Author Topic: Raytheon Lobbyist (and Dep. Sec. Def.) William Lynn: I own your computer, slave!  (Read 11327 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Dok

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21,269
    • end times and current events
Pentagon to treat cyberspace as operational domain

Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn unveiled a new U.S. strategy on Thursday for protecting military computer networks, moving away from a passive defense toward treating cyberspace as an "operational domain" in which trained forces defend against attacks.

Lynn, in a speech at the National Defense University at Fort McNair, said the Pentagon wanted to avoid militarizing cyberspace but at the same time secure strategic networks, both by threat of retaliation and by mounting an effective defense.

"Our ability to identify and respond to a serious cyber attack is ... only part of the strategy. Our strategy's overriding emphasis is on denying the benefit of an attack," he said. "If an attack will not have its intended effect, those who wish us harm will have less reason to target us through cyberspace in the first place."

He said as part of its active defenses, the Pentagon would introduce new operating concepts and capabilities on its networks, such as sensors, software and signatures to detect and stop malicious code before it affects U.S. operations.

"Far from militarizing cyberspace, our strategy of securing networks to deny the benefit of an attack will help dissuade military actors from using cyberspace for hostile purposes," Lynn said.

REST: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/14/us-usa-defense-cybersecurity-idUSTRE76D5FA20110714
HOW TO BE SAVED
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/how_to_be_saved.html

Ye Must Be Born Again!
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/ye_must_be_born_again.htm

True Salvation & the TRUE Gospel/Good News!
http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1060

how to avoid censorship ;)

Offline Kilika

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,762
  • Thank you Jesus!
Re: Pentagon to treat cyberspace as operational domain
« Reply #1 on: July 14, 2011, 05:23:44 pm »
While my background in computers is limited, I do know that they should be doing that in the first place! You don't sit around and wait for somebody to compromise your network, THEN run them off. You actively attempt to prevent them from getting in the network in the first place.

Quote
our strategy of securing networks to deny the benefit of an attack

Now that sounds like they are referring to a counter offensive. Basically, if you get in, you won't leave without suffering your own damage. Kind of like a digital parting gift for the intrusion.
"For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows."
1 Timothy 6:10 (KJB)

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
William Lynn III is the biggest Raytheon lobbyist ever. His entire soul is a bona fide conflict of interest. His goal is to serve up every electronic device for Raytheon to utilize in NWO false flag and red teaming operations.

This has been planned for years, here is the entire agenda which is 100% illegal, seditious, and treasonous as it directly stifles commerce, rights of man, and just plain common decency.

Here is a bit about the agenda of the DIRT bags...
RAND WHITE PAPER 1997:
Information Warfare allows obstruction of Posse Comitatus

WHITE PAPER ON INFORMATION TERRORISM
1997
Brian K. Houghton
Doctoral Fellow
RAND CORPORATION


http://www.devost.net/papers/suntzu.pdf

Offensive information warfare techniques developed for military use at a state level could also be utilized to respond to information terrorism. Law enforcement agencies, in general, do not have similar offensive information warfare capabilities. For this reason a specialized and integrated counter information terrorism group is required. These highly trained information warriors would be the national security equivalent of Carnegie Mellon’s Computer Emergency Response Team, but with an offensive capability. Like a “Digital Delta Force” these Digital Integrated Response Teams (DIRTs) would work from remote computer systems and use information warfare tactics to detect, locate and counter the information terrorists. The DIRTs would be in networked remote cells inside CONUS (with one on the East and West coasts, and an additional cell in the Midwest). The DIRTs would exploit law enforcement IT-oriented assets, investigative capabilities, and intelligence bases. The DIRTs, created by Executive Order, would operate as a cell of the National Security Council and take its directives from the information terrorism counterpart to the White House “Drug Czar.”

These information warriors, comprised of members from the Joint Services, as well as Justice and Treasury Departments, would strike using digital means against computers and networks used by the information terrorists. Using an anonymous response, the U.S. government could strike at information terrorists without large display or legitimizing the terrorists, both of which would occur with a physical response. Such a response offers ultimate plausible denial. In addition, the DIRTs close integration with law enforcement agencies would provide legal guidance and accountability, and avoid a “Posse Comitatus” syndrome.

