing to have an impact on users' experiences," said Kris Lamb, operations manager, X-Force Research and Development for IBM Internet Security Systems. "The Storm Worm provides a microcosm of the kinds of threats users faced in 2007. All in all, the exploits used to spread Storm Worm are a blend of the various threats tracked by X-Force, including spam, phishing and drive-by-downloads by way of Web browser exploitation."
The Storm Worm, the most pervasive Internet attack last year, continues to infect computers around the world through a culmination of the threats the X-Force tracks, including malicious software (malware), spam and phishing. Last year, delivery of malware was at an all time high, as X-Force reported a 30 percent rise in the number of malcode samples identified. The Storm Worm comprised around 13 percent of the entire malcode set collected in 2007.
In other findings, for the first time ever, the size of spam emails decreased sharply to pre-2005 levels. X-Force believes the decrease is linked to the drop off of image-based spam. This decrease can be counted as a win for the security industry -- as anti-spam technologies became more efficient at detecting image-based spam, spammers were forced to turn to new techniques.
The X-Force has been cataloguing, analyzing and researching vulnerability disclosures since 1997. With more than 33,000 security vulnerabilities catalogued, it has the largest vulnerability database in the world. This unique database helps X-Force researchers to understand the dynamics that make up vulnerability discovery and disclosure.
The new X-Force report from IBM also reveals that:
* The number of critical computer security vulnerabilities disclosed increased by 28 percent, a substantial upswing from years past.
* The overall number of vulnerabilities reported for the year went down for the first time in 10 years.
* Out of all the vulnerabilities disclosed last year, only 50 percent can be corrected through vendor patches.
* Nearly 90 percent of 2007 disclosed vulnerabilities are remotely exploitable.
IBM is the world's leading provider of risk and security solutions. Clients around the world partner with IBM to help reduce the complexities of security and strategically manage risk. IBM's experience and range of risk and security solutions are unsurpassed -- from dedicated research, software, hardware, services and global business partner value -- helping clients secure business operations and implement company-wide, integrated risk management programs.
For more security trends and predictions from IBM, including graphical representations of security statistics, please access the full "2007 X-Force Trends Statistics" at: http://www-935.ibm.com/services/us/index.wss/offerfamily/iss/a1029112
Note to Editors: Images and broadcast-quality b-roll are available for download by registered journalists at www.thenewsmarket.com/ibm
Note to Bloggers: Images and video are available for download by registered bloggers at www.thenewsmarket.com/videocafe
For more information about IBM, visit www.ibm.com
________________________________________________________________________________________Hahahaha, remember this guy from my other thread? He keeps showing up. The NWO has some REALLY educated people working for them.
Rich Baich, Commanding Officer, U.S. Naval Reserve Navy, Information Systems Command (Public-Private Relationships Working Group Members)
Securing Cyberspace for the 44th Presidencyhttp://www.asisonline.org/newsroom/120808_CSIS_Cyber_Security_Report.pdf
CSIS Cyber Security Report
PROMIS/Ptech/Choicepoint/Infragard/DIEBOLD=World ID/Carbon Tax/IP v6http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=79634.msg448966#msg448966
Information Security Conference
Wednesday, August 24, 2005
Nashville Convention Center
Peter Allor, Director of Intelligence, ISS X-Force
Peter Allor is the director of intelligence and special assistant to the CEO for Internet Security Systems, Inc. (ISS) where he is responsible for guiding the company’s overall security intelligence initiatives and participates in enterprise and government implementation strategies. He assists ISS X-Force team with the collection, analysis and dissemination of information regarding cyber vulnerabilities, exploits, incidents, threats and early warning. This information is used to provide customers with information and resources to employ best practices to defend their networks from potential attacks. Allor is also the director of operations for the Information Technology - Information Sharing and Analysis Center (IT-ISAC) as part of the X-Force internet threat intelligence services-- a task force that provides global information protection solutions analysis for securing IT infrastructure, defending key online assets and critical infrastructures from attack and misuse.
He is responsible for managing ISAC operations where members report vulnerabilities, solutions, best security practices and track hackers globally. The ISAC operations center provides threat analysis and anonymous reporting of security vulnerabilities and shares solutions with all of its members. Allor holds a Bachelor of Business Administration degree from Rollins College and a Master of Arts degree in organizational management from the University of Phoenix. He is a graduate of the US Army Command and General Staff College.Rich Baich, Managing Director, PricewaterhouseCoopers
Rich Baich, CISSP/CISM, is the Managing Director for PricewaterhouseCoopers in Charlotte. He is the former Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) at ChoicePoint Inc., where he had enterprise wide responsibility for the architecture, design, risk management, and implementation of information and technology security. He was the company’s official executive representative to internal and external customers, audit, regulatory and law enforcement on information security matters. With over 10 years experience in Information Security Business, Rich has held security leadership positions as the Cryptology Officer for the National Security Agency (NSA), Sr. Director Professional Services at Network Associates (now McAfee) and after 9/11 as the Special Assistant to the Deputy Director for the National Infrastructure Protection Center (NIPC) at the FBI.
Rich received the Information Security Executive of the Year Award in Georgia for 2004. He holds a BS from United States Naval Academy, MBA / MSM from University of Maryland University College, and has been awarded the National Security Telecommunications and Information Systems Security (NSTISSI) 4011 Certification.Mark Burnette, Global Information Security Officer, Willis
Mark Burnette is the Global Information Security Officer for Willis, the third largest risk management company in the world. Mark has global responsibilities for Willis’ information security function, spanning more than 100 countries and 15,000 employees globally. His role is to ensure Willis has adequate protection mechanisms in place for all of the Company’s electronic assets worldwide. In addition to his strategic leadership, Mark directs Willis’ team of technical security specialists to ensure that security policies and practices are implemented globally using a comprehensive defense-in-depth strategy and is responsible for coordinating IS compliance with business regulatory requirements such as Sarbanes-Oxley and HIPAA. A passionate and seasoned security leader, Mark was named the 2005 Information Security Executive of the Year at the Executive Alliance ISE Southeast Awards in March 2005. Prior to joining Willis, Mark worked for several years with two of the Big 5 accounting firms, where he specialized in developing, implementing, assessing, and securing IT solutions for companies in the healthcare, retail, manufacturing, banking, and insurance industries. Recognized as a security expert by technology think-tank Gartner, Mark has been featured as a subject matter expert on ABC and CBS television affiliates numerous times, in print media such as CSO magazine and Secure Enterprise, and is a noted author and a frequent speaker to International conferences and specialty groups such as ISACA, IMA, IIA, & ISSA, and on College and University campuses across the United States.
Carl Herberger, Director, Information Security Program, SunGard Availability Services
Prior to joining SunGard Planning Solutions as an Internet Security Specialist in January of 2002, Carl worked as the Manager of Campbell Soup Company’s Global IT Security Department. In this position he was responsible for a staff of five and budget of $2 million. He maintained corporate IT Security strategy, supervised intrusion detection (IDS) and incident handling, global policies and procedures, and administration of a complex $50MM+ multi-platform IT environment. Carl also ran Campbell Soup’s domestic Disaster Recovery program. Prior to Campbell Soup Company, Carl served as an U.S. Air Force Officer with his last duty as a Electronic / Computer Warfare Specialist in the Pentagon. While at the Pentagon, Carl evaluated computer security events impacting daily Air Force operations. He also managed critical operational intelligence for computer network attack programs to aid National Security Council and Secretary of the Air Force with policy and budgetary decisions.
Bart Hubbs, HCA
Bart Hubbs is a Director in HCA’s Information Security Organization and is responsible for the Organizational Management Group. His background spans ten years as an active practitioner in general information systems, IS Security and IS Audit. Bart has designed, implemented, audited, and managed security and IT solutions/processes for the insurance and healthcare industries.
He has a Bachelor of Science degree in finance and currently holds certifications in the areas of Security Leadership, Systems & Security Management, and IT Audit.
Mark Johnson, CISSP, CISO, Vanderbilt University and Medical Center Mr. Johnson has over thirteen years of experience in the Information Security field. His experience includes working with several financial services, consumer products and manufacturing entities on Internet security architecture design and implementation, intrusion detection and incident response, information security policy development and implementation. Mr. Johnson has conducted several hundred computer investigations, and was the operations lead for intrusion detection Network Operation Center for a U.S. Intelligence Agency. His role at Vanderbilt is to lend his expertise and leadership to its information security program. Under his leadership VU will continue to provide its students, faculty and staff a safe and secure computing environment, while facing 21st century threats. Mr. Johnson holds a Master’s Degree in Computer Science from James Madison University, and a Bachelor’s Degree in Physics from the University of Minnesota.Matt Jonkman, CTO, Infotex
Matt has a strong background in banking and Network Security, Network Engineering, Incident Response, and Intrusion Detection and is founder of Bleeding Snort (www.bleedingsnort.com), an open-source research community for Intrusion Detection Signatures. Matt spent 5 years serving abroad in the Army as an Air Traffic Control Radar and Communications Systems Engineer before attending Indiana State University and the Rose-Hulman Institute. After several years as a general consultant, he became Lead Technician for Sprint’s Internal and Managed Security division, overseeing the implementation of all Sprint Internal and Managed Security Devices. Matt then moved to the financial sector as Senior Security Engineer for a major Midwestern bank and financial services corporation. Matt is currently CTO of Infotex, a Security Consulting firm offering a full range of general and security specific consulting services and Security Assessments to the entire country, as well as Managed Intrusion Detection, Secure Email, and Managed Firewall Services.
Thomas Lewis, CISSP, President, Praemunio
Thomas Lewis has over ten years experience assisting Fortune 500 clients with the development of security solutions for complex environments. Thomas is responsible for the design, development and implementation of several information security departments. Additionally, he is a frequent speaker for local and national organizations including the ISSA, MIS Institute, Information Systems Audit and Control Association and the Institute of Internal Auditors. In addition to Mr. Lewis’ information security consulting experience, he also has several years experience with three of the “Big 5” accounting firms conducting information systems audit and other attest engagements. Thomas is the founding president of the Middle Tennessee ISSA chapter. He has been active within the ISSA organization on a local and international level. Mr. Lewis is a Certified Information Systems Security Professional (CISSP), Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer (MCSE) and Certified Information Systems Auditor (CISA). He received his Master’s degree from the University of Tennessee and Bachelor’s degree from David Lipscomb University.
