April 11, 2014
Take a look at my article on @HuffPostTech - http://huff.to/1ncz1vv
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Sunday, April 13, 2014
Monday, March 24, 2014
The Snowden Effect: A Web of Conflict
March 24, 2014
I'm co-author of a@HuffingtonPost article, today, with Brandi Andres: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brandi-andres/privacy-matters-edward-snowden_b_5009738.html about how our intelligence services violate our privacy. It's time our country's elected officials had a public conversation about whether these activities should be deemed unconstitutional and the lawbreakers (the US Senate, the CIA, the NSA, or,the whistleblowers) punished or whether this is okay and we want it. Either way, it's better for us if we know and agree to the policies in effect.
What do you think?
I'm co-author of a
What do you think?
Wednesday, March 12, 2014
Senator Feinstein versus the CIA
March 12, 2014
Yesterday, the breaking headline was a very public argument between CIA Director John Brennan and Senator Diane Feinstein, Chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, each one claiming the other’s organization had infiltrated their computers in an attempt to steal information regarding investigations each was pursuing with the other.
It sounds, on the face of it, like a snake swallowing its head. To me, the biggest question is, which end is the head? To whom does the CIA report? To whom does the Senate report? Who runs whom? The constitution created the Senate, but laws the Senate was a party to passing created the CIA. So, is the CIA subservient to the Senate? My belief is that this is so, but lately I’ve come to have my doubts. In the wake of the Edward Snowden affair, intelligence services in the United States seem to report to no one these days. And, of course, as I’m very fond of saying, the key mission of any intelligence service is disinformation, or lies.
The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 forbids the use of the military of the United States for law enforcement purposes, with the exception of the National Guard. Coupled with the Insurrection Act of 1807, we have a set of laws that governed the President of the United States of America’s ability to deploy troops within the United States to put down lawlessness, insurrection and rebellion. “Posse comitatus” means “an armed body of men at the disposal of the King for the purposes of keeping the peace.”
One of the implications of the Posse Comitatus Act was that the CIA was also forbidden to operate on US soil.
The Posse Comitatus was repealed, replaced by The “National Defense Authorization Act” (NDAA), H.R. 1540. This legislation was signed into law by President Barack Obama in Hawaii on December 31, 2011. The new law codifies indefinite military detention without charge or trial into law for the first time in American history.
Had Posse Comitatus been in effect, the CIA would have very clearly broken the law, if they have hacked the Senate’s computers. But with that law repealed, it’s hard for someone who isn’t a constitutional lawyer to determine if the CIA’s actions were illegal. If indeed, the CIA hacked the Senate.
Obama justified the NDAA as a means to combating terrorism, as part of a “counter-terrorism” agenda. But in substance, any American opposed to the policies of the US government can – under the provisions of the NDAA – be labelled a “suspected terrorist” and arrested under military detention.
We now know – courtesy of Edward Snowden – that hacking into government computers is an act of terrorism.
Is the CIA subject to the laws of the United States? Are they subject to this law? If they have hacked the Senate’s computers, is that an act of terrorism?
Is the Senate subject to this law? If they hacked the CIA’s computers, is that an act of terrorism?
Shades of Edward Snowden! Seems to me, someone needs to redefine what the NDAA implies, since its violators now include our elected and employed government officials.
Yesterday, the breaking headline was a very public argument between CIA Director John Brennan and Senator Diane Feinstein, Chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, each one claiming the other’s organization had infiltrated their computers in an attempt to steal information regarding investigations each was pursuing with the other.
It sounds, on the face of it, like a snake swallowing its head. To me, the biggest question is, which end is the head? To whom does the CIA report? To whom does the Senate report? Who runs whom? The constitution created the Senate, but laws the Senate was a party to passing created the CIA. So, is the CIA subservient to the Senate? My belief is that this is so, but lately I’ve come to have my doubts. In the wake of the Edward Snowden affair, intelligence services in the United States seem to report to no one these days. And, of course, as I’m very fond of saying, the key mission of any intelligence service is disinformation, or lies.
The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 forbids the use of the military of the United States for law enforcement purposes, with the exception of the National Guard. Coupled with the Insurrection Act of 1807, we have a set of laws that governed the President of the United States of America’s ability to deploy troops within the United States to put down lawlessness, insurrection and rebellion. “Posse comitatus” means “an armed body of men at the disposal of the King for the purposes of keeping the peace.”
One of the implications of the Posse Comitatus Act was that the CIA was also forbidden to operate on US soil.
The Posse Comitatus was repealed, replaced by The “National Defense Authorization Act” (NDAA), H.R. 1540. This legislation was signed into law by President Barack Obama in Hawaii on December 31, 2011. The new law codifies indefinite military detention without charge or trial into law for the first time in American history.
Had Posse Comitatus been in effect, the CIA would have very clearly broken the law, if they have hacked the Senate’s computers. But with that law repealed, it’s hard for someone who isn’t a constitutional lawyer to determine if the CIA’s actions were illegal. If indeed, the CIA hacked the Senate.
Obama justified the NDAA as a means to combating terrorism, as part of a “counter-terrorism” agenda. But in substance, any American opposed to the policies of the US government can – under the provisions of the NDAA – be labelled a “suspected terrorist” and arrested under military detention.