This structure would combine the investigative and jurisdictional assets of the law enforcement community with the offensive capabilities of the military. If the United States is going to enter the Information Age, we need to have policy that spans the spectrum of information-related threats to our national security, driving offensive and defensive assets that can respond symmetrically and effectively. Our offensive capabilities against peer or near-peer competitors are formidable, whether in information or conventional warfare.
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline MonkeyPuppet

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,976
  • aut libertas aut mors
Re: Pentagon to treat cyberspace as operational domain
« Reply #3 on: July 14, 2011, 05:36:13 pm »

Now that sounds like they are referring to a counter offensive. Basically, if you get in, you won't leave without suffering your own damage. Kind of like a digital parting gift for the intrusion.


Either that, or that should a hacker compromise the network and try to steal data, the system actively sets up barriers to thwart the attack or to delay access until operators intervene.  Or perhaps preventing bugs from doing any damage even after network access is obtained.

Kind of like a grown up version of this scenario... hacker uses a brute-force technique to get a wi-fi password (since "hacking" 128bit encryption is practically impossible) and the Windows network they've just gained access to uses complex password security, switch and router based ACLs, along with a tiered firewall setup (with on-system software firewalls).  This is enough to thwart most would-be hackers, but the type going after government infrastructures would require even more intense proactive measures.

Hell, maybe they mean AI... like Skynet.

Income Tax: Shattering The Myths
w w w . original intent . o r g

The 1911 in .45 ACP... don't leave home without it!  Safety first!!

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Here is the agenda, all cyberspace will be controlled by deception...this is their blueprint for the future...


A Framework for Deception

by Fred Cohen, Dave Lambert, Charles Preston, Nina Berry, Corbin Stewart, and Eric Thomas

http://all.net/journal/deception/Framework/Framework.html

[HUGE RESEARCH PROJECT PLEASE READ ALL OF IT HERE]

Executive Summary

This paper overviews issues in the use of deception for information protection. Its objective is to create a framework for deception and an understanding of what is necessary for turning that framework into a practical capability for carrying out defensive deceptions for information protection.
References
[1] Sun Tzu, "The Art of War", (Translated by James Clavell), Dell Publishing, New York, NY 10036 (1983).
[2] David Kahn, "The Code Breakers", Macmillan Press, New York, 1967
[3] Robert E. Huber, "Information Warfare: Opportunity Born of Necessity", News Briefs, September-October 1983, Vol. IX, Num. 5, "Systems Technology" (Sperry Univac) pp 14-21.
[4] Tom Keaton, "A History of Warfare", Vintage Books, NY, 1993
[5] Robert W. Mitchell and Nicholas S. Thompson, "DECEPTION: Perspectives on human and nonhuman deceipt", SUNY Press, 1986, NY.
[6] Andrew Wilson, "The Bomb and The Computer", Delacorte Press, NY, 1968.
[7] Field Manual 90-02: Battlefield Deception, 1998.
[8] Bart Whaley, "Stratagem: Deception and Surprise in War", Cambridge: MIT Center for International Studies. 1969
[9] James F. Dunnigan and Albert A. Nofi, "Victory and Deceipt: Dirty Tricks at War", William Morrow and Co., New York, NY, 1995.
[10] Colonel Michael Dewar, "The Art of Deception in Warfare", David and Charles Military Books, 1989.
[11] Knowledge Systems Corporation, "C3CM Planning Analyzer: Functional Description (Draft) First Update", RADC/COAD Contract F30602-87-C-0103, December 12, 1987.
[12] William L. Griego, "Deception - A 'Systematic Analytic' Approach", (slides from 1978, 1983)
[13] Gordon Stein, "Encyclopedia of Hoaxes", Gale Research, Inc, 1993, p. 293.
[14] Chuck Whitlock, "Scam School", MacMillan, 1997.
[15] Fay Faron, "Rip-Off: a writer's guide to crimes of deception", Writers Digest Books, 1998, Cinn, OH.
[16] Bob Fellows, "Easily Fooled", Mind Matters, PO Box 16557, Minneapolis, MN 55416, 2000
[17] Thomas Gilovich, "How We Know What Isn't So: The fallibility of human reason in everyday life", Free Press, NY, 1991
[18] Charles K. West, "The Social and Psychological Distortion of Information", Nelson-Hall, Chicago, 1981.
[19] Al Seckel, "The Art of Optical Illusions", Carlton Books, 2000.
[20] Donald D. Hoffman, "Visual Intelligence: How We Create What We See", Norton, 1998, NY.
[21] Diana Deutsch, "Musical Illusions and Paradoxes", Philomel, La Jolla, CA 1995.
[22] Chester R. Karrass, "The Negotiating Game", Thomas A. Crowell, New York, 1970.
[23] Robert B. Cialdini, "Influence: Science and Practice", Allyn and Bacon, Boston, 2001.
[24] Richard J. Robertson and William T. Powers, Editors, "Introduction to Modern Psychology, The Control-Theory View". The Control Systems Group, Inc., Gravel Switch, Kentucky, 1990.
[25] David Lambert, "A Cognitive Model for Exposition of Human Deception and Counter-deception" (NOSC Technical Report 1076 - October, 1987). [Main Table]