Cindy Liebes, Assistant Regional Director, Federal Trade Commission
Cindy Liebes received her law degree in 1984 from the Cumberland School of Law at Samford University in Birmingham Alabama. She has been with the Federal Trade Commission since 1986, and is currently the Assistant Regional Director for the Southeast Region. Ms. Liebes is responsible for supervising and litigating various law enforcement actions involving a variety of consumer protection issues, including online privacy; fraudulent Internet schemes; deceptive telemarketing fraud; business opportunity scams; consumer credit statute enforcement; and other unfair and deceptive trade practices. She also regularly conducts seminars and gives outreach presentations to business and consumer groups, and has appeared on numerous television and radio broadcasts to discuss various consumer fraud and credit issues.
John O’Leary, Director of Education, Computer Security Institute
John O'Leary is Director of Education for Computer Security Institute. His background spans four decades as an active practitioner in information systems, IT Security and contingency planning. John has designed, implemented and managed security and recovery for networks ranging from single site to multinational. He has been honored by the recipients of CSI’s Lifetime Achievement Award as a “Fellow of the Security Profession,” and is CSI's all-time highest-rated and most requested instructor. O'Leary has trained tens of thousands of practitioners, and regularly conducts on-site programs at major corporations and government facilities worldwide. Following the formation of CSI’s Working Peer Groups in 1995, John has facilitated all meetings of the groups, where security professionals from diverse corporations share ideas, concerns and techniques. He is the winner of the 2004 COSAC Award.
Ron Ross, Ph.D., Senior Computer Scientist, National Institute of Standards and Technology
Dr. Ron Ross is a senior computer scientist and information security researcher at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). His areas of specialization include security requirements definition, security testing and evaluation, and information assurance. Dr. Ross currently leads the FISMA Implementation Project for NIST, which includes the development of key security standards and guidelines for the federal government and critical information infrastructure. His recent publications include FIPS 199 (the security categorization standard), Special Publication 800-53 (the security controls guideline), and Special Publication 800-37 (the system certification and accreditation guideline). Dr. Ross is also the architect of the risk management framework that integrates the suite of NIST security standards and guidelines into a comprehensive enterprise security program.
Dr. Ross previously served as the Director of the National Information Assurance Partnership, a joint activity of NIST and the National Security Agency. A 1973 graduate of the United States Military Academy at West Point, Dr. Ross served in a variety of leadership and technical positions during his twenty-year career in the United States Army. During his military career, Dr. Ross served as a White House aide and as a senior technical advisor to the Department of the Army.Mark Sletto, US Secret Service
Joe Thomasone, Senior Network Security Engineer, Fortress Technologies
Joe Tomasone is the senior network security engineer for Fortress Technologies. With more than 15 years in the IT industry, Joe has extensive practical experience in networking and security, and has briefed local, State and Federal Government agencies such as the Pentagon, the White House Communications Agency, the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy, and U.S. Army, plus numerous Fortune 1000 companies on wireless and wired security. In his current role, he is responsible for educating potential customers on wireless security as well as the features and benefits of the company's Air Fortress family of products.Adriaan Valk, FBI
Special Agent Valk has been assigned to the Nashville Resident Agency of the Memphis Division of the FBI for the last 7 years. SA Valk is a member of the Nashville Joint Terrorism Task Force, with investigative responsibility for Computer Intrusions and Infrastructure Protection, Weapons of Mass Destruction, Key Assets, and Domestic and International Terrorism. SA Valk is also the Nashville Coordinator for the InfraGard program - a public/private partnership sponsored by the FBI and the NIPC which is dedicated to safeguarding America's critical infrastructures.
Jim Vines, US Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice
Jim Vines was appointed by President George W. Bush and confirmed by the U.S. Senate as United States Attorney for the Middle District of Tennessee on February 8, 2002. Prior to his appointment, Vines was a partner in the Nashville office of Baker, Donelson, Bearman & Caldwell. In the early 1990's, he was an associate with King & Spalding in Atlanta. Vines received his undergraduate and law degrees from Washington & Lee University. He served as law clerk to Honorable William H. Rehnquist, Chief Justice of the United States in 1989-90, as well as law clerk to Senior U.S. District Court Judge Robert R. Merhige, Jr., of the Eastern District of Virginia in 1988-89. He also served as Executive Director and General Counsel of Environmental Affairs and in other capacities at Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. from 1993 to 2001. He specialized in the practice areas of environmental, health and safety, toxic tort litigation and federal appellate practice.
Ray Wagner, Ph.D., Vice-President Research, Gartner
Ray Wagner is a research vice president in Gartner Research, where he is part of the Information Security Strategies group. Dr. Wagner focuses on a wide range of security issues, including identity and access management, Web services security, public key infrastructures, digital rights management, security architectures, the information security organization, and information security issues within emerging technologies. Dr. Wagner has taught information and network security at Vanderbilt University and computer science at Dartmouth College. He is a veteran of information security startups in secure identity management systems, PKI-based information security infrastructures, secure remote access and digital rights management technology for healthcare enterprises and the music and entertainment industries.
Jeff Williams, OWASP
Jeff is a founder and CEO of Aspect Security, a leader in application security services. He also chairs the open-source Open Web Application Security Project (OWASP) and manages projects and local chapters worldwide. An expert in all aspects of software security, Jeff has led several advanced research and development projects focused on automatic software vulnerability identification. He also chaired the group responsible for creating ISO 21827, the Systems Security Engineering Capability Maturity Model (SSE-CMM). Jeff majored in cognitive psychology and computer science at UVA, earned an MA from GMU, and received his JD cum laude at Georgetown University Law Center.Amit Yoran, CEO, Yoran Associates
Amit Yoran is president and CEO of Yoran Associates and currently serves as an independent director and advisor to several early stage security technology companies and large corporations. He was appointed by President Bush as the Administration's cyber chief, responsible for coordinating the national activities in cyber security. Working with the Secretary of Homeland Security, Mr. Yoran coordinated among federal departments, law enforcement and intelligence efforts, as well as direct interaction with many leading IT and IT security companies. These efforts were particularly focused on protection of the 13 critical infrastructures of the United States. Prior to joining the Bush Administration, Mr. Yoran was the Vice President of Worldwide Managed Security Services at the Symantec Corporation. Mr. Yoran was the co- founder of Riptech, a market leading IT security company, and served as its CEO until the company was acquired by Symantec. He previously served an officer in the US Air Force as the Director of Vulnerability Programs for the Department of Defense's Computer Emergency Response Team. Mr. Yoran received a Master of Science degree from the George Washington University and Bachelor of Science from the United States Military Academy at West Point.
Chris Young, SVP & CIO, Saint Thomas Health Services
Mr. Young serves as a Regional CIO for Ascension Health and Senior Vice President and CIO for Saint Thomas Health Services. In this role, he is responsible for maintaining all existing technology as well as the selection and deployment of new technologies throughout the Southern Region. Prior to this, Mr. Young served as a Sr. VP of Management Resources responsible for implementation of operational synergies across the newly formed system. Prior to this role, he functioned as the Interim-CIO responsible for turning around IT operations at Saint Thomas Hospital. He actively serves on multiple ASCENCION oversight committees. Before joining Saint Thomas Health Services, Mr. Young led emerging market development at Embark based in California. In this capacity, he was responsible for entry into international and military clients. While functioning in this role, he was also a private venture capitalist in multiple technology companies. Prior to Embark, Mr. Young was the General Manager for East Coast operation for SVP America, a subsidiary of SAP AG. There, he was responsible for the foundation of the New York Office and all East Coast sales and consulting. Mr. Young holds a degree in Economics from the University of Chicago.
WOW! This is BIG! Can't believe I haven't heard of this before. This needs to hit mainstream. Of course I guess it was supposed to a one point in time but it got overruled by the neocon media outlets. If you google this, not much turns up. Youtube seems to only have a few copies running around. All have very few hits and comments. Censoring maybe?
Anyone know if she is still alive? If she is, she needs to be hiding under a rock.
"The most important lesson of History is that nobody ever learns History's lesson"
thanks for tak'n the time to put all of this info together. keep it up AI !!!!!
Information Assurance Industry Uses CVE and OVAL to Identify Vulnerabilities
Back door vulnerabilitiesAs the number of software vulnerabilities continues to increase, MITRE's CVE and OVAL initiatives are becoming standards in the information assurance industry.
The Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) initiative is a list of more than 15,000 names industry experts have agreed to use in identifying vulnerabilities. MITRE's Open Vulnerability and Assessment Language (OVAL) project is a baseline standards initiative that helps determine the presence of vulnerabilities and configuration issues on computer systems.
The CVE list also is being used as the basis for the National Vulnerability Database (NVD), developed by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology. NVD is a comprehensive security vulnerability database that integrates all publicly available U.S. Government vulnerability resources and provides references to industry resources.
Growing List of CVE Names
The breadth of the CVE list of names makes it easier for vendors of information security products and services to identify computer vulnerabilities and create fixes. A vulnerability with a CVE name is important because everybody working in the security field can look up a name on the CVE website and know that the name is standardized.
Before CVE, software manufacturers and security vendors often used different names for the same vulnerability or flaw. "Security product vendors can still use their own native label for a vulnerability," says MITRE's CVE Compatibility manager Robert A. Martin. "Using CVE names ensures that CVE-compatible products and services can correlate to information in other products that use CVE names."
So far, more than 240 information security products and services have declared support of CVE, with 60 of these being "Officially CVE-compatible." When a product or service earns CVE Compatibility, the vendor has shown that it uses CVE names in a way that allows it to cross-link with other organizations and products that use CVE names and that MITRE has evaluated the accuracy of their use of CVE names. This ensures enhanced interoperability and security for enterprises.
OVAL Identifies Vulnerabilities and Configuration Issues
OVAL goes further than CVE by using XML schemas for definitions that check for the presence of vulnerabilities and configuration issues on computer systems. OVAL also uses XML schemas to report the results of the checks. It makes machine-to-machine checking possible, which is faster and more accurate than human-to-machine checking. There are over 1,400 OVAL definitions, and 28 products from 15 organizations have declared support for OVAL, with 10 of these being "Officially Oval-compatible."
"Today, an advisory is sent out as a written narrative description," says Martin. "If you're a tool vendor, you have to have your researchers read the description and figure out how to make your security tool check for that problem."
In checking for vulnerabilities, OVAL does three things: First, it checks to see if the vulnerable software is installed. Second, it checks whether the patches for the issue are present. Third, it evaluates how the software is configured. Depending on the answer to these questions, the OVAL result is that you are or are not vulnerable to the issue.
For configuration issues, OVAL compliance definitions can be used to check the configuration settings of a system and ensure that the settings meet an organization's computer security policies. For example, determining whether or not a particular service is running, a port is open, or a password meets a minimum length requirement, are examples of configuration checks that can be tested using OVAL definitions.