We now know – courtesy of Edward Snowden – that hacking into government computers is an act of terrorism.
Is the CIA subject to the laws of the United States? Are they subject to this law? If they have hacked the Senate’s computers, is that an act of terrorism?
Is the Senate subject to this law? If they hacked the CIA’s computers, is that an act of terrorism?
Shades of Edward Snowden! Seems to me, someone needs to redefine what the NDAA implies, since its violators now include our elected and employed government officials.
Tuesday, February 4, 2014
It Can’t Happen Here? Well, Maybe, But…
February 4, 2014
Anyone else see the economic, religious, political and cultural similarities between the United States today and Iran under the last days of the Shah?
In 1978, the Shah’s secret police, the Savak, had a death grip on the populations, fearing an uprising. They saw the uprising coming internally, but focused on military and political forces, and missed the entire cause of the unrest.
Iran in 1978 was emerging from a half-century of slow cultural diversification forced by the Shah. The country had a very small middle class. There was a growing religious right wing, whose power was deemed dangerous by the secret police. The military was clearly undecided regarding whose side they favored, and so were left out of the political equation.
The United States today is emerging from its most serious economic catastrophe in over seventy years. Our country’s middle class is swiftly growing smaller and more irrelevant as the gulf between rich and poor continues to leave the majority of Americans economically disenfranchised. The religious right wing is growing. The intelligence services – NSA, CIA, FBI, all see a growing threat within America from Americans. The political fringes – both right and left – are growing in power, leaving moderates and the military out of the “power” equation.
It’s a nightmare come true. And, we all remember how it ended up for Iran in 1979. As Frank Zappa sang with the Mothers of Invention so many decades ago, “It can’t happen here.” The song, by the way, was satire.
Was there anything that the Shah could have done to prevent his overthrow? What if he’d had a more open policy toward dissent? What if he’d gone even more the other way, and had the most repressive regime in human history? History seems to indicate that no given policy works forever, and many simply don’t work at all.
Is there a lesson here for us? Or has our regime begun to wind down? It’s an issue we should try to address, but I think it’s just too damn scary for anyone to ponder for very long, and no real answers are easy to come by.
Like global warming and the cigarettes-cause-cancer controversies, this one could play out for a long time. What comes to my mind is the old saw, ‘Nero fiddles while Rome burns.’
Anyone else see the economic, religious, political and cultural similarities between the United States today and Iran under the last days of the Shah?
In 1978, the Shah’s secret police, the Savak, had a death grip on the populations, fearing an uprising. They saw the uprising coming internally, but focused on military and political forces, and missed the entire cause of the unrest.
Iran in 1978 was emerging from a half-century of slow cultural diversification forced by the Shah. The country had a very small middle class. There was a growing religious right wing, whose power was deemed dangerous by the secret police. The military was clearly undecided regarding whose side they favored, and so were left out of the political equation.
The United States today is emerging from its most serious economic catastrophe in over seventy years. Our country’s middle class is swiftly growing smaller and more irrelevant as the gulf between rich and poor continues to leave the majority of Americans economically disenfranchised. The religious right wing is growing. The intelligence services – NSA, CIA, FBI, all see a growing threat within America from Americans. The political fringes – both right and left – are growing in power, leaving moderates and the military out of the “power” equation.
It’s a nightmare come true. And, we all remember how it ended up for Iran in 1979. As Frank Zappa sang with the Mothers of Invention so many decades ago, “It can’t happen here.” The song, by the way, was satire.
Was there anything that the Shah could have done to prevent his overthrow? What if he’d had a more open policy toward dissent? What if he’d gone even more the other way, and had the most repressive regime in human history? History seems to indicate that no given policy works forever, and many simply don’t work at all.
Is there a lesson here for us? Or has our regime begun to wind down? It’s an issue we should try to address, but I think it’s just too damn scary for anyone to ponder for very long, and no real answers are easy to come by.
Like global warming and the cigarettes-cause-cancer controversies, this one could play out for a long time. What comes to my mind is the old saw, ‘Nero fiddles while Rome burns.’
It Can’t Happen Here? Well, Maybe, But…
March 3, 2014
Anyone else see the economic, religious, political and cultural similarities between the United States today and Iran under the last days of the Shah?
In 1978, the Shah’s secret police, the Savak, had a death grip on the populations, fearing an uprising. They saw the uprising coming internally, but focused on military and political forces, and missed the entire cause of the unrest.
Iran in 1978 was emerging from a half-century of slow cultural diversification forced by the Shah. The country had a very small middle class. There was a growing religious right wing, whose power was deemed dangerous by the secret police. The military was clearly undecided regarding whose side they favored, and so were left out of the political equation.
The United States today is emerging from its most serious economic catastrophe in over seventy years. Our country’s middle class is swiftly growing smaller and more irrelevant as the gulf between rich and poor continues to leave the majority of Americans economically disenfranchised. The religious right wing is growing. The intelligence services – NSA, CIA, FBI, all see a growing threat within America from Americans. The political fringes – both right and left – are growing in power, leaving moderates and the military out of the “power” equation.