[26] Charles Handy, "Understanding Organizations", Oxford University Press, NY, 1993. img35.jpg
[27] National Research Council, "Modeling Human and Organizational Behavior", National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1998.
[28] Robert Greene, "The 48 Laws of Power", Penguin Books, New York 1998
[29] Various documents, A list of documents related to MKULTRA can be found over the Internet.
[30] Richards J. Heuer, Jr., "Psychology of Intelligence Analysis", History Staff Center for the Study of Intelligence Central Intelligence Agency 1999.
[31] Aldert Vrij, "Detecting Lies and Deceipt", Wiley, New York, NY, 2000.

[32] Bill Cheswick, An Evening with Berferd, 1991. - ALSO - Bill Cheswick, Steve Bellovin, Diana D'Angelo, and Paul Glick, "An Evening with Berferd" - followed by S. M. Bellovin. "There Be Dragons". Proceedings of the Third Usenix UNIX Security Symposium. Baltimore (September 1992).
[33] F. Cohen, Operating System Protection Through Program Evolution Computers and Security 1992.
[34] F. Cohen, "Internet Holes - Internet Lightning Rods", Network Security Magazine, July, 1996.
[35] F. Cohen, A Note On Distributed Coordinated Attacks, Computers and Security, 1996.
[36] F. Cohen, "A Note on the Role of Deception in Information Protection", Computers and Security 1999.
[37] Fred Cohen, "The Unpredictability Defense", Managing Network Security, April, 1998.
[38] Fred Cohen, "Method and Aparatus for Network Deception/Emulation", International Patent Application No PCT/US00/31295, Filed Octoboer 26, 2000.
[39] F. Cohen, "A Mathematical Structure of Simple Defensive Network Deceptions", 1999, http://all.net (InfoSec Baseline Studies).
[40] Scott Gerwehr, Jeff Rothenberg, and Robert H. Anderson, "An Arsenal of Deceptions for INFOSEC (OUO)", PM-1167-NSA, October, 1999, RAND National Defense Research Institute Project Memorandum.
[41] Scott Gerwehr, Robert Weissler, Jamison Jo Medby, Robert H. Anderson, Jeff Rothenberg, "Employing Deception in Information Systems to Thwart Adversary Reconnaissance-Phase Activities (OUO)", PM-1124-NSA, Novermber 2000, RAND National Defense Research Institute.

[42] Fred Cohen, "Deception Toolkit", March, 1998
[43] Norbert Weiner, "Cybernetics", 1954?
[44] Fred Cohen, "Simulating Cyber Attacks, Defenses, and Consequences", IFIP TC-11, Computers and Security, 1999.
[45] Kalbfleisch, Pamela J. The language of detecting deceit. Journal of Language & Social Psychology, Dec94, Vol. 13 Issue 4, p469, 28p, 1 chart [Provides information on the study of language strategies that are used to detect deceptive communication in interpersonal interactions. Classification of the typology; Strategies and implementation tactics; Discussions on deception detection techniques; Conclusion.]

[46] Fred Cohen, "The Structure of Intrusion and Intrusion Detection", May 16, 2000, http://all.net/ (InfoSec Baseline Studies)
[47] National Technical Baseline, "Intrusion Detection and Response", Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Sandia National Laboratories, December, 1996
[48] Fred Cohen Cynthia Phillips, Laura Painton Swiler, Timothy Gaylor, Patricia Leary, Fran Rupley, Richard Isler, and Eli Dart, "A Preliminary Classification Scheme for Information System Threats, Attacks, and Defenses; A Cause and Effect Model; and Some Analysis Based on That Model", The Encyclopedia of Computer Science and Technology, 1999.
[49] Colonel John Hughes-Wilson, "Military Intelligence Blunders", Carol & Graf, NY, 1999
[50] John Keegan, "A History of Warfare", Vintage Books, NY 1993.
[51] Donald Danial and Katherine Herbig, ed. "Strategic Military Deception", Pergamon Books, 1982.
[52] Charles Mackay, "Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds", Templeton Publications, 1989 (originally Richard Bently Publishers, London, 1841)
[53] Western Systems Coordinating Council WSCC Preliminary System Disturbance Report Aug 10, 1996 - DRAFT [This report details the August 10, 1996 major system disturbance that separated the Western Systems Coordinating Council system into 4 islands, interrupting service to 7.5 million customers for periods ranging from several minutes to nearly six hours.]
[54] Bob Pekarske. Restoration in a Flash---Using DS3 Cross-connects, Telephony. September 10, 1990. [This paper describes the techniques used to compensate for network failures in certain telephon switching systems in a matter of a millisecond. The paper points out that without this rapid response, the failed node would cause other nodes to fail, causing a domino effect on the entire national communications networks.]
[55] Heidi Vanderheiden, Boston University "Gender swapping on the Net?", http://web.aq.org/~tigris/loci-virtualtherapy.html
[56] Mimi Ito, "Cybernetic Fantasies: Extended Selfhood in a Virtual Community", 1993.