Currently, MITRE is leveraging the CVE and OVAL Initiatives to help the Department of Defense (DoD) transform its enterprise incident and remediation management efforts. A paper describing the activity was published in the May 2005 Journal of Defense Software Engineering. "MITRE has influenced the DoD toward requiring its software suppliers and security tool providers to support CVE and OVAL," says Martin. "As a result, the DoD will be fundamentally changing the way it deals with vulnerabilities and configuration issues in the commercial and open source components of its infrastructure and mission systems."
—by David Van Cleave
OVAL: A New Language to Determine the Presence of Software Vulnerabilities
You're the system administrator looking at the most recent reports generated by your vulnerability assessment tools and services—which give you conflicting information. One says there are vulnerabilities present in the system, another says there are not. You know what this means: hours of work tracking down text-based descriptions of the vulnerabilities from other sources such as software and tool vendor alerts, Web sites and databases, and government resources. You will look through all this information, make the best guess possible, and hope it's good enough.
Having been in this position in the past, some MITRE IT experts saw the need for a standardized baseline method for identifying the vulnerabilities within systems—a method that could be incorporated into tools and services and that could be plainly understood by system administrators and other security professionals. "MITRE’s Open Vulnerability Assessment Language (OVAL), created by a collaborative effort of the information security community, does exactly that," says MITRE's OVAL Project Manager, Todd Wittbold. "It uses Structured Query Language (SQL) queries to create 'gold standard' tests that definitively determine the presence of vulnerabilities on end systems."
Tools vary making it difficult to determine if any particular vulnerability is truly present.
In an OVAL-enabled process, an OVAL-compliant assessment or scanning tool determines which vulnerabilities exist on a system and issues reports. On the basis of these reports, the system administrator may then obtain software patches and fix information from his or her security assessment tools, vendors, or vulnerability research databases and Web sites, and make the repairs. A Reference Query Interpreter is available now from the OVAL Web site; OVAL-compliant tools will be listed on the site as they become available.
"This process provides a consistent and repeatable approach for vulnerability assessment," says MITRE senior information engineer and OVAL Editor Matthew Wojcik, "leading to a more secure system overall."
Open Vulnerability Assessment Language (OVAL)
"OVAL was developed to be a common language for security experts to use to discuss and agree upon the technical details of how to check for the presence of vulnerabilities on computer systems," says Wojcik. "OVAL queries are used to identify the vulnerabilities on the systems." It is these queries, and the official OVAL Schema, that serve to keep queries consistent and standardized, giving the experts a common language.
For each CVE vulnerability there is one or more SQL queries in the OVAL language that measures the presence of that vulnerability on an end system. An OVAL-compliant assessment or scanning tool determines which vulnerabilities exist on your system and issues reports.
Both the OVAL Schema and queries are written in SQL, the industry standard database language that is widely understood by numerous computer professionals. Because they are written in SQL, OVAL queries are machine-readable and can be incorporated into host-based vulnerability assessment computer programs or read in hardcopy or electronic form by information security professionals.
"OVAL queries detect the presence of software vulnerabilities in terms of system characteristics and configuration information," says Wojcik. "By specifying logical conditions on the values of system characteristics and configuration attributes, the queries can characterize exactly which systems are susceptible to a given vulnerability." System characteristics include operating system (OS) installed, settings in the OS, software applications installed, and settings in applications. Configuration attributes include registry key settings, file system attributes, and configuration files.
OVAL queries use the vulnerabilities listed in MITRE's Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE®), a dictionary of standardized names and descriptions for publicly known information security vulnerabilities developed by MITRE in cooperation with the international security community. For each CVE name, there are one or more OVAL queries. OVAL works with Windows, UNIX, and Linux. Refer to the OVAL Web site for the official OS versions supported.
Improving Vulnerability Assessment with OVAL
For system administrators and other end users, OVAL queries provide a baseline check for performing vulnerability assessments. "Until OVAL," says Wojcik, "consistency in this capability did not exist. The widespread availability of OVAL queries will eventually provide the means for standardized vulnerability assessment. It will also result in consistent and reproducible information assurance metrics from an organization's systems."
OVAL benefits those who produce information security products, as well as those who use them. For operating system and application software vendors, the precise definitions of how to detect vulnerabilities found in OVAL queries eliminates the need for exploit code as an assessment tool. For tool vendors, the tests they implement to check for vulnerabilities are frequently closed and proprietary and are often in procedural code not easily read or understood by customers. "With OVAL," says Wojcik, "their customers can understand the SQL on which queries are based and tools can be easily combined with OVAL language content to provide a baseline capability, resulting in more accurate determinations of vulnerability existence for customers and fewer false positives than what currently exists today."
OVAL's Broad Community Participation
Community participation in OVAL comes through the OVAL Board and the OVAL Community Forum. The Board, which approves the official OVAL Schema and assists in the development of OVAL queries, already includes members from 15 organizations from across the information security community (see the OVAL Web site for a current list). MITRE maintains OVAL and provides impartial technical guidance to the Board on all matters related to the ongoing development of OVAL.
The OVAL Community Forum is a public email list forum hosted and moderated by MITRE. Members can discuss the OVAL Schema, OVAL queries currently in development as well as those already posted on the OVAL Web site, and the information security vulnerabilities themselves that affect query writing. The forum ensures that all OVAL vulnerability content reflects the combined expertise of the broadest possible group of security and system administration professionals.
"We expect that OVAL will evolve in a way similar to CVE, through community involvement: that is, users will encourage their vendors to incorporate OVAL into products and services. The vendors will see that using OVAL improves the value of their products. And so, the OVAL effort will grow as organizations adopt tools that use OVAL and vendors incorporate OVAL into their products and services," says Wojcik. "But ongoing community participation in query development is equally important."
"We encourage system administrators, software vendors, security analysts, and other members of the information security community to join the OVAL Community Forum," concludes Wittbold. "As members of the Community Forum they can actively participate at the ground level of this new community effort by submitting new draft queries and discussing and debating the queries already posted on the OVAL Web site."
—by Bob Roberge
I have recently been made aware of the "Big Safari" program of the skunk works.... BAE Systems - bribes - Prince Bandar - 9/11 attacks
1. BAE Systems currently holds the contract for the US HAARP program. Weather/social control anyone? Before that, I believe it was Raytheon. Just thought I’d thicken the sauce a little.
News release for BAE doing HAARP:
BAE SYSTEMS RECEIVES $35 MILLION FOR HAARP PROGRAM
WASHINGTON -- The Office of Naval Research has awarded BAE Systems a $35.4 million contract to manufacture 132 high frequency (HF) transmitters for installation in the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program's (HAARP) phased array antenna system. The contract was finalized April 19 with BAE Systems Information & Electronic Warfare Systems in Washington, D.C.
Rest of the press release here:http://www.na.baesystems.com/releasesDetail.cfm?a=170http://www.spacedaily.com/news/missiles-04zi.html
Significant potential applications include long-range communication, sensing and satellite vulnerability to nuclear effects," said Ramy Shanny, BAE Systems vice president and general manager for Advanced Technologies (AT).
In 1992, AT was awarded a contract to design and build the Ionospheric Research Instrument (IRI), the HAARP program's primary tool used to study ionospheric physics. The IRI is currently composed of 48 antenna elements and has a power capacity of 960,000 watts
When installed, the additional 132 transmitters will give HAARP a 3.6 mega-watt capacity
. The HAARP build-out is jointly funded by the U.S. Air Force, the U.S. Navy and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).
programs” googles back to Raytheon, E-Systems, BAE, and a whole gaggle of MIC players
. This whole thread is starting to look like a very large can o worms but it's clicking together like a Rubik's pyramid puzzle.
This is VERY interesting:http://www.bigsafariassociation.org/
ATK Integrated Systems , BAE Systems , L-3 Communications Integrated Systems ,Textron Defense Systems , Sierra Nevada Corporation , Lockheed Martin , DRS Technologies http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/big_safari.htm
BIG SAFARI is the USAF's program office responsible for for sustainment and modification of specialized special mission aircraft. ...
The Lockheed Martin Skunk Works
has been a primary contributor to Big Safari, transforming C-130s into Combat Talon (MC-130E), Compass Call/Rivet Fire (EC-130H), Commando Solo (EC-130E), AC-130H Gunship Special Operations Forces Improvement (SOFI), and Senior Scout. The October 1996 arrival of an EC-130H Compass Call electronic warfare jamming aircraft
marked the beginning of a transition
of US Air Force's Big Safari class programs, which are managed under specialized procedures, from Lockheed Martin facilities in Ontario, CA, to Palmdale, CA
BAE-Israel-Ptech Connection:http://www.1913intel.com/2007/10/05/what-is-suter/What is Suter?
Posted by Matt in October 5th, 2007Israel’s amazing attack in Syria
on September 6th left just about everybody scratching their heads. How did they do that? Well, meet “Suter”.
Suter is an airborne network attack system. It hacks into enemy air defense systems so that they can be taken over
. Suter includes some powerful sensors for detecting a large assortment of electronic emissions. Computer software can identify the emitters based on a database of known emitters. Based on this information potential entry points into air defense systems can be exploited
. Suter can monitor enemy emitters, mislead them or shut them down.
is a Big Safari-managed special access program
. Big Safari itself is a shadowy Air Force unit that has developed small numbers of specialized reconnaissance systems, including drones, in what are often classified programs. Big Safari is a specialized process of acquisition and contracting management process that supports 20-24 projects at any one time and includes responsibility for logistics sustainment for over 50 aircraft.
The Suter technology was developed during the last several years by BAE Systems
and involves invading enemy communications networks and computer systems
, particularly those associated with integrated air defense systems (AW&ST Aug. 16, 2004, p. 24; Nov. 4, 2002, p. 30). Suter 1 allowed U.S. operators to monitor what enemy radars could see. The capability enables U.S. forces to assess the effectiveness of their stealth systems or terrain-masking tactics. Suter 2 permits U.S. operators to take control of enemy networks as system managers and actually manipulate the sensors, steering them away from penetrating U.S. aircraft
. Suter 3
was tested last summer to add the ability to invade the links to time-critical targets, such as battlefield ballistic missile launchers or mobile surface-to-air missile launchers. Aircraft involved in the Suter programs include the EC-130 Compass Call, RC-135 Rivet Joint and F-16CJ strike aircraft specialized for suppression of enemy air defenses.http://www.airforce-technology.com/features/feature1625/Israeli E-Tack on Syria - Part 1
BLACK ICE: INTELLIGENCE, COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONICS
For some time now, the USAF has pursued a highly classified initiative picturesquely called Big Safari. According to an unidentified Air Force officer, Big Safari is an ongoing series of projects 'emphasising integration of ISR (intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance), space and information operations to defeat threats of special concern'.