It’s a nightmare come true. And, we all remember how it ended up for Iran in 1979. As Frank Zappa sang with the Mothers of Invention so many decades ago, “It can’t happen here.” The song, by the way, was satire.
Was there anything that the Shah could have done to prevent his overthrow? What if he’d had a more open policy toward dissent? What if he’d gone even more the other way, and had the most repressive regime in human history? History seems to indicate that no given policy works forever, and many simply don’t work at all.
Is there a lesson here for us? Or has our regime begun to wind down? It’s an issue we should try to address, but I think it’s just too damn scary for anyone to ponder for very long, and no real answers are easy to come by.
Like global warming and the cigarettes-cause-cancer controversies, this one could play out for a long time. What comes to my mind is the old saw, ‘Nero fiddles while Rome burns.’
Anyone else see the economic, religious, political and cultural similarities between the United States today and Iran under the last days of the Shah?
In 1978, the Shah’s secret police, the Savak, had a death grip on the populations, fearing an uprising. They saw the uprising coming internally, but focused on military and political forces, and missed the entire cause of the unrest.
Iran in 1978 was emerging from a half-century of slow cultural diversification forced by the Shah. The country had a very small middle class. There was a growing religious right wing, whose power was deemed dangerous by the secret police. The military was clearly undecided regarding whose side they favored, and so were left out of the political equation.
The United States today is emerging from its most serious economic catastrophe in over seventy years. Our country’s middle class is swiftly growing smaller and more irrelevant as the gulf between rich and poor continues to leave the majority of Americans economically disenfranchised. The religious right wing is growing. The intelligence services – NSA, CIA, FBI, all see a growing threat within America from Americans. The political fringes – both right and left – are growing in power, leaving moderates and the military out of the “power” equation.
It’s a nightmare come true. And, we all remember how it ended up for Iran in 1979. As Frank Zappa sang with the Mothers of Invention so many decades ago, “It can’t happen here.” The song, by the way, was satire.
Was there anything that the Shah could have done to prevent his overthrow? What if he’d had a more open policy toward dissent? What if he’d gone even more the other way, and had the most repressive regime in human history? History seems to indicate that no given policy works forever, and many simply don’t work at all.
Is there a lesson here for us? Or has our regime begun to wind down? It’s an issue we should try to address, but I think it’s just too damn scary for anyone to ponder for very long, and no real answers are easy to come by.
Like global warming and the cigarettes-cause-cancer controversies, this one could play out for a long time. What comes to my mind is the old saw, ‘Nero fiddles while Rome burns.’
Sunday, October 27, 2013
Edward Snowden is Just The Tip of the Iceberg
October 6, 2013, D. S. Kane
For over a decade, the United States has waged war on hackers while it has simultaneously hacked into the lives of its own citizens "to protect us" from ourselves.
Since the beginning of the Snowden scandal, my friends have asked if I believe he is a hero or a traitor. For months, I've pondered an answer, since both answers have very little merit.
Snowden exposed the NSA' s despicable behavior, and for that, he is a hero. The best outcome would be a national debate leading to a national policy the majority of voters could approve (or reject). The worst outcome would be what has happened so far: Snowden is a wanted criminal, the NSA continues to hack into everyone's identities with impunity, and the hacker community is furious to the point where there will be many, many more Snowdens in our future.
In his thriller novel Black List, Brad Thor envisions a world where new technologies lead to the increasing loss of our personal privacy and inevitably leads to the total loss of our personal liberty.
It's a two-edged sword. Much that the government does for us is beneficial. My tolerance diminishes when it comes to personal privacy and liberty. Which is the sole province of our country's intelligence agencies and services. Those 1,200 organizations now number in excess of 1.4 million people. Way too much manpower unless you fear an uprising. And given the huge and expanding gulf in power and wealth between rich and poor, is that so far fetched?
So, maybe we've ignored the bigger issue. Washington is like an onion. Every scandal is a cover-up for a larger, more important issue:
This country is no longer a democracy, and hasn't been since we turned past the millennia. What we now have governing us is a group of idiots. And they control us using spy agencies and clandestine services. Maybe that's the bigger secret here. But if that's true, then I can only view Snowden as a hero.
For over a decade, the United States has waged war on hackers while it has simultaneously hacked into the lives of its own citizens "to protect us" from ourselves.
Since the beginning of the Snowden scandal, my friends have asked if I believe he is a hero or a traitor. For months, I've pondered an answer, since both answers have very little merit.
Snowden exposed the NSA' s despicable behavior, and for that, he is a hero. The best outcome would be a national debate leading to a national policy the majority of voters could approve (or reject). The worst outcome would be what has happened so far: Snowden is a wanted criminal, the NSA continues to hack into everyone's identities with impunity, and the hacker community is furious to the point where there will be many, many more Snowdens in our future.
In his thriller novel Black List, Brad Thor envisions a world where new technologies lead to the increasing loss of our personal privacy and inevitably leads to the total loss of our personal liberty.