[57] Mark Peace, "Dissertation: A Chatroom Ethnography", May 2000
[58] Daniel Chandler, "Personal Home Pages and the Construction of Identities on the Web", 2001
[59] SSCSD Tactical DecisionMaking Under Stress
[60] The HoneyNet Project web site (www.honeynet.org).
[61] Fred Cohen, "Red Teaming and Other Agressive Auditing Techniques", Managing Network Security", March, 1998.


MORE, PLEASE RESEARCH

http://repository.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/85915/Riddle.pdf?sequence=1

12th International Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium
http://www.dodccrp.org/events/12th_ICCRTS/CD/html/papers/207.pdf

A PUBLICATION OF THE SOCIETY FOR MODELING AND SIMULATION INTERNATIONAL
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.113.1238&rep=rep1&type=pdf

ITS Strategic Research Plan, 2010-2014
www.its.dot.gov/strategic_plan2010_2014/index.htm

Policing on the Global Scale
http://anti-politics.net/distro/download/policing.doc

Development and command-control tools for many-robot systems (pre-9/11)
http://www.public.navy.mil/spawar/Pacific/Cyber/Robotics/Documents/Publications/1995/spie2593p121.pdf
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
EVIDENCE OF PSYCHOSIS: Deputy Secretary of Defense is a psychotic maniac!

Pentagon may apply preemptive warfare policy to the Internet
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/0829/pentagon-weighs-applying-preemptive-warfare-tactics-internet/
By Stephen C. Webster
Sunday, August 29th, 2010 -- 11:39 pm


Grappling with matters of law and policy governing the United States military's cyber-warfare capabilities, Pentagon planners are eying ways of making preemptive strikes across the Internet part of America's toolbox. In a piece for Foreign Affairs, the publication of globalist policy group The Council on Foreign Relations, Deputy Secretary of Defense William J. Lynn III paints a picture of dire threat to American infrastructure, disclosing for the first time details of a devastating cyber-attack on U.S. infrastructure. While not giving many specifics, Lynn described how malicious code on a USB thumb drive managed to spread across the Department of Defense network, establishing a "digital beachhead" that could siphon key data. "It was a network administrator's worst fear: a rogue program operating silently, poised to deliver operational plans into the hands of an unknown adversary," he wrote. "This previously classified incident was the most significant breach of U.S. military computers ever, and it served as an important wake-up call. The Pentagon's operation to counter the attack, known as Operation Buckshot Yankee, marked a turning point in U.S. cyberdefense strategy." However, "Operation Buchshot Yankee," commenced in 2008 and lasting some 14 months, saw the Department of Defense scramble over what was essentially a very minor security threat that caught their network experts completely by surprise.

CFR has issued the directive.

THIS IS A ROCKEFELLER INITIATIVE!!!!!!!!!!!

Coming out next month: OCTOBER SURPRISE:



Defending a New Domain
The Pentagon's Cyberstrategy
By William J. Lynn III

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/66552/william-j-lynn-iii/defending-a-new-domain

Summary:  Right now, more than 100 foreign intelligence organizations are trying to hack into the digital networks that undergird U.S. military operations. The Pentagon recognizes the catastrophic threat posed by cyberwarfare, and is partnering with allied governments and private companies to prepare itself.

In 2008, the U.S. Department of Defense suffered a significant compromise of its classified military computer networks. It began when an infected flash drive was inserted into a U.S. military laptop at a base in the Middle East. The flash drive's malicious computer code, placed there by a foreign intelligence agency, uploaded itself onto a network run by the U.S. Central Command. That code spread undetected on both classified and unclassified systems, establishing what amounted to a digital beachhead, from which data could be transferred to servers under foreign control. It was a network administrator's worst fear: a rogue program operating silently, poised to deliver operational plans into the hands of an unknown adversary.