Of specific relevance to the Israeli raid are two programmes: Senior Suter and NCCT
. Senior Suter is one section of the 'senior' family of projects, which in turn exists under the Big Safari umbrella. The senior category deals with information and electronic warfare, broadly defined
. The Suter programme (whose namesake, Colonel Richard 'Moody' Suter, created the USAF's Red Flag training programme at Nellis AFB) focuses on implementing electronic data warfare against air defence systems. The prime contractor for Senior Suter is BAE Systems
. Network-centric collaborative targeting, or NCCT, is not technically part of Suter, Senior or Big Safari (else its name would be less descriptive but more colourful).
Indeed, NCCT's mission
is almost self-explanatory: this system enables a network of sensors to collaborate in determining the location of a target with minimal human intervention
. The prime contractor for NCCT is L-3 Communications
. The Suter programme first emerged from its 'redacted' status in 2002, when the Pentagon asked for extra funding to modify the capabilities of the EC-130H Compass Call aircraft in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Subsequently, US forces in Iraq have used the Compass Call to prematurely set off insurgent IEDs along convoy routes. NCCT (and perhaps Suter) has been at the very least tested operationally in Iraq and Afghanistan over the last couple years, probably against insurgent communication networks. "Network warfare is transcending mere importance and could be on its way to indispensability."
Similarly, Israel used its versions of Suter and NCCT technology during its 2006 incursion into Lebanon.
As their missions suggest, NCCT and Suter can be used independently of each other. Obviously, NCCT is more widely applicable, as USAF operators can use many types of weapons against the targets it locates. However, NCCT and Suter are especially synergistic because Suter is a natural extension of the NCCT task.
FIRST, FIND IT WITH NCCT All physical entities that are 'alive' and functioning radiate or reflect energy in one form or another whenever they are doing something.
These energy emissions span a range of modalities (electromagnetic, thermal, auditory, etc.) and each is detectable by sensors attuned to that modality. As a result of millions of years of biological evolution, humans use their senses instinctively, without conscious thought, which is one reason why instinctive physiological reactions seem so swift.
In contrast, military organisations of analogous integrated complexity do not respond as swiftly (relatively speaking) – precisely because the processing of sensation into perception by the organisation as a whole does require conscious thought, in the form of interpretation and decision making by human operators. Historically, intelligence in military organisations had to navigate up the chain of command to some higher level of authority before it could be aggregated with other intelligence to actually create useful knowledge.
According to Major Barb Carson, public affairs liaison with the Air Force Command and Control Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance (C2ISR) Center, US military operations in Kosovo a decade ago demonstrated that this process was a key constraint on battlefield responsiveness
. "Although traditional ISR sensors performed well, their stove-piped, closed network operations weren't effective in providing timely targeting solutions for time-sensitive threats," says Major Carson, who notes that traditional forms of hierarchical data integration required several minutes at best – and often took hours when many organisational boundaries
had to be crossed. "Of specific relevance to the Israeli raid are two programmes: Senior Suter and NCCT."
Consistent with the biological comparison, the solution lies in streamlining the sensation-perception process flow. Major Carson explains, "NCCT mimics the way the human central nervous system instantaneously focuses the eyes on the potential source of a threatening sound.
When an enemy asset communicates or moves, a sensor platform will get a line of bearing on it and alert the other sensors to focus on the enemy asset and provide corroborating evidence of the enemy's identity and location." Once two other sensors detect the asset, the NCCT system can then automatically calculate the location of the asset to within a few hundred feet – roughly the area of a football pitch. NCCT needs three vectors not only because assets could be elevated or airborne, and thus utilising all three dimensions, but also because bearings can be planar rather than linear, and three planes are needed to create a one-dimensional intersection point. By obviating human intervention, NCCT reduces the time needed to locate a target from hours or minutes down to seconds.
The system is also highly sensitive in two respects. First, the sensors themselves can pick up even relatively weak signals such as those from cell phones, and can detect other C2 components that produce electromagnetic signatures. Additionally, NCCT can compare the signals to dynamic databases of previously collected signals to ascertain, in some cases, even the individual identity of the emitting enemy unit. Part II will discuss Senior Suter and the integration of these and other technologies into an operational package
Also see: http://vwt.d2g.com:8081/2007/10/suter_israel_the_usa_iraq_iran.html
The following information is not 100% accurate (the author makes a weird argument about 9/11 not being an inside job, but rather that it was only "surrogate warfare"), this is obviously false due to direct involvement by govt. and privatized Intelligence such as (but not limited to): NRO, DISA, NIMA, Booz Allen, IBM, Raytheon/E-Systems, Air Products and Chemicals (guilty at least by willful rejection of ignoring warnings about Ptech (i.e. the CEO had foreknowledge/motive), and subsequently years later showing up as a participant in Cyber Storm II), and George Mason University for engineering the software used to give the NWO full interoperability, removing legitimate command and control from anyone who would have tried to stop the black op. Despite this, and a few other details, there is much new damning information revealed here. Highly repetitious use of the words "no pagination" from the original source have been removed.In Bed with the EnemySource
Huey Long once asserted that fascism would first appear in America as anti-fascism. Whether you consider the man to have been a hero or a tyrant, Long hit the nail on the head with this assertion. President George W. Bush recently characterized Arab terrorists as fascists. During a press conference held at his Texas ranch, Bush stated that the terrorists "try to spread their jihadist message - a message I call ... Islamic radicalism, Islamic fascism" (Greene). The President's contention concerning Arab terrorists is, for the most part, correct. There is little difference between a radical Islamic fundamentalist and a goose-stepping Nazi. However, when one examines the American political landscape more closely, the tremendous hypocrisy of Bush's statement becomes apparent. While denouncing Islamofascism in the public spotlight, criminal factions in the government are actually connected to the terrorists behind the scenes. Islamofascism is not merely the refuge of fanatics; it is a well-oiled, highly intricate, government-sponsored enterprise.[Insert: See the following additional info regarding]:Grover NorquistMirza | GMU C4ISR Ptech-Future Combat Systems (FCS) GENOCIDE | Police StatePtech CONFIRMED-Booz Allen, *False Flag Warning* to usher in Internet2/GIGResigned Cybersecurity "chief" to be used as scapegoat for 2009 false flag?Live Free or Die Hard 2: Ptech/CVE.MITRE.ORG/DHS/Horizons/EA/IT Governance/USAIDRuth David, Drills/CBRNE/CCMRF/"Preparedness"=False Flag Pandemic/Attacks
A key character connecting the government to the terrorist network is Grover Norquist
. Norquist is a GOP/Bush operative who helped the President gain the support of Islamic people and organizations here in the United States. The Nation magazine referred to Norquist as "'Field Marshal of the Bush Plan" (Gitell). However, Norquist can be characterized as much more than just a Bush supporter. Grover Norquist is best described as the tie between the Administration and Islamists. Seth Gitell elaborates:
The Protestant Norquist is a founding director of the Islamic Institute, a socially conservative Muslim think tank that eschews international issues in favor of domestic issues such as tax cuts and faith-based initiatives. In addition, Norquist's lobbying firm, Janus-Merritt Strategies LLC, was officially registered as a lobbyist for the Islamic Institute as well as for Abdurahman Alamoudi, the founder and former executive director of the American Muslim Council. Public records show that Alamoudi has done more than $20,000 worth of business with Norquist's firm, on issues relating to Malaysia.
Norquist's Islamic links can be called anything but moderate. Consider the aforementioned Abdurahman Alamoudi. Alamoudi has been involved in activities that could be characterized as extremist. Seth Gitell informs us that Alamoudi:
attended an anti-Israel protest outside the White House on October 28, 2000. Alamoudi revved up the crowd, saying: "I have been labeled by the media in New York as being a supporter of Hamas. Anybody supporters of Hamas here? "The crowd cheered." Hear that, Bill Clinton? We are all supporters of Hamas ... I wish they added that I am also a supporter of Hezbollah." (Both groups are on the State Department's official list of terrorist organizations.)
Another individual tied to the Alamoudi's American Muslim Council is Sami Al-Arian, a Kuwaiti born Palestinian associate professor at the University of South Florida. In House of Bush, House of Saud, Craig Unger describes Al-Arian's 1998 guest appearance at the American Muslim Council:
In 1998, he appeared as a guest speaker before the American Muslim Council. According to conservative author Kenneth Timmerman, Al-Arian referred to Jews as 'monkeys and pigs' and added, 'Jihad is our path. Victory to Islam. Death to Israel. Revolution! Revolution! Until victory! Rolling, rolling to Jerusalem!' That speech was part of a dossier compiled on al-Arian by federal agents who have had him under surveillance for many years because of suspected ties to terrorist organizations. (207)
On March 12, 2000, Al-Arian was among a group of Muslim leaders who had the opportunity to meet with George and Laura Bush at a local mosque in Tampa Florida (206). Doubtless, such a meeting would not have been possible without the influence of Grover Norquist.
The ties between Norquist and Alamoudi are disturbing. However, Norquist's links to radical Islam go much deeper. There is evidence that seems to suggest that Norquist is now a convert to Islam. Daniel Pipes provides evidence that this is the case:
Paul Sperry, author of the new book, Infiltration, in an interview calls Grover Norquist "an agent of influence for Islamists in Washington." When asked by FrontPageMag.com why a Republican anti-tax lobbyist should so passionately promote Islamist causes, Sperry implied that Norquist has converted to Islam: "He's marrying a Muslim, and when I asked Norquist if he himself has converted to Islam, he brushed the question off as too 'personal.'" As Lawrence Auster comments on this exchange, "Clearly, if Norquist hadn't converted to Islam, or weren't in the process of doing so, he would simply have answered no."
Norquist's marriage to a Muslim woman further supports the contention that the GOP/Bush operative is no longer a Protestant. Pipes elaborates:
Indeed, Norquist married Samah Alrayyes, a Palestinian Muslim, on April 2, 2005, and Islamic law limits a Muslim woman to marrying a man who is Muslim. This is not an abstract dictum but a very serious imperative, with many "honor" killings having resulted from a woman ignoring her family's wishes.
Alrayyes (now known as Samah Norquist) has radical Islamic credentials of her own; she served as communications director at the Islamic Free Market Institute, the Islamist organization Norquist helped found. Now, she is employed as a public affairs officer at the U.S. Agency for International Development - and so it appears that yet another Islamist finds employment in a branch of the U.S. government.
Daniel Pipes is notorious for his anti-Arab, anti-Muslim writings that verge on paranoia. However, his contentions concerning Norquist are supported by the facts and seem to be quite sound. It is interesting to find that Samah Norquist is an employee of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). This government organization has actually been involved in social engineering projects meant to spread a violent and radical form of Islam. Using the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan as a pretext, USAID provided Afghan school children with textbooks "filled with violent images and militant Islamic teachings" (Stephens and Ottaway). The Washington Post's Stephens and Ottaway continue:
THE PRIMERS, which were filled with talk of jihad and featured drawings of guns, bullets, soldiers and mines, have served since then as the Afghan school system's core curriculum. Even the Taliban used the American-produced books, though the radical movement scratched out human faces in keeping with its strict fundamentalist code.