It's a two-edged sword. Much that the government does for us is beneficial. My tolerance diminishes when it comes to personal privacy and liberty. Which is the sole province of our country's intelligence agencies and services. Those 1,200 organizations now number in excess of 1.4 million people. Way too much manpower unless you fear an uprising. And given the huge and expanding gulf in power and wealth between rich and poor, is that so far fetched?
So, maybe we've ignored the bigger issue. Washington is like an onion. Every scandal is a cover-up for a larger, more important issue:
This country is no longer a democracy, and hasn't been since we turned past the millennia. What we now have governing us is a group of idiots. And they control us using spy agencies and clandestine services. Maybe that's the bigger secret here. But if that's true, then I can only view Snowden as a hero.
Thursday, December 20, 2012
Return of the Law of Unanticipated Consequences
December 19, 2012
A few months ago, my wife and I dined at a French restaurant. We were in withdrawal concerning the law prohibiting the sale of foie gras in California, where we live. I mentioned our unhappiness to the waiter. He said, “True, we can’t sell it anymore. So, we give it away. The law doesn’t prohibit free foie. There are dishes which aren’t on the menu, and when you order them, for example a plain green salad, you can ask for it to be topped with foie.”
I asked, “How would we know about them if they’re not on the menu?”
He replied, “You just asked about them.” He smiled.
I asked how much the salad is and he replied, “It’s thirty dollars.”
More expensive for a salad than for steak. But for someone who wants the product and knows the “password,” it’s still available.
The moral for us all, is that capitalism always seeks to find a way. You may find the work-around difficult to find. You may find it to be nasty, but there will always be a work-around.
A few months ago, my wife and I dined at a French restaurant. We were in withdrawal concerning the law prohibiting the sale of foie gras in California, where we live. I mentioned our unhappiness to the waiter. He said, “True, we can’t sell it anymore. So, we give it away. The law doesn’t prohibit free foie. There are dishes which aren’t on the menu, and when you order them, for example a plain green salad, you can ask for it to be topped with foie.”
I asked, “How would we know about them if they’re not on the menu?”
He replied, “You just asked about them.” He smiled.
I asked how much the salad is and he replied, “It’s thirty dollars.”
More expensive for a salad than for steak. But for someone who wants the product and knows the “password,” it’s still available.
The moral for us all, is that capitalism always seeks to find a way. You may find the work-around difficult to find. You may find it to be nasty, but there will always be a work-around.
Saturday, December 15, 2012
China (PRC) is a Puzzle-Box
September 5, 2012
My wife and I just returned from a visit to Hong Kong and PRC. It was a vacation trip for her, research for me. And it was eye-popping. As a result, I’ll have to revise about fifty pages of the settings in my novels. As my friend Barry Eisler says, "Nothing beats first-hand research for writing fiction."
We bookended our trip in Hong Kong, both starting and finishing it there. Hong Kong is Manhattan on steroids. One of the major fictional characters in my espionage thrillers, William Wing, lives there, in the New Territories. I decided to visit the location where I’d put his residence. So, yes, I’m a bit crazy. Go figure. We ate in Fook Lam Moon, downtown on Johnson Street, the restaurant where I’d had one of my major fictional character Cassandra Sashakovich, dine. The food was superb. We also ate dim sum at the Dim Sum Bar and at Super Star Seafood, both extraordinary. Between the huge throngs walking the streets, the tall apartments, and the fastastic dim sum, Hong Kong was a dream.
Hong Kong is a shopper’s paradise, and fills its tiny island with over 20 million people. Everywhere you look, they are building or have already built skyscraper apartment buildings. I believe the residences make Manhattan condos look like a bargain.
In the PRC, we visited Beijing, Guilin, Yangshou, Hangzhou and Shanghai. It was an amazing experience, one I had wanted for years. So, what were my impressions of the PRC?
Mainland China is a puzzle-box. They are still mostly a third world country, but slowly – faster than I thought possible – becoming a mature nation with all the opportunities and problems faced by any leading world force. The cities are huge; 20 million or more in Beijing and Shanghai, 7 million in Hangzhou and Guilin. We only saw these coastal gems.
We saw rampant poverty alongside magnificent villas. Too many cars to believe. PRC has the same problem with income redistribution that America has, with too many poor and too little opportunity for them to advance. But, in China, they’re trying to remedy the problem. In America, we’re making it worse. And soon, if we don’t watch out, we’ll be China and they’ll be us.
Beijing is both ancient and administratively oriented. The buildings – the Forbidden City, the Summer Palace, all look similar and very old, even restored they are full of character and show off what is ancient about the places they inhabit. We saw the Forbidden City, the Summer Palace, and, way far away from the city, Andrea (my wife) walked the Great Wall while I took some of the over 1,000 photos of our trip. Our guide Jesse often would tell us a story about one of the sights and include the footnote, “This has a hidden meaning.” Seems, much of the history of China is filled with double meanings or hidden meanings.
As you move from central Beijing toward the outer ring roads, the city could be anyplace suburban. Tall apartments and factories dot the landscape. By the time you reach the airport, outside Ring Road Six, the city seems light years away. The high point of our visit to Beijing was when our guide pointed to a building in the heart of downtown Band said, “See that building? It’s the Chinese CIA.” Can’t fault him for not knowing that I write espionage thrillers, but I copied the street address so I can use it in my books. The best food we had in Beijing was at a vegetarian restaurant. Most of the rest can’t compete with the Chinese food we get in San Francisco.