This previously classified incident was the most significant breach of U.S. military computers ever, and it served as an important wake-up call. The Pentagon's operation to counter the attack, known as Operation Buckshot Yankee, marked a turning point in U.S. cyberdefense strategy.  Over the past ten years, the frequency and sophistication of intrusions into U.S. military networks have increased exponentially. Every day, U.S. military and civilian networks are probed thousands of times and scanned millions of times. And the 2008 intrusion that led to Operation Buckshot Yankee was not the only successful penetration. Adversaries have acquired thousands of files from U.S. networks and from the networks of U.S. allies and industry partners, including weapons blueprints, operational plans, and surveillance data.

As the scale of cyberwarfare's threat to U.S. national security and the U.S. economy has come into view, the Pentagon has built layered and robust defenses around military networks and inaugurated the new U.S. Cyber Command to integrate cyberdefense operations across the military. The Pentagon is now working with the Department of Homeland Security to protect government networks and critical infrastructure and with the United States' closest allies to expand these defenses internationally. An enormous amount of foundational work remains, but the U.S. government has begun putting in place various initiatives to defend the United States in the digital age.

THE THREAT ENVIRONMENT

Obama Nominee For Control Over Weapons is Raytheon Lobbyist
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/washingtonpostinvestigations/2009/01/president_barack_obamas_strict.html
POSTED: 01:03 PM ET, 01/23/2009 by Derek Kravitz

President Barack Obama's strict new lobbying rules for cabinet members have put his administration in a difficult spot when it comes to one of its top nominees. William J. Lynn III, a former Pentagon official under President Bill Clinton and Obama's choice for deputy secretary of the Defense Department, spent the better part of the past two years lobbying for defense contractor Raytheon, federal records show. Obama's ethics rules state that ex-lobbyists in his administration cannot work on issues they lobbied on for two years:

"2. Revolving Door Ban All Appointees Entering Government. I will not for a period of 2 years from the date of my appointment participate in any particular matter involving specific parties that is directly and substantially related to my former employer or former clients, including regulations and contracts.

"3. Revolving Door Ban Lobbyists Entering Government. If I was a registered lobbyist within the 2 years before the date of my appointment, in addition to abiding by the limitations of paragraph 2, I will not for a period of 2 years after the date of my appointment:

(a) participate in any particular matter on which I lobbied within the 2 years before the date of my appointment;
(b) participate in the specific issue area in which that particular matter falls; or
(c) seek or accept employment with any executive agency that I lobbied within the 2 years before the date of my appointment.

That rule complicates matters for Lynn. It also affects William V. Coor, the nominee for deputy secretary for the Department of Health and Human Services, who has lobbied for the nonprofit Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. But Coor has pledged not to work on any tobacco issues in his new job. Lynn, however, lobbied the Pentagon on so many Raytheon projects -- acquisitions policy, space, intelligence and command and control, among others -- that it might be hard to find an area within the department that was untouched by his previous work.

2009-             Dept of Defense, Obama               Deputy Secretary of Defense
2002-2008   Raytheon Co    Lobbyist
2001-2002   DFI International                           Exec VP
1997-2001   Dept of Defense, Clinton                Undersec (Comptroller)
1993-1997   Dept of Defense, Clinton                Dir, Prgrm Analysis & Evaluation
1987-1993   Kennedy, Edward M                       Legislative Counsel
1985-1986   Institute for Defense                      Analyses Prof Staff   
1982-1985   Center for Strategic & Intl Studies    Exec Dir, Defense Project

http://www.opensecrets.org/revolving/rev_summary.php?id=31517

COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
The age of nations is over.
The United States is Dead.
The new age has begun.

BY PARAG KHANNA | SEPT. / OCT. 2010

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/08/16/beyond_city_limits

The 21st century will not be dominated by America or China, Brazil or India, but by the city. In an age that appears increasingly unmanageable, cities rather than states are becoming the islands of governance on which the future world order will be built. This new world is not -- and will not be -- one global village, so much as a network of different ones.

Time, technology, and population growth have massively accelerated the advent of this new urbanized era. Already, more than half the world lives in cities, and the percentage is growing rapidly. But just 100 cities account for 30 percent of the world's economy, and almost all its innovation. Many are world capitals that have evolved and adapted through centuries of dominance: London, New York, Paris. New York City's economy alone is larger than 46 of sub-Saharan Africa's economies combined. Hong Kong receives more tourists annually than all of India. These cities are the engines of globalization, and their enduring vibrancy lies in money, knowledge, and stability. They are today's true Global Cities.