Stephens and Ottaway further inform us that the textbooks were replete with violent images and language:
Children were taught to count with illustrations showing tanks, missiles and land mines, agency officials said. They acknowledged that at the time it also suited U.S. interests to stoke hatred of foreign invaders. (Stephens & Ottaway)
According to Stephens and Ottaway, the material shocked and disturbed some: "An aid worker in the region reviewed an unrevised 100-page book and counted 43 pages containing violent images or passages". The article elaborates:
One page from the texts of that period shows a resistance fighter with a bandolier and a Kalashnikov slung from his shoulder. The soldier's head is missing.
Above the soldier is a verse from the Koran. Below is a Pashtu tribute to the mujaheddin [sic], who are described as obedient to Allah. Such men will sacrifice their wealth and life itself to impose Islamic law on the government, the text says. (Stephens & Ottaway)
USAID poured money hand over fist into this social engineering project. Stephens and Ottaway elaborate:
Published in the dominant Afghan languages of Dari and Pashtu, the textbooks were developed in the early 1980s under an AID [Agency for International Development] grant to the University of Nebraska-Omaha and its Center for Afghanistan Studies. The agency spent $51 million on the university's education programs in Afghanistan from 1984 to 1994.
With Samah Norquist working for a government organization guilty of spreading violent Islam, and Grover Norquist tied to extremists such as Alamoudi and the American Muslim Council, it seems safe to say that the couple are in the radicalization business. Furthermore, if Grover Norquist has truly converted to Islam, he is in the perfect position to solidify ties between the government and Islamic extremists. He is also a perfect shepherd for government-sponsored terrorists. Evidence suggests that Norquist may already be acting in that capacity. The case of Operation Green Quest provides us with this evidence.
Operation Green Quest
Operation Green Quest was a Treasury Department task force that conducted a series of raids against several Islamic groups. Grover Norquist led the crusade to condemn these raids as civil rights violations (Shwartz). However, was Norquist really concerned with civil rights when he condemned Green Quest? The truth was that several of Green Quest's targets were connected to the government and to several different elites. The possibility that this would be discovered probably made Norquist uneasy.
One of Green Quest's targets was the Herndon office of Jamal Barzinji (Schwartz). Concerning Barzinji, Stephen Schwartz writes: "In 1980, he was listed in local public records as a representative of the World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY), an arm of the Saudi regime with offices in Virginia". Barzinji's involvement with WAMY suggests a government connection. Journalist Greg Palast discovered that the Bush Administration had effectively killed an FBI investigation into WAMY prior to the September 11, 2001 attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center (145). Osama bin Laden's younger brother, Abdullah, was the president of WAMY (Schwartz,). The WAMY investigation was blocked and then unblocked after the attacks, putting the lie to the idea that Osama was merely a "black sheep" and the rest of the Bin Laden clan was not involved in terrorism (Palast 245).
It is also very interesting to note that the WAMY headquarters was in Falls Church, Virginia (Palast 144). This is strangely close to CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia. Osama bin Laden is essentially a CIA creation. In 1979, Bin Laden went to Afghanistan to fight the Soviets (Moran). Osama came to head the Maktab al-Khidamar, also known as the MAK. This organization would act as a front through which money, arms, and fighters were supplied for the Afghan war. According to MSNBC's Michael Moran, hidden puppeteers controlled the MAK:
What the CIA bio conveniently fails to specify (in its unclassified form, at least) is that the MAK was nurtured by Pakistan's state security services, the Inter-Services Intelligence agency, or ISI, the CIA's primary conduit for conducting the covert war against Moscow's occupation.
Even after the war in Afghanistan was over, Bin Laden was still regarded by the CIA as an admirable freedom fighter:
Though he has come to represent all that went wrong with the CIA's reckless strategy there, by the end of the Afghan war in 1989, bin Laden was still viewed by the agency as something of a dilettante-a rich Saudi boy gone to war and welcomed home by the Saudi monarchy he so hated as something of a hero. (Moran)
Unfortunately, evidence suggests that Bin Laden's connection to the American Intelligence Community continued up to the present and extends to the rest of the Bin Laden family, some of whom are just as involved in terrorism as Osama. Peter L. Bergen points out that the Bin Laden construction firm "receives legal advice from the white-shoe law firm Sullivan and Cromwell" (49). The Sullivan and Cromwell legal firm is one of the most powerful on Wall Street and has been known to collaborate with enemies of the United States before. These enemies included Nazi clients such as I.G. Farben (the outfit responsible for running a slave factory at Auschwitz), Fritz Thyssen, and Gestapo General Kurt Von Schroeder (Keith 24). Sullivan and Cromwell connect to the Intelligence Community through the Dulles family. Brothers Allen and John Foster Dulles were lawyers for Sullivan and Cromwell. Both supervised the writing of the National Security Act of 1947, which led to the creation of the CIA. Allen would serve as a Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) until President John Kennedy fired him for the Bay of Pigs fiasco.
In his article entitled "Bin Laden Comes Home to Roost," Moran suggests that Osama was propped up by the Agency for reasons other than doing battle with our Cold War nemesis:
The CIA, ever mindful of the need to justify its "mission," had conclusive evidence by the mid-1980s of the deepening crisis of infrastructure within the Soviet Union. The CIA, as its deputy director Robert Gates acknowledged under congressional questioning 1992, had decided to keep that evidence from President Reagan and his top advisors and instead continued to grossly exaggerate Soviet military and technological capabilities in its annual "Soviet Military Power" report right up to 1990.
The Agency wished to keep Osama in the game in spite of his irrelevance in the Cold War crusade against Communism. In fact, it was so important to the CIA that they were willing to present a fraudulent assessment of Soviet military capabilities to the President. Certain elites and criminal factions within the U.S. Intelligence Community obviously wanted to create the Bin Laden threat to act as a pretext for their own agendas. WAMY was a part of the Bin Laden network that receive protection from the Bush Administration. By condemning Green Quest's move against WAMY representative Barzinji, Norquist was perhaps trying to protect both the Bush Administration and his Islamic extremist clients.
Another target of Green Quest raids was the Boston-area computer software firm known as Ptech. ("Whose War on Terror?"). This company had sensitive government contracts worth millions of dollars. Those government organizations that could be counted among Ptech's clients were the Air Force, the Energy Department, and the FBI. One of the firm's main investors was Yasin Al-Qadi, who MSNBC describes as "a wealthy Saudi businessman whom the Bush administration had formally designated a terrorist financier under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act". When company whistleblowers tried to alert the FBI to criminal and terrorist activity at Ptech, the Bureau strangely did nothing.
Ptech was still in business in 2002, six months after the Bush administration had designated its main investor a terrorist financier (Hopsicker, "FBI Shut Down Investigation Into Saudi Terror Cell In Boston,"). One of the places Ptech came looking for business was one of America's largest banks, J.P. Morgan Chase. Ptech had been invited to give a presentation at J.P. Morgan Chase by the bank's consultant, Indira Singh. Singh had no idea what she was stepping off into. Investigative journalist Daniel Hopsicker tells the story:
Indira Singh, who later became a whistleblower, was an unwitting eyewitness to the "train wreck."
"I invited Ptech to come down and give a presentation and a customized demo to JP Morgan Chase," states Singh, who was a consultant to the bank on "risk architecture," an arcane software specialty which calculates enterprise risk. In one of the story's many ironic twists, Singh was at the time designing a system to help JP Morgan Chase detect terrorist money laundering.
When Ptech showed up, Singh quickly realized that she was witnessing her worst fears about compromised security come true. "Within half an hour on the premises, I knew something was up," she says. "They had almost immediately raised about six of my red flags, to the point where I walked over to my desk and picked up the phone, and began making phone calls."
She talked with a respected industry figure who had once worked at Ptech. "He was shocked to learn that I had invited Ptech on the premises. He told me the company belonged to Yasin Qadi."
In the course of what would otherwise have been just another day at the bank, Indira Singh made the amazing discovery that the firm in front of her at the moment was owned by Saudis, including Yasin Qadi, with suspected as well as proven ties to the terrorists who carried out the 9/11 attack.
All this left her feeling more than a little surprised. Naturally, Singh decided to alert her bosses at J.P. Morgan Chase to the danger. Their response was nothing less than shocking. Hopsicker reports:
When Singh alerted authorities, and her employer, what she encountered was the inexplicable wrath of a top Wall Street Bank, as well as an official wall of silence at the FBI.
"I took everything I had at that point back to my boss at JP Morgan Chase," she states. "He didn't want to deal with it. So I called his boss, because at this point I realized I was sitting on dynamite."
"The various heads of the security functions at the bank set up an interview with me, and it quickly escalated to the bank's General Auditor, who introduced himself to me as JP Morgan Chase's 'chief thug.'"
We didn't know banks like JP Morgan had thugs, we said.
"He introduced himself as the General Auditor," said Singh, "but he said, for the real purposes of what he does at JP Morgan Chase, I am the 'chief thug.'"
"He basically told me to keep my mouth shut and look the other way, and enjoy a wonderful life here at JP Morgan, and if I didn't I was out."
Why would J.P. Morgan Chase cover for a firm with ties to terrorism? There are, of course, financial reasons. J.P. Morgan Chase might be able to make a good profit from collaboration with Ptech. However, there is also a little known political reason as well. J.P. Morgan Chase used to be two different financial institutions. One of those institutions was J.P. Morgan Bank. Morgan Bank founder, J.P. Morgan, attended the University of Gottingen in Germany (Sutton 120). According to deceased researcher Antony Sutton, the University of Gottingen was "a center of Hegelian activism" (120).Antony C. Sutton — Feb. 14, 1925 - June 17, 2002
Sutton further states that "German Hegelianism is apparent in J.P. Morgan's approach to political parties-Morgan used them all" (120, emphasis in original). The Hegelian dialectic involves the engagement of two ideational entities in an ostensibly adversarial dynamic. However, neither of two ideational entities involved are dichotomously related. The conflict that ensues between the two is superficial at best and, eventually, results in their synthesis into a new ideational entity. This synthesis amalgamates the worst features of the opposing camps. The Hegelian tradition in Morgan firm may have continued on after its merger with Chase. If this is the case, J.P. Morgan Chase's collaboration with Ptech may be part of the construction of a dialectical camp. In this case, that dialectical camp is Islamofascist terrorism. America (thesis) clashes with Islamofascism (antithesis) which leads to the rise of an American Empire (synthesis) spoken so much about by the neoconservative faction of the elite in their Project for a New American Century (PNAC) documents.