Guilin was a remarkable contrast to Beijing. Country clubs with golf courses and villas filled the approach to the city from the airport. The city was almost entirely modern and middle class, with patches of poverty, but no major places where things looked sodden. We saw a cavern that was totally amazing and I took hundreds of photos in the caves. That’s when it hit me: China is now organized to look like Disneyland. It is entirely commercial. We visited a jade factory, a silk factory, a Chinese medicinal pharmacy, and bought an entire suitcase filled with functional, useable souvenirs.
Anyone visiting China should take the boat ride from Guilin to Yangshou. Our guide Warren helped take photos while we ate the dinner served on the boat. The needle-shaped mountains jutting out from the shoreline are both photo-worthy and eye-popping. As for the merchandizers in Yangshou, run away as fast as you can. Especially if you’ve already had to buy one new suitcase and fill it with stuff you bought.
Hangzhou Was pleasant enough, but after what we’d already seen, not that interesting. ‘Nuff said.
Shanghai, on the other hand, was the most impressive piece of real estate we saw in PRC. An amazing skyline. Our guide Cindy showed us a bake shop where almost a thousand people waited on line to buy their delicious Moon Cakes. We bought and ate many. Yum! And, after the tour finished, we had the best and most expensive meal we’d ever eaten, at Jean Georges, located on the fourth floor of Bund Number Three. Of the six courses, four had foie gras. Fatty but delicious. Our wait staff person, Olivia, was a marvel. We wanted to take her home.
So then, why is China a puzzle-box? The easy answer is that they have shown how fast a country can change from a closed dictatorship with a communist view toward life, to a capitalistic and materialistic society, where the entire country is on sale as a commercial enterprise. How can they manage such fast change when our society refuses to change? They are still the ancient society they always were, but with the patience of expert planners. Their long view rivals that of Japan. In the United States, we don’t even make short range plans, only annual budgets. And, in our Congress, even those never get approved anymore. This single difference gives the Chinese a major competitive advantage we cannot match. But, China has its own problems, like nothing we can understand. It appears to me from what I saw, that people living in the PRC and Hong Kong are left on their own without a government safety net to cushion against bad joss. In the USA, we have welfare, Social Security and Medicare. But we also have a very nasty financial system, where in China and Hong Kong at least their financial system isn’t nearly as corrupt. In the Far East, there is the threat of starvation motivating the poor and destitute. Here in the USA, we have a sense of entitlement that supersedes our desire to improve our lives and those of the next generation.
In Shanghai, Andrea got sick the last night we were there (after that amazing fatty meal at Jean Georges). It got worse our last night of the trip, in Hong Kong. So when we returned home, we had her see her doctor. She had her gall bladder duct blocked by a stone and we needed to rush her to the ER and get her gall bladder removed. Here’s the neat little irony: A life of eating fat food was the predisposing cause of her problem. But the precipitating cause was the dinner in Shanghai. Seems like no matter where we go, we remain constant. But, across the world, things have myriad shades of difference. And so it is between the USA and China. So similar, yet so different.
It was the vacation of a lifetime and a research opportunity that will continue to inform my fiction writing for the rest of my life. But, what it all comes down to at its end is, it’s good to be home.
My wife and I just returned from a visit to Hong Kong and PRC. It was a vacation trip for her, research for me. And it was eye-popping. As a result, I’ll have to revise about fifty pages of the settings in my novels. As my friend Barry Eisler says, "Nothing beats first-hand research for writing fiction."
We bookended our trip in Hong Kong, both starting and finishing it there. Hong Kong is Manhattan on steroids. One of the major fictional characters in my espionage thrillers, William Wing, lives there, in the New Territories. I decided to visit the location where I’d put his residence. So, yes, I’m a bit crazy. Go figure. We ate in Fook Lam Moon, downtown on Johnson Street, the restaurant where I’d had one of my major fictional character Cassandra Sashakovich, dine. The food was superb. We also ate dim sum at the Dim Sum Bar and at Super Star Seafood, both extraordinary. Between the huge throngs walking the streets, the tall apartments, and the fastastic dim sum, Hong Kong was a dream.
Hong Kong is a shopper’s paradise, and fills its tiny island with over 20 million people. Everywhere you look, they are building or have already built skyscraper apartment buildings. I believe the residences make Manhattan condos look like a bargain.
In the PRC, we visited Beijing, Guilin, Yangshou, Hangzhou and Shanghai. It was an amazing experience, one I had wanted for years. So, what were my impressions of the PRC?
Mainland China is a puzzle-box. They are still mostly a third world country, but slowly – faster than I thought possible – becoming a mature nation with all the opportunities and problems faced by any leading world force. The cities are huge; 20 million or more in Beijing and Shanghai, 7 million in Hangzhou and Guilin. We only saw these coastal gems.
We saw rampant poverty alongside magnificent villas. Too many cars to believe. PRC has the same problem with income redistribution that America has, with too many poor and too little opportunity for them to advance. But, in China, they’re trying to remedy the problem. In America, we’re making it worse. And soon, if we don’t watch out, we’ll be China and they’ll be us.