Columbia University scholar Saskia Sassen has done the most to contribute to our thinking about how urban advantage translates into grand strategy. As she writes in The Global City, such places are uniquely suited to translate their productive power into "the practice of global control." Her academic work has traced how Europe's largely autonomous Renaissance cities such as Bruges and Antwerp innovated the legal frameworks that enabled the first transnational stock exchanges, setting the stage for international credit and the forerunners of today's trading networks. Then as now, nations and empires did not restrain cities; they were merely filters for cities' global ambitions. The supply chains and capital flows linking global cities today have similarly denationalized international relations. As Sassen argues, in cities we can't make trite divisions between the government and private sector; either they work together or the city doesn't work at all. Even massive national investments in telecommunications or other infrastructure don't equalize the balance of power between cities and the rest; they ultimately reinforce the power of cities to conduct their own "sovereign" diplomacy.

Just like clockwork...32% of US Tax funded weapons systems can now be sold to enemies of the sovereignty of the United States of America thanks to Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski

(don't anyone dare blame the bullshit failed Soetoro puppet for this one - he does not have the power to do this and everybody knows it)



Council on Foreign Relations moves to remake US weapons controls
http://rawstory.com/news/afp/Obama_moves_to_remake_US_weapons_co_08302010.html
Published: Monday August 30, 2010

President Barack Obama will on Tuesday move to reform US export rules, hoping to boost trade while hampering the sale of sensitive technology. Capping a year-long review of weapons controls, Obama will tell a Washington non-proliferation conference that previous rules were fractured, making it difficult for some legitimate firms to do business. "These reforms will focus our resources on the threats that matter most," Obama said in recorded video remarks. "They'll help us not just increase exports and create jobs, but strengthen our national security as well." The reforms will include more specific definitions of goods that need export licenses and restructuring how requests are dealt with. The move is expected to result in around 32 percent of items on the munitions list being "decontrolled."
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Bombshell from London, Al-Qaeda threats are part of Military Industrial Complex Ponzi Scheme
Eric Margolis  The Toronto Sun September 14, 2010

THE London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), is the world's leading think tank for military affairs. It represents the top echelon of defence experts, retired officers and senior military men, spanning the globe from the United States and Britain to China, Russia and India.

I've been an IISS member for over 20 years. IISS's reports are always authoritative but usually cautious and diplomatic, sometimes dull. However, two weeks ago the IISS issued an explosive report on Afghanistan that is shaking Washington and its Nato allies.

The report, presided over by the former deputy director of Britain's foreign intelligence agency, MI-6, says the threat from al-Qaeda and Taliban has been "exaggerated" by the western powers. The US-led mission in Afghanistan has "ballooned" out of all proportion from its original aim of disrupting and defeating al-Qaeda. The US-led war in Afghanistan, says IISS, using uncharacteristically blunt language, is "a long-drawn-out disaster".

for the rest of the article:

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=13432
or
http://www.thesundaily.com/article.cfm?id=51732

Is it even possible to be even more of a nazi than Jay Rockefeller?



Experts Caution Against Federal Web Regulations
http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/08/26/29911.htm
By AVERY FELLOW

     WASHINGTON (CN) - The federal government is "flirting with killing the goose that laid the golden eggs" by contemplating stricter Internet regulations, an ACLU director cautioned Thursday.
     At the conservative think tank the Heritage Foundation, Jay Stanley, public education director of the American Civil Liberties Union, acknowledged that it's important for the government to set Internet security standards for facilities such as power plants and public schools. But he said federal officials should be wary of violating personal liberties by implementing stifling Internet regulations.
     Much of the wealth in the United States is based on the Internet, Stanley said. Strict government regulation threatens to "kill the goose that has laid many golden eggs," he said.
     "The Constitution is not a suicide pact," added the Heritage Foundation's Paul Rosenzweig, quoting the oft-used phrase. "We cannot allow a virus to take down the entire electric grid in fear of violating personal liberties."
     He said government intelligence agencies should work hard to balance Internet security and personal liberties.
     Stanley said he fears that the latest embodiment of the government effort to protect its computer networks, dubbed Einstein 3, will employ "threat-based decision making," making pre-emptive calls on who poses an Internet threat.
     The new system might include personally identifiable information, using a database of signatures to attack malicious code, Stanley said. The system could be placed on the servers of private Internet providers, blurring the line between government and private industry.
     President Obama has promised that the government will not monitor private traffic as part of its cybersecurity initiative, but Stanley remained skeptical.
     "We don't trust that that will remain true," he said. "Security imperatives and security dynamics have a life of their own."
     He added, "What we don't want is watch lists for the Internet." Stanley compared Internet watch lists to "Kafka-esque" no-fly lists in the airline industry that are "based on sloppy lists and questionable computer algorithms."
     Stanley also objected to the notion of needing a license to use the Internet, saying it would eliminate useful discussions in which people can anonymously voice opinions about those in power.
     "We do not want to ruin all that," he said.
     He said giving the government the power to shut down the Internet in the case of an emergency would pose the greatest risk to the freedom of speech and association. Right now, Stanley said, it is easier to see how that kind of power could be abused than how it may prove useful. If it were employed, he added, it would require well-defined parameters as well as checks and balances.
     Rosenzweig said there was no way to stop people or companies from creating profiles based on Internet users' search, travel and shopping data.
     "It's a lost cause," he said.
     With increasing computer power and storage space, Rosenzweig said, "the half-life of secrets is plummeting dramatically."
     Even if the United States shut down analytical capacity, he said, countries such as China or India might continue to create profiles for U.S. consumers.
     "The game's over," Rosenzweig said.