Indira Singh also had an opportunity to speak to the FBI concerning Ptech. The results were equally shocking. Hopsicker reports:
After talking to the Boston FBI, Singh said she had been ''shocked'' and ''frustrated'' to learn that the FBI had not alerted any of the government agencies using Ptech software that there were questions about the company's ties to suspected terrorist fund-raisers. ("FBI Shut Down Investigation Into Saudi Terror Cell In Boston,")
The FBI seems to have no desire to touch Ptech. There is however, evidence that the Bureau has tried to protect the firm from scrutiny. According to MSNBC, shortly after Green Quest began investigating Ptech "the FBI stepped in and unsuccessfully tried to take control of the case". Interestingly, the FBI and its parent agency, the Justice Department, sought to gain control over Green Quest after it folded into Homeland Security. Needless to say, such an acquisition would make it easier for the FBI and the Justice Department to disrupt attempts to probe organizations and individuals with suspected ties to terrorism. There seems to be a criminal element at the Bureau and Justice that believe terrorists are to be shepherded, not hunted. It should raise more than a few eyebrows to learn that Michael Chertoff pushed for the FBI/Justice takeover of Green Quest while he was DOJ Criminal Division chief. This is the same Michael Chertoff who is now the head of Homeland Security. It is also the same Michael Chertoff who is related to Ben Chertoff, the man who wrote a piece for Popular Mechanics claiming that all questions about 9/11 are simply baseless conspiracy theories. Ultimately, all the article did was knock over a few straw men in a poor attempt to label anyone looking into government complicity in 9/11 clinically insane.
The Ptech case raises an important question about Grover Norquist. When Norquist condemned the Green Quest raid, was he really concerned with civil rights? Is it more likely that he feared an investigation would reveal that sometimes terrorists received protection from the FBI and do business with large Wall Street firms?
The Saar Foundation, Khalid bin Mahfouz, and BCCI
Perhaps another reason Norquist didn't like the Green Quest raid stems from the fact that the Saar Foundation was the keystone of the network being investigated (Schwartz). The Saar Foundation is connected to Khalid bin Mahfouz. Just who is Bin Mahfouz? Incredibly, he was the director of the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI) ("Khalid bin Mahfouz,"). The BCCI was a hotbed of scandal. Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega and Palestinian terrorist Abu Nidal were just two of the individuals in a rogue gallery tied to BCCI (Bainerman 286).
Therefore, it was shocking when the CIA engaged in a cover-up of the BCCI scandal. The Agency's first report over the BCCI in 1986 only cryptically referred to the bank's methods "unorthodox and unconventional" (286). A later CIA report was equally unacceptable. Israeli investigative reporter Joel Bainerman elaborates:
A later CIA report, a 30-page document issued in May 1989, contained mini-profiles of BCCI managers and a long list of its branches and shareholders. Even by 1989, the only thing the CIA would admit that it knew about the bank was that it was "a source of undetermined reliability" and that BCCI established a Washington, D.C., presence in late 1987 with the purchase of First American Bankshares. It goes on to describe BCCI as a bank that "has a reputation for doing business with anyone, and using whatever means are available to preserve anonymity when the depositor request it." (286)
Why was the CIA being so secretive? Richard Kerr, who acted as the DCI prior to Robert Gates being chosen to run the Agency in 1991, probably spilled the beans when he revealed that the CIA held accounts at the BCCI (286). While Kerr claimed the accounts were "ordinary" and "lawful and honest," it begs the question why the CIA was not honest and up front about the BCCI from the offset. All the secrecy and concealment suggest the Agency had something to hide about its relationship with the BCCI. Perhaps they did not wish for it to be known that $2 billion in U.S. aid had been funneled to Mujahadeen rebels through the bank (287). These were the same people who were radicalized by textbooks made with USAID money.
It is safe to say that people in high places were watching over BCCI. However, it would be wrong to accuse Ronald Reagan of being one of those individuals just because much of the bank's nefarious activities occurred during his time as President. Webster Tarpley and Anton Chaitkin provide a description of Reagan at the time:
Ronald Reagan was 70 years old when he took office, the oldest man ever to be inaugurated as President. His mind wandered; long fits of slumber crept over his cognitive faculties. On some days, he may have kept bankers' hours with his papers and briefing books and meetings in the Oval Office, but he needed a long nap most afternoons and became distraught if he could not have one. His custom was to delegate all administrative decisions to the cabinet members, to the executive departments and agencies.
Policy questions were delegated to the White House staff, who prepared the options and then guided Reagan's decisions among the pre-defined options. This was the staff that composed not just Reagan's speeches, but the script of his entire life: Normally, every word that Reagan spoke in meetings and conferences, every line down to and including "Good morning, Senator," every word was typed on three-by-five file cards from which Reagan would read (363-64).
Clearly, Reagan was a puppet, not a puppeteer. On the other hand, George H. W. Bush can be described as a master manipulator. Furthermore, Bush is connected to BCCI through Little Rock billionaire Jackson Stephens. Joel Bainerman explains Jackson's connections to Bush and BCCI:
The Stephens group investment firm, Stephens Inc., is reportedly to be worth nearly $1 billion. Stephens helped BCCI executives in the late 1970s to find key American investment opportunities, such as First American Bankshares. He was a major contributor to President Bush and part of Team 100, a Republican group where membership required a $100,000 donation to Bush's election campaign. Stephens' wife, Mary Anne, was the 1988 co-chairman of the Bush for President drive. In September 1977, Jimmy Carter's former Office of Management and Budget director Bert Lance recommended that BCCI officials meet his good friend Jackson Stephens to discuss acquisition of National Bank of Georgia. Stephens met with Agha Hasan Abedi, founder and head of BCCI. Stephens was a defendant in the suit against BCCI in its attempt to take over First American Bankshares. (293-4)
Why did Bill Clinton fail to look into BCCI after Bush was ousted? The answer to that question lies with Jackson Stephens. Joel Bainerman explains:
When Arkansas' governor Bill Clinton was running for governor in October 1990, his campaign was in deep financial trouble. He called on Jackson Stephens, a member of the Bush 100 Club in Little Rock, and the prime mover behind Harken Energy's bid to win a lucrative oil-drilling contract in Bahrain. Stephens helped Clinton raise nearly $100,000, and receive a $2 million line of credit from the Worthen National Bank. This was done, it is believed, through one of Stephens' associates, Curt Bradbury, a former employee of his who is now chief executive officer of Worthen National Bank. Jackson Stephens is chairman of the bank. (305)
Did Norquist really believe that the Green Quest raids were a civil rights violation? An investigation that could potentially lead to George Bush, Jackson Stephens, BCCI, and CIA with a little Bill Clinton thrown into the mix has nothing to do with civil rights. However, it does have everything to do with political conspiracy and elite criminality.
BCCI also connects to another interesting character named Adnan Kashoggi. Seymour Hersh elaborates on the connection between Kashoggi and the BCCI:
During the Reagan Administration, Khashoggi was one of the middlemen between Oliver North, in the White House, and the mullahs in Iran in what became known as the Iran-Contra scandal. Khashoggi subsequently claimed that he lost ten million dollars that he had put up to obtain embargoed weapons for Iran which were to be bartered (with Presidential approval) for American hostages. The scandals of those times seemed to feed off each other: a congressional investigation revealed that Khashoggi had borrowed much of the money for the weapons from the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (B.C.C.I.), whose collapse, in 1991, defrauded thousands of depositors and led to years of inquiry and litigation.
Kashoggi also worked with Mohammad Hammoud, the front man for BCCI Holdings Luxembourg (Bainerman 293). Even after the BCCI collapse, Kashoggi remained connected to people very high up in the government. Seymour Hersh explains:
Khashoggi is still brokering. In January of this year, he arranged a private lunch, in France, to bring together Harb Saleh al-Zuhair, a Saudi industrialist whose family fortune includes extensive holdings in construction, electronics, and engineering companies throughout the Middle East, and Richard N. Perle, the chairman of the Defense Policy Board, who is one of the most outspoken and influential American advocates of war with Iraq.
The Defense Policy Board is a Defense Department advisory group composed primarily of highly respected former government officials, retired military officers, and academics. Its members, who serve without pay, include former national-security advisers, Secretaries of Defense, and heads of the C.I.A. The board meets several times a year at the Pentagon to review and assess the country's strategic defense policies.
When Adnan Kashoggi is not brokering, he is busy spreading disinformation to muddy the waters surrounding 9/11. Investigative journalist Daniel Hopsicker has discovered that Adnan Kashoggi owns the business of John Gray, author of Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus and a primary financier of the misnamed 9/11 Truth Movement (Hopsicker, "The 9.11 Heroin Connection,"). One of Hopsicker's anonymous sources puts the relationship between Kashoggi and John Gray in proper perspective:
"To say that John Gray is in business with Adnan Khashoggi doesn't portray the relationship in quite the right light," stated another observer, asking to remain anonymous. "Khashoggi owns John Gray. He bought his whole Mars-Venus shtick, his company. Gray works for him."
The 9/11 Truth Movement basically holds that 9/11 was an inside job. This contention puts government agents at the scene of the crime planting demolition charges in the WTC buildings and shooting missiles at the Pentagon. If the building was an Iranian government facility in Tehran, then maybe an American soldier or intelligence agent would be willing to shoot a missile at it or blow it up. However, it is doubtful an American soldier or intelligence agent would do the same in America.
The 9/11 Truth Movement also holds that the hijackers were patsies. As Hopsicker eloquently points out, there is no basis to believe that the hijackers were patsies because of the numerous examples of Arab suicide bombers throughout history. If Islamofascists would be willing to conduct suicide bombings in the Middle East, then they would hold no reservations about conducting suicide attacks in America.
Ultimately, all of the 9/11 Truth theories are nonsense. From the standpoint of scholarship, the contentions of the 9/11 Truth Movement are intellectually lazy. Instead of following the money trail or connecting the dots between the people involved, the 9/11 Truth Movement speculates about elements that are not even pertinent to the crime. However, from the standpoint of disinformation, the 9/11 Truth Movement is priceless. The 9/11 Truth Movement diverts attention away from Islamofascists who were involved in the crime that were protected and shepherded by criminal factions in the United States government.
That's why Adnan Kashoggi and his puppet, John Gray, are throwing money at these trash-peddlers. Yes, there was government complicity in the 9/11 attacks. However, the attacks were carried out by surrogates, many of who were Islamofascists who may have not even been aware of Western elites manipulating things from behind the scenes. Terrorism is almost always surrogate warfare. Surrogate warfare is not the same as an inside job.