Beijing is both ancient and administratively oriented. The buildings – the Forbidden City, the Summer Palace, all look similar and very old, even restored they are full of character and show off what is ancient about the places they inhabit. We saw the Forbidden City, the Summer Palace, and, way far away from the city, Andrea (my wife) walked the Great Wall while I took some of the over 1,000 photos of our trip. Our guide Jesse often would tell us a story about one of the sights and include the footnote, “This has a hidden meaning.” Seems, much of the history of China is filled with double meanings or hidden meanings.
As you move from central Beijing toward the outer ring roads, the city could be anyplace suburban. Tall apartments and factories dot the landscape. By the time you reach the airport, outside Ring Road Six, the city seems light years away. The high point of our visit to Beijing was when our guide pointed to a building in the heart of downtown Band said, “See that building? It’s the Chinese CIA.” Can’t fault him for not knowing that I write espionage thrillers, but I copied the street address so I can use it in my books. The best food we had in Beijing was at a vegetarian restaurant. Most of the rest can’t compete with the Chinese food we get in San Francisco.
Guilin was a remarkable contrast to Beijing. Country clubs with golf courses and villas filled the approach to the city from the airport. The city was almost entirely modern and middle class, with patches of poverty, but no major places where things looked sodden. We saw a cavern that was totally amazing and I took hundreds of photos in the caves. That’s when it hit me: China is now organized to look like Disneyland. It is entirely commercial. We visited a jade factory, a silk factory, a Chinese medicinal pharmacy, and bought an entire suitcase filled with functional, useable souvenirs.
Anyone visiting China should take the boat ride from Guilin to Yangshou. Our guide Warren helped take photos while we ate the dinner served on the boat. The needle-shaped mountains jutting out from the shoreline are both photo-worthy and eye-popping. As for the merchandizers in Yangshou, run away as fast as you can. Especially if you’ve already had to buy one new suitcase and fill it with stuff you bought.
Hangzhou Was pleasant enough, but after what we’d already seen, not that interesting. ‘Nuff said.
Shanghai, on the other hand, was the most impressive piece of real estate we saw in PRC. An amazing skyline. Our guide Cindy showed us a bake shop where almost a thousand people waited on line to buy their delicious Moon Cakes. We bought and ate many. Yum! And, after the tour finished, we had the best and most expensive meal we’d ever eaten, at Jean Georges, located on the fourth floor of Bund Number Three. Of the six courses, four had foie gras. Fatty but delicious. Our wait staff person, Olivia, was a marvel. We wanted to take her home.
So then, why is China a puzzle-box? The easy answer is that they have shown how fast a country can change from a closed dictatorship with a communist view toward life, to a capitalistic and materialistic society, where the entire country is on sale as a commercial enterprise. How can they manage such fast change when our society refuses to change? They are still the ancient society they always were, but with the patience of expert planners. Their long view rivals that of Japan. In the United States, we don’t even make short range plans, only annual budgets. And, in our Congress, even those never get approved anymore. This single difference gives the Chinese a major competitive advantage we cannot match. But, China has its own problems, like nothing we can understand. It appears to me from what I saw, that people living in the PRC and Hong Kong are left on their own without a government safety net to cushion against bad joss. In the USA, we have welfare, Social Security and Medicare. But we also have a very nasty financial system, where in China and Hong Kong at least their financial system isn’t nearly as corrupt. In the Far East, there is the threat of starvation motivating the poor and destitute. Here in the USA, we have a sense of entitlement that supersedes our desire to improve our lives and those of the next generation.
In Shanghai, Andrea got sick the last night we were there (after that amazing fatty meal at Jean Georges). It got worse our last night of the trip, in Hong Kong. So when we returned home, we had her see her doctor. She had her gall bladder duct blocked by a stone and we needed to rush her to the ER and get her gall bladder removed. Here’s the neat little irony: A life of eating fat food was the predisposing cause of her problem. But the precipitating cause was the dinner in Shanghai. Seems like no matter where we go, we remain constant. But, across the world, things have myriad shades of difference. And so it is between the USA and China. So similar, yet so different.
It was the vacation of a lifetime and a research opportunity that will continue to inform my fiction writing for the rest of my life. But, what it all comes down to at its end is, it’s good to be home.
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Did our administration have pre-knowledge of 9/11?
December 5, 2004
From a story reported on another web site (http://www.crooksandliars.com/House Hearings On State Department IG Shows Conflict) during September 2007 , Inspector General Howard J. Krongard testified before Chairman Henry Waxman of the Congrssional Oversight Committee. These hearings continued, and on November 14, the public discovered that brother, Alvin Bernard “Buzzy” Krongard, may be on Blackwater’s advisory board. Buzzy had previously served as the Executive Director of the CIA.