Raytheon's Presentation on C4ISR

Cool, huh?



Expect these outside everybody's window

"THE PREEMPTIVE STRIKE IS JUSTIFIED ON 100 MILLION AMERICAN CITIZENS" Said former Raytheon lobbyist.



We are coming for you!


"Without a trace...Raytheon can make sure your false flag goes off without a hitch!"

"Remember, it is all legal because the CFR and Jay Rockefeller said so."

"Operation Cyber-Northwoods in Full Effect!"

"Wow, we can see everybody's naked body from up here"

"Quick, call THE FINDERS and FRANKLIN...we got a few more for the CIA Special Ops"



If you see these on your streets do not worry...

Raytheon is planning a pre-emptive strike after gathering up over 1,000 hours of video evidence on every person in the city they are illegally monitoring.


All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Kilika

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,762
  • Thank you Jesus!
Quote
The report, presided over by the former deputy director of Britain's foreign intelligence agency, MI-6, says the threat from al-Qaeda and Taliban has been "exaggerated" by the western powers. The US-led mission in Afghanistan has "ballooned" out of all proportion from its original aim of disrupting and defeating al-Qaeda. The US-led war in Afghanistan, says IISS, using uncharacteristically blunt language, is "a long-drawn-out disaster".

It took a whole room full of military experts at a think tank to figure that out? Boy, those guys must have them some smarts!  ::)
"For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows."
1 Timothy 6:10 (KJB)

Offline Optimus

  • Globalist Destroyer
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,802
    • GlobalGulag.com
Pentagon perception manager knows how to manipulate search engine algorithm
http://www.oldthinkernews.com/?p=1633
Old-Thinker News | July 14, 2011

By Daniel Taylor

The Pentagon announced today that the internet is an active “Operational Domain” for the military. In fact the internet was already targeted by the Pentagon in its 2003 Information Operations Roadmap that outlined a strategy to “fight the net” as if it were an enemy weapons system. The strategy as outlined for the public involves protecting “national security” and sensitive government networks from hack attacks.

Information warfare is the front line of battle in the 21st Century, a fact that the Pentagon is clearly aware of.

    "It begins with getting inside the algorithm."

“Perception manager” John Rendon is a key figure in the information war. As Rolling Stone reports, his job was to sell the Iraq war to the American people, but Rendon firmly denies any involvement. As of 2005, John’s firm, the Rendon Group, has earned more than $56 million in Pentagon contracts.

In his newly released book The Filter Bubble: What the internet is hiding from you, Eli Pariser of Moveon.org interviews Rendon, where he candidly spoke of perception management in the digital world. Specifically, Rendon hints that he knows how to game the system of search engine algorithms – the system by which pages are ranked and internet searches are displayed – and in turn shift the mindset of the masses.

Rendon stated during the interview, “It begins with getting inside the algorithm. If you could find a way to load your content up so that only your content gets pulled by the stalking algorithm, then you’d have a better chance of shaping belief sets.”

Rendon hinted to Pariser that this was already happening.

    “In fact, he suggested, if we looked in the right places, we might be able to see traces of this kind of thing happening now – sentiment being algorithmically shifted over time.”

“I returned to the question about using algorithms to shift sentiment,” writes Pariser.