9/11 Truth Movement "researchers" also have a tendency to present those who will listen with the picture of a monolithic conspiracy behind 9/11. The monolithic view contends that the U.S. government as a whole conducted the attacks. This gives a very distinct anti-American flavor to the 9/11 Truth Movement. It comes as little surprise that the anti-American, communist Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez has come out supporting the 9/11 Truth Movement's contention that the buildings were destroyed by demolition charges ("Chavez says U.S. may have orchestrated 9/11,").
Does Chavez have a reason for diverting peoples' attention away from the Islamofascist aspect of 9/11? Chavez, like criminal elements in the U.S government, may have supported the Islamofascist terrorist network. Juan Diaz Castillo, a former Venezuelan Air Force major, claims he was charged by Chavez with the job of organizing a million dollars worth of assistance from Chavez to Al Qaeda (Freitas).
The evidence overwhelmingly points to factions of the U.S. government being involved in 9/11. However, the government as a whole is not the culprit. Several government employees, such as Sibel Edmonds, Robert Wright, and others were doing their jobs. The culprit is a criminal element within our government. Do not think for one moment that Washington, Jefferson, or any of the other Founding Fathers constructed our constitutional government to be a system of enslavement.
Parasitical criminal forces have latched on to the legitimate government. This criminal element has evolved into a shadow government running parallel with the constitutional government. The shadow government periodically prostitutes portions of our government to the power elite. They also sanction the power elite's private forces to actually act as extensions of the government. So, in the end, oligarchs existing above government are the ultimate villains. Sorry if this bursts the bubble of anti-government types.
Fortunately, some of the more responsible researchers are not buying the garbage. According to German author Matthias Broeckers, when researcher Michel Chossudovsky learned of Gray's financing of the International 9/11 Inquiry meeting, he demanded the that organizers drop Gray (Hopsicker). While Chossudovsky's warning was ignored, his actions clearly illustrate that not everyone is fooled by Kashoggi's illusion. Essentially, Norquist and Kashoggi share the same job. Both want to divert peoples' attention away from a government-sponsored Islamofascist terrorist network. Norquist diverts with a debate over civil rights. Kashoggi diverts with talk of demolition charges in the buildings, remote-controlled planes equipped with bunker buster bombs, missiles fired at the Pentagon, and holograms.
Adnan Kashoggi, Khalid Bin Mahfouz, and BCCI are not just names associated with the shepherding and protecting of the Islamofascist terrorist network. They are also names associated with the Iran-Contra affair. Curiously, several members of the Iran-Contra fraternity have reemerged in the Bush Administration. Among them are Otto Reich, John Pointdexter, Elliott Abrams, and John Negroponte. There seems to be a connection between the shepherding and protection of the Islamofascist terrorist network and Iran-Contra. What is the commonality? Perhaps the answer lies in an exchange between Representative Jack Brooks and Senator Daniel Inouye during the 1987 Iran-Contra hearings:
Brooks: Colonel North, in your work at the N.S.C., were you not assigned, at one time, to work on plans for the continuity of government in the event of a major disaster?
Brendan Sullivan (North's counsel): Mr. Chairman?
Senator Daniel Inouye: I believe that question touches upon a highly sensitive and classified area so may I request that you not touch upon that?
Representative Brooks: I was particularly concerned, Mr. Chairman, because I read in the Miami papers, and several others, that there had been a plan developed, by that same agency, a contingency plan in the event of emergency, that would suspend the American Constitution. And I was deeply concerned about it and wondered if that was the area in which he had worked I believe that it was and I wanted to get his confirmation.
Senator Inouye: May I most respectfully request that matter not be touched upon, at this stage. If we wish to get into this, I'm certain arrangements can be made for an executive session. (Keith 104)
It seems the Iran-Contra fraternity was in the midst of building a dictatorship here in the United States prior to being discovered. They may have returned to finish the job. The Islamofascist terrorist network is providing the pretext. John Poindexter's Total Information Awareness (TIA) program provides a case in point. Daniel Schorr, a journalist for Christian Science Monitor, examines TIA:
Deep in the recesses of the Pentagon is the Office of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). DARPA is where Vice Adm. John Poindexter (USN ret.) hangs out these days, working on TIA. TIA stands for Total Information Awareness. The project, which is budgeted at $10 million this year and expected to get more next year, has been getting bad press. That is in part because its Orwellian-sounding purpose is to create a centralized database of personal information about Americans.
Cutting-edge technology would be used to gather everything that the computer age has to offer, from travel plans to pharmacy prescriptions. Pentagon officials say it's meant to be a tool in the war against terrorism, not an invasion of privacy of innocent citizens. Well, maybe. But that would sound more reassuring if it were not for the identity of the project manager.
Indeed, Poindexter is certainly not one of the most ethical people who have ever lived. His past is replete with scandal and fraud, more than enough to preclude him from such a sensitive position as project manager of a national security program. Schorr proceeds to unveil Poindexter's shady past:
Admiral Poindexter is probably better known for destroying information than for gathering it. Before a congressional investigating committee in 1986, he admitted that, as President Reagan's national security adviser, he destroyed evidence in connection with the Iran-contra affair. Specifically, he tore up the only signed copy of a document called a "presidential finding" that retroactively authorized shipment of arms to Iran in return for the release of American hostages in Lebanon.
He testified that he did this to avoid embarrassment to Mr. Reagan. Poindexter, like Oliver North, who reported to him, was convicted in federal district court of lying to Congress and of obstruction. The conviction was overturned on technical grounds by an appeals court majority of two Reagan-appointed judges, Douglas Ginsburg and David Sentelle, over the vigorous dissent of Carter-appointed judge Abner Mikva.
Yet, despite Poindexter's dubious past, the Bush Administration had no qualms about employing him in such a sensitive post. Schorr states:
The Bush administration has shown no inclination to alter Poindexter's sensitive assignment. Mr. Rumsfeld says: "I would recommend people take a deep breath. Nothing terrible is going to happen."
What was the nature of Poindexter's Total Information Awareness project? What was its true magnitude and scope? Washington Times journalist Audrey Hudson provides a glimpse:
In what one critic has called "a supersnoop's dream," the Defense Department's Total Information Awareness program would be authorized to collect every type of available public and private data in what the Pentagon describes as one "centralized grand database."
This data would include: "e-mail, Internet use, travel, credit-card purchases, phone and bank records of foreigners". Further elaborating on the ominous scope of this centralized database, New York Times columnist William Safire wrote:
"To this computerized dossier on your private life from commercial sources, add every piece of information that government has about you - passport application, driver's license and bridge toll records, judicial and divorce records, complaints from nosy neighbors to the FBI, your lifetime paper trail plus the latest hidden camera surveillance - and you have the supersnoop's dream: a 'Total Information Awareness' about every U.S. citizen." (Qutd. In Hudson)
Needless to say, the TIA program would enable the Bush Administration to erect a dictatorship in the name of fighting the War on Terror. However, this would be no ordinary dictatorship. It would be a scientific dictatorship, also known as a technocracy. The particular variety of technocracy that TIA would help establish is what author Charles Stross refers to as a Panopticon Singularity. A Panopticon Singularity is a technocracy that technology has transformed into the perfect surveillance state. Charles Stross elaborates:
A Panopticon Singularity is the logical outcome if the burgeoning technologies of the singularity are funneled into automating law enforcement. Previous police states were limited by manpower, but the panopticon singularity substitutes technology, and ultimately replaces human conscience with a brilliant but merciless prosthesis.
If a panopticon singularity emerges, you'd be well advised to stay away from Massachusetts if you and your partner aren't married. Don't think about smoking a joint unless you want to see the inside of one of the labour camps where over 50% of the population sooner or later go. Don't jaywalk, chew gum in public, smoke, exceed the speed limit, stand in front of fire exit routes, or wear clothing that violates the city dress code (passed on the nod in 1892, and never repealed because everybody knew nobody would enforce it and it would take up valuable legislative time).
You won't be able to watch those old DVD's of 'Friends' you copied during the naughty oughties because if you stick them in your player it'll call the copyright police on you. You'd better not spend too much time at the bar, or your insurance premiums will rocket and your boss might ask you to undergo therapy. You might be able to read a library book or play a round of a computer game, but your computer will be counting the words you read and monitoring your pulse so that it can bill you for the excitement it has delivered.
Even the official emblem of the Total Information Awareness program semiotically gesticulated towards the rise of a technocratic dictatorship. Schorr concludes his examination of the program with the following statement:
Outside Poindexter's Pentagon office is a logo showing an all-seeing eye on top of a pyramid and the slogan, "Scientia est potentia" ("Knowledge is power"). The question is: How much power over knowledge about us should be entrusted to an admitted destroyer of federal documents?
Extensive press coverage of TIA led to the Pentagon shutting the program down and Poindexter leaving the government (Bamford). However, the TIA's method of collecting vast heaps of information, known in national security circles as "data mining," did not disappear. Initiatives that elites cannot establish in plain view, they usually sneak through the back door. It was recently revealed that, in the fall of 2001, President Bush secretly ordered the National Security Agency (NSA) to sidestep a special court and carry out warrantless spying on American citizens (Bamford).
The legality of the President's actions is questionable. Under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, before spying domestically on Americans suspected of having terrorist ties, the NSA must first go before a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance court and show probable cause to obtain a warrant (Bamford). Persuading a FISA court to give the NSA the warrants it desired would have been relatively simple, as James Bamford points out:
The court rarely turns the government down. Since it was established in 1978, the court has granted about 19,000 warrants; it has only rejected five. And even in those cases the government has the right to appeal to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, which in 27 years has only heard one case. And should the appeals court also reject the warrant request, the government could then appeal immediately to a closed session of the Supreme Court.
Given the ease with which the NSA might have procured the required warrants it is shocking that the President's secret program bypassed the FISA court entirely. Perhaps the evidence suggesting probable cause was extremely flimsy. It would not be the first time that such was the case. J. Edgar Hoover was convinced that Martin Luther King Jr. was a subversive and tirelessly snooped into the famous Civil Rights leader's private life. Today it is known that, while King's private life left much to be desired, the case that he was somehow a conscious agent of Moscow was weak. Perhaps Bush did not want take a chance, no matter how low the odds, because his oligarchical upbringing has made it hard for him to take "no" for an answer.
However, there is another possibility. Perhaps the neoconservative faction of the elite are determined to establish the Panopticon Singularity before this President's time in office is over. Such a task would call for circumventing every safeguard the law provides. The President may believe he has done just that by having the NSA spy on hundreds, perhaps even thousands, of Americans just for a few days or weeks at a time (Bamford). Such fishing expeditions would allow the President to argue that the eavesdropping was short-term and that FISA does not apply because it is for long-term monitoring (Bamford).