The most disturbing thing about Buzzy is on September 6 and 7, 2001, just before ’9/11,’ he initiated a number of (criminal) transactions in financial markets that indicate specific foreknowledge of the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
From a story reported on another web site (http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/10_09_01_krongard.html), until 1997 A.B. “Buzzy” Krongard had been Chairman of the investment bank A.B. Brown. A.B. Brown was acquired by Banker’s Trust in 1997. Krongard then became, as part of the merger, Vice Chairman of Banker’s Trust-AB Brown, one of 20 major U.S. banks named by Senator Carl Levin this year as being connected to money laundering. Krongard’s last position at Banker’s Trust (BT) was to oversee “private client relations.” In this capacity he had direct hands-on relations with some of the wealthiest people in the world in a kind of specialized banking operation that has been identified by the U.S. Senate and other investigators as being closely connected to the laundering of drug money.
In the case of at least one of these trades – which has left a $2.5 million prize unclaimed – the firm used to place the “put options” on United Airlines stock was, until 1998, managed by the man who is now in the number three Executive Director position at the Central Intelligence Agency.
On September 29, 2001 – in a vital story that has gone unnoticed by the major media – the San Francisco Chronicle reported, “Investors have yet to collect more than $2.5 million in profits they made trading options in the stock of United Airlines before the Sept. 11, terrorist attacks, according to a source familiar with the trades and market data… The source familiar with the United trades identified Deutsche Bank Alex Brown, the American investment banking arm of German giant Deutsche Bank, as the investment bank used to purchase at least some of these options.”
From a story reported on another web site (http://www.crooksandliars.com/House Hearings On State Department IG Shows Conflict) during September 2007 , Inspector General Howard J. Krongard testified before Chairman Henry Waxman of the Congrssional Oversight Committee. These hearings continued, and on November 14, the public discovered that brother, Alvin Bernard “Buzzy” Krongard, may be on Blackwater’s advisory board. Buzzy had previously served as the Executive Director of the CIA.
The most disturbing thing about Buzzy is on September 6 and 7, 2001, just before ’9/11,’ he initiated a number of (criminal) transactions in financial markets that indicate specific foreknowledge of the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
From a story reported on another web site (http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/10_09_01_krongard.html), until 1997 A.B. “Buzzy” Krongard had been Chairman of the investment bank A.B. Brown. A.B. Brown was acquired by Banker’s Trust in 1997. Krongard then became, as part of the merger, Vice Chairman of Banker’s Trust-AB Brown, one of 20 major U.S. banks named by Senator Carl Levin this year as being connected to money laundering. Krongard’s last position at Banker’s Trust (BT) was to oversee “private client relations.” In this capacity he had direct hands-on relations with some of the wealthiest people in the world in a kind of specialized banking operation that has been identified by the U.S. Senate and other investigators as being closely connected to the laundering of drug money.
In the case of at least one of these trades – which has left a $2.5 million prize unclaimed – the firm used to place the “put options” on United Airlines stock was, until 1998, managed by the man who is now in the number three Executive Director position at the Central Intelligence Agency.
On September 29, 2001 – in a vital story that has gone unnoticed by the major media – the San Francisco Chronicle reported, “Investors have yet to collect more than $2.5 million in profits they made trading options in the stock of United Airlines before the Sept. 11, terrorist attacks, according to a source familiar with the trades and market data… The source familiar with the United trades identified Deutsche Bank Alex Brown, the American investment banking arm of German giant Deutsche Bank, as the investment bank used to purchase at least some of these options.”
The Middle East has always been a time bomb
February 24, 2011
The Middle East has always been a time bomb. It still is.
From the time the Jewish people migrated into the area now known as Israel, a few thousand years ago, until now, this area has known war without end. The Bible has a passage containing Moses’ use of spies to scout the Holy Land before they occupied it. (In North America, we did the same thing, but we didn’t just conquor the indigenous people, we eliminated most of them.)
Now, the Arab crescent is boiling over with unhappy young and disadvantaged people who have known only kings and dictators. Is it possible for democracy to succeed in such places?
In the United States, I believe we hope so. In fact, I’d bet most of the world hopes that the kings and dictators will be replaced with tolerant governments. Would this be good for the United States? Would it make a permanent peace with Israel possible? It’s very hard to say.
My personal opinion is that the current unrest in the Middle East was inevitable. It is a repeat of history not just from that region, but from the world over. Look back to the mid-nineteenth century’s revolts in Europe, where Prince Metternich played a prominent role. From the mid-1840′s to World War One, there was a time of conflict in Europe between the rich and poor leading to a few mostly-failed revolutions. During the Great Depression (the one in the 1920′s and 1930′s, not the current one), global conflict between the rich and poor intensified. World War Two ended that conflict, but it’s happening again all over the planet. What’s happening in the Middle East is more visible that what’s happening in the United States, but greed for power among the rich and a desire for a decent life among the poor will always set the stage for violence and change.
History repeats itself. It’s not that we don’t learn lessons from history. It’s that greed and power are what motivate those who seek to govern. The real lesson is in our DNA. We’re built like this.
Expect the worst to happen. Be surprised when, or if, it doesn’t. As for me, the current unrest is marvelous fodder for spies and their roles in political power shifts. As a fiction writer, it’s time to sit and watch.
After all, the Middle East has always been a time bomb.
The Middle East has always been a time bomb. It still is.