    “I have to think about it more, Rendon said, “But I think I know how to do it.” “How?” I asked. He paused, then chuckled: “Nice try.”
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people,
it's an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” – Patrick Henry

>>> Global Gulag Media & Forum <<<

Offline Optimus

  • Globalist Destroyer
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,802
    • GlobalGulag.com

In fact the internet was already targeted by the Pentagon in its 2003 Information Operations Roadmap that outlined a strategy to fight the net as if it were an enemy weapons system.


Pentagon: The internet needs to be dealt with as if it were an enemy "weapons system"
http://www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=7980



Information Operation Roadmap Part 3

The Pentagon's Information Operations Roadmap is blunt about the fact that an internet, with the potential for free speech, is in direct opposition to their goals. The internet needs to be dealt with as if it were an enemy "weapons system".

The 2003 Pentagon document entitled the Information Operation Roadmap was released to the public after a Freedom of Information Request by the National Security Archive at George Washington University in 2006. A detailed explanation of the major thrust of this document and the significance of information operations or information warfare was described by me here.

Computer Network Attack

From the Information Operation Roadmap:

    "When implemented the recommendations of this report will effectively jumpstart a rapid improvement of CNA [Computer Network Attack] capability." - 7

    "Enhanced IO [information operations] capabilities for the warfighter, including: ... A robust offensive suite of capabilities to include full-range electronic and computer network attack..." [emphasis mine] - 7

Would the Pentagon use its computer network attack capabilities on the Internet?

Fighting the Net

    "We Must Fight the Net. DoD [Department of Defense] is building an information-centric force. Networks are increasingly the operational center of gravity, and the Department must be prepared to "fight the net." " [emphasis mine] - 6

    "DoD's "Defense in Depth" strategy should operate on the premise that the Department will "fight the net" as it would a weapons system." [emphasis mine] - 13

It should come as no surprise that the Pentagon would aggressively attack the "information highway" in their attempt to achieve dominance in information warfare. Donald Rumsfeld's involvement in the Project for a New American Century sheds more light on the need and desire to control information.

PNAC Dominating Cyberspace

The Project for a New American Century (PNAC) was founded in 1997 with many members that later became the nucleus of the George W. Bush administration. The list includes: Jeb Bush, Dick Cheney, I. Lewis Libby, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz among many other powerful but less well know names. Their stated purpose was to use a hugely expanded U.S. military to project "American global leadership." In September of 2000, PNAC published a now infamous document entitled Rebuilding America's Defences. This document has a very similar theme as the Pentagon's Information Operations Roadmap which was signed by then Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

From Rebuilding America's Defenses:

    "It is now commonly understood that information and other new technologies... are creating a dynamic that may threaten America's ability to exercise its dominant military power." [emphasis mine] - 4

    "Control of space and cyberspace. Much as control of the high seas - and the protection of international commerce - defined global powers in the past, so will control of the new "international commons" be a key to world power in the future. An America incapable of protecting its interests or that of its allies in space or the "infosphere" will find it difficult to exert global political leadership." [emphasis mine] - 51

    "Although it may take several decades for the process of transformation to unfold, in time, the art of warfare on air, land, and sea will be vastly different than it is today, and "combat" likely will take place in new dimensions: in space, "cyber-space," and perhaps the world of microbes." [emphasis mine] - 60

For more on Rebuilding America's Defences read this.

Internet 2

Part of the Information Operation Roadmap's plans for the internet are to "ensure the graceful degradation of the network rather than its collapse." (pg 45) This is presented in "defensive" terms, but presumably, it is as exclusively defensive as the Department of Defense.

As far as the Pentagon is concerned the internet is not all bad, after all, it was the Department of Defense through DARPA that gave us the internet in the first place. The internet is useful not only as a business tool but also is excellent for monitoring and tracking users, acclimatizing people to a virtual world, and developing detailed psychological profiles of every user, among many other Pentagon positives. But, one problem with the current internet is the potential for the dissemination of ideas and information not consistent with US government themes and messages, commonly known as free speech. Naturally, since the plan was to completely dominate the "infosphere," the internet would have to be adjusted or replaced with an upgraded and even more Pentagon friendly successor.

In an article by Paul Joseph Watson of Prison Planet.com, he describes the emergence of Internet 2.

    "The development of "Internet 2" is also designed to create an online caste system whereby the old Internet hubs would be allowed to break down and die, forcing people to use the new taxable, censored and regulated world wide web. If you're struggling to comprehend exactly what the Internet will look like in five years unless we resist this, just look at China and their latest efforts to completely eliminate dissent and anonymity on the web."
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people,
it's an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” – Patrick Henry

>>> Global Gulag Media & Forum <<<