Even still, Bamford contends that such a method is "precisely the type of abuse the FISA court was put in place to stop". The President may be establishing a dangerous precedent, the end of which is a fully functional Panopticon Singularity. All of this done in the name of fighting the very Islamofascist terrorist network that criminal elements in the government are sponsoring.
While it is discomforting, the conclusion is inescapable. There are criminal elements within the U.S. government that are guilty of protecting and shepherding the very Islamofascists they claim to be fighting. The power elite have an unhealthy influence on the American political system. A disturbing consequence of this influence is the fact that our government periodically goes to bed with known enemies of the United States. Whoever said, "When you lie down with dogs you get up with fleas" knew whereof he spoke.
The enemy is now within the gates. If America had an effective internal security apparatus to weed people with conflicts of interest out of government service, this problem would probably be nonexistent. After all, government service is a privilege, not a right. The American people have a right to a government staffed with decent people. However, America does not have an effective internal security apparatus. The lack may be deliberate; as such an apparatus would have the potential of shining a light on people in very high places.
For instance, one person who would probably come under heavy scrutiny is none other than Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz. Recently it was revealed that Wolfowitz was engaged in a "discreet romance" with Shaha Riza, a communications advisor at the World Bank (Leiby). The Oxford-educated Riza was born in Tunisia and grew up in Saudi Arabia. She is a British citizen who claims to be a feminist, not exactly the qualities of an Islamofascist. However, is this really the case or a just a cover? Has Wolfowitz been compromised? Is the man now working for the other side? Only an in-depth inquiry into the relationship between Wolfowitz and Riza could answer these questions. None seems to be forthcoming.
What are the motives behind this treason? The first motive is periodic loyalty to an ideological kissing cousin. Currently, the government has come under the control of the neoconservative wing of the power elite. The neoconservatives are Trotskyites who have blended their Trotskyist beliefs with the fascism of Leo Strauss. Because of this fascist additive, neoconservatives share much more in common with the Islamofascists than they care to admit.
However, the most important motive for protecting Islamofascists is the fact that they provide a pretext for world government. With the help of certain financiers who view neoconservatism as politically expedient, the neoconservatives have risen up through the political ranks to become a faction of the power elite. The power elite possess a shared vision of a world without borders, a New World Order. Neoconservatives are no exception to the rule. Without Islamofascism, there is no war on terrorism. Without the war on terrorism, there is no American Empire.
The American Empire is merely the final stepping-stone to world government. Alexander Joffe made this clear in an article for the neocon connected Journal of International Security Affairs entitled "The Empire that Dared Not Speak Its Name." In the article, Joffe states: "The best way to preserve the American empire is to eventually give it up. Setting the stage for global governance can only be done with American leadership and American-led institutions…"
The neoconservative crusade for world government calls for an expanded military campaign in the Middle East, the region of the world that is considered the epicenter of Islamofascism. This campaign will employ a method which neoconservative Michael Ledeen refers to as creative destruction. Ledeen defines this term: Creative destruction is our middle name, both within our own society and abroad. We tear down the old order every day, from business to science, literature, art, architecture, and cinema to politics and the law. Our enemies have always hated this whirlwind of energy and creativity, which menaces their traditions (whatever they may be) and shames them for their inability to keep pace. Seeing America undo traditional societies, they fear us, for they do not wish to be undone. They cannot feel secure so long as we are there, for our very existence-our existence, not our policies-threatens their legitimacy. They must attack us in order to survive, just as we must destroy them to advance our historic mission.
In a nutshell, creative destruction is the tearing down and rebuilding of every aspect of a society. It may be no accident that Ledeen's creative destruction bears eerie resemblance to the Masonic dictum of Ordo ab Chao (order out of chaos). Ledeen collaborated with Francesco Pazienza, an Italian Secret Service agent and member of the notorious Propaganda Due (P2) Masonic lodge headed up by Licio Gelli (Szymanski). It is quite possible that the creative destruction is merely the Masonic idea of Ordo ab Chao recycled by Ledeen and given a new name.
The Islamofascists have been swept up into the game for a New World Order. When the American Empire resumes its march across the Middle East, it may eventually become apparent that the Islamofascists' involvement in the game has made them beggars to their own demise. Creative destruction could tear down both extremist and moderate Islam. Islamic culture has been marked for extinction. Christian and Judaic cultures are meant to follow, as all the Abrahamic faiths are at odds with the oligarchical Weltanschauung.
However, there is another possibility to consider. Maybe the neoconservative faction could miscalculate and lose control of the Islamofascist network. While it is true that the neoconservatives are using the Islamofascists, it is also safe to assume the Islamofascists are milking the neoconservatives as well. What if the neoconservatives cease to be useful to the Islamofascists? The very network the neoconservatives facilitated the rise of could become too hard to manage. Islamofascism could actually turn on the neoconservatives. In such a situation, all bets would be off. Who knows which side would be the victor?
While many of the other elite factions do not agree with the neoconservatives' imperial approach to world government, all parties seem to agree that the Islamofascists are an asset for now. At least one member of the ruling elite, former CIA executive director A.B. "Buzzy" Krongard has publicly stated that Bin Laden's capture "might prove counter-productive" (Allen-Mills). Krongard tried to justify his position by claiming that Bin Laden's capture would result in a power struggle among Al-Qaeda subordinates that would unleash a wave of terrorist attacks (Allen-Mills).
However, Krongard's argument strains credulity to the breaking point. In all likelihood, Osama's apprehension would result in a terrible loss of morale for Al-Qaeda and disorganization stemming from a serious leadership void. When you chop off the snake's head, the body dies too. Truth be told, a world government needs enemies to justify its existence. An invisible Bin Laden, who can be everywhere and nowhere at the same time, provides just such a pretext.
The power elites' collusion with the Islamofascists does not only jeopardize America's well being. It also places America's ally in the Middle East, Israel, in a very dangerous position. There is hardly a single Islamofascist group that does not steadfastly believe in the destruction of Israel. However, thee power elite do not care if their collaboration with Islamofascists results in Israel becoming a target. Recently, Israeli researcher Barry Chamish had an opportunity to speak with a member of the Rothschild dynasty. This family member's statement captures the power elites' attitude toward Israel. Chamish tells the story: I am in Salt Lake City. A lunch is arranged for me with Evelyn Rothschild's grandson who has abandoned the family for Mormonism. He does not talk willingly but I learn that just seven families are enjoying the fruits of the war. I ask him why they want to destroy Israel. He smiles and notes, "They created Israel as their personal toy. It makes them richer and gives them more control. It's not going to be destroyed."
The power elite considers Israel a play-thing. Doubtless, they feel the exact same way about America. Only ending the influence the power elite have over national governments will end this sorry state of affairs. Until that time, do not think it strange if current events have you feeling like someone's toy.
* Allen-Mills, Tony. "Let Bin Laden stay free, says CIA man." The Sunday Times. 9 January 2005.
* Bainerman, Joel. The Crimes of a President. New York: S.P.I. Books, 1992.
* Bamford, James. "The Agency That Could be Big Brother." New York Times 25 December 2005.
* Bergen, Peter L. Holy War Inc.: Inside the Secret World of Osama Bin Laden. New York: Touchstone/Simon and Schuster, 2002.
* Chamish, Barry. "The Oslo War Erupts." BarryChamish.com. 19 July 2006.
* "Chavez says U.S. may have orchestrated 9/11." MSNBC. 12 September 2006.
* Freitas, Johan. "9/11: Chavez financed Al Qaeda, details of $1M donation emerge." Free Republic. 31 December 2002.
* Gitell, Seth. "STRANGE BEDFELLOWS: Grover Norquist and Abdurahman Alamoudi." Boston Phoenix. 4 October 2001.
* Greene, Richard Allen. "Bush's language angers US Muslims." BBC. 12 August 2006.
* Hersh, Seymour. "Lunch With The Chairman." The New Yorker. 10 March 2003.
* Hopsicker, Daniel. "FBI SHUT DOWN Investigation Into Saudi Terror Cell In Boston" Mad Cow News.
o "The 9.11 Heroin Connection." Mad Cow News. 6 September 2006.
* Hudson, Audrey. "A Supersnoop's Dream." The Washington Times. 15 November 2002.
* Joffe, Alexander. "The Empire that Dared Not Speak its Name." Journal of International Security Affairs. Summer 2003.
* Keith, Jim. Casebook on Alternative 3: UFOs, Secret Societies, and World Control. Georgia: IllumiNet Press, 1994.
* "Khalid bin Mahfouz." Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. 28 August 2006.
* Ledeen, Michael. The War Against the Terror Masters. New York: St. Martin's Griffin, 2003.
* Leiby, Richard. "What Will the Neighbors Say? Wolfowitz Romance Stirs Gossip." Washington Post. 22 March 2005.
* Moran, Michael. "Bin Laden comes home to roost." MSNBC. 24 August 1998.
* Palast, Greg. The Best Democracy Money Can Buy. London: Pluto Press, 2002.
* Pipes, Daniel. "Is Grover Norquist an Islamist?" Daniel Pipes Blog. 14 April 2005.
* Schorr, Daniel. "Poindexter Redux." The Christian Science Monitor. 30 November 2002.
* Schwartz, Stephen. "Wahhabis in the Old Dominion." Weekly Standard. 8 April 2002.
* Stephens, Joe and David B. Ottaway. "From the U.S.A., the ABCs of jihad." MSNBC. 2002.
* Stross, Charles. "The Panopticon Singularity." Whole Earth Review. 2002.
* Sutton, Antony. America's Secret Establishment. Billings, Mont.: Liberty House Press, 1986.
* Szymanski, Greg. "Part Two: How Michael Ledeen Fits Into The Puzzle Of The Strange Case Of Dr. Francesco Pazienza Donato." The Arctic Beacon. 21 March 2006.
* Tarpley, Webster Griffin and Anton Chaitkin. George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography. Washington, D.C.: Executive Intelligence Review, 1992.
* Unger, Craig. House of Bush, House of Saud. New York: Scribner, 2004.
* "Whose War on Terror?" Newsweek Web. 10 December 2003.
About the author
Paul D. Collins has studied suppressed history and the shadowy undercurrents of world political dynamics for roughly eleven years. In 1999, he earned his Associate of Arts and Science degree. In 2006, he completed his bachelor's degree with a major in liberal studies and a minor political science. Paul has authored another book entitled The Hidden Face of Terrorism: The Dark Side of Social Engineering, From Antiquity to September 11. Published in November 2002, the book is available online from www.1stbooks.com
, barnesandnoble.com, and also amazon.com. It can be purchased as an e-book (ISBN 1-4033-6798-1) or in paperback format (ISBN 1-4033-6799-X). Paul also co-authored The Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship (ISBN 1-4196-3932-3).
The Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship is available here
. Read a comprehensive collection of Collins essays here