From the time the Jewish people migrated into the area now known as Israel, a few thousand years ago, until now, this area has known war without end. The Bible has a passage containing Moses’ use of spies to scout the Holy Land before they occupied it. (In North America, we did the same thing, but we didn’t just conquor the indigenous people, we eliminated most of them.)
Now, the Arab crescent is boiling over with unhappy young and disadvantaged people who have known only kings and dictators. Is it possible for democracy to succeed in such places?
In the United States, I believe we hope so. In fact, I’d bet most of the world hopes that the kings and dictators will be replaced with tolerant governments. Would this be good for the United States? Would it make a permanent peace with Israel possible? It’s very hard to say.
My personal opinion is that the current unrest in the Middle East was inevitable. It is a repeat of history not just from that region, but from the world over. Look back to the mid-nineteenth century’s revolts in Europe, where Prince Metternich played a prominent role. From the mid-1840′s to World War One, there was a time of conflict in Europe between the rich and poor leading to a few mostly-failed revolutions. During the Great Depression (the one in the 1920′s and 1930′s, not the current one), global conflict between the rich and poor intensified. World War Two ended that conflict, but it’s happening again all over the planet. What’s happening in the Middle East is more visible that what’s happening in the United States, but greed for power among the rich and a desire for a decent life among the poor will always set the stage for violence and change.
History repeats itself. It’s not that we don’t learn lessons from history. It’s that greed and power are what motivate those who seek to govern. The real lesson is in our DNA. We’re built like this.
Expect the worst to happen. Be surprised when, or if, it doesn’t. As for me, the current unrest is marvelous fodder for spies and their roles in political power shifts. As a fiction writer, it’s time to sit and watch.
After all, the Middle East has always been a time bomb.
Wisconsin and the Middle East
February 28, 2011
Wisconsin and the Middle East. Two places, so dissimilar, but with a common bond so strong it is undeniable. Can you guess what that commonality might be?
People in both of those places are now revolting against their governments.
I’d be among the first to agree that elections have consequences. In Wisconsin and other states, voters were faced with difficult choices where the outcomes might express more or less than the choice on which they voted. But, governments are more complicated in their governing than the opinions which got them elected. It is truly difficult to understand what issue or issues caused any voter to make their (often binary) decision. When a politician uses that decision as a claim for everything they personally deem within their own voting purview. I cringe and shudder.
Likewise, when Middle Eastern despots claim their right to absolute rule, I can understand the reaction of those of their people who want them gone. The protests in Wisconsin have taught me.
We – all of us everywhere – seem to have little patience for those who govern. We have no tolerance for others with an opinion unlike ours. And since most people lie in the middle of the proverbial bell-shaped curve, we are now a planet ruled everywhere by extremists. Fundamentalists of every description. Religious fundamentalists, Christian, Moslem, and Jewish want us to obey their versions of correct behavior. Political extremists of every kind claim the right to govern us, even when the issue at hand has little to do with what voters were thinking when they elected the politician. Without consensus, economic and financial experts claim they know best the regulations we should permit, even though most of us haven’t the skill to understand to follow their apparently well-disguised intentions.*
Special interests and greed continue to own unmitigated power. Whether it is duly elected Republican governors in the United States, desiring to eliminate the right of labor unions to collective bargaining, or despotic rulers of poverty stricken countries who have privately pocketed funds that might have been used to elevate the education level of their citizens, the result widens the gap between the socio-economic lives of the richest and poorest of us.
It is ironic, then, that this intended result has the unfortunate unintended consequence of the likelihood of massive political unrest and upheaval. We’ve all witnessed the revolts across the Middle East. I predict we’ll see voters revolt across America in the 2012 elections. Why? Because, the majority of voters are moderates, while left and right-wing extremists dominate the news. If Americans cannot find a moderate candidate to vote for, the extremists elected from the party that lost the previous election will once again again claim that they were elected to put in place their own extremist agenda.
The solution in both the Middle East and in America is moderation. Back in the 1950s, we had moderates practicing a moderate form of politics, promoting moderate religious views, practicing moderately regulated banking and economics, and life was good. I fear we’ll never see the likes of those days again.
Wisconsin and the Middle East. Two places, so dissimilar, but with a common bond so strong it is undeniable. Can you guess what that commonality might be?
People in both of those places are now revolting against their governments.
I’d be among the first to agree that elections have consequences. In Wisconsin and other states, voters were faced with difficult choices where the outcomes might express more or less than the choice on which they voted. But, governments are more complicated in their governing than the opinions which got them elected. It is truly difficult to understand what issue or issues caused any voter to make their (often binary) decision. When a politician uses that decision as a claim for everything they personally deem within their own voting purview. I cringe and shudder.
Likewise, when Middle Eastern despots claim their right to absolute rule, I can understand the reaction of those of their people who want them gone. The protests in Wisconsin have taught me.
We – all of us everywhere – seem to have little patience for those who govern. We have no tolerance for others with an opinion unlike ours. And since most people lie in the middle of the proverbial bell-shaped curve, we are now a planet ruled everywhere by extremists. Fundamentalists of every description. Religious fundamentalists, Christian, Moslem, and Jewish want us to obey their versions of correct behavior. Political extremists of every kind claim the right to govern us, even when the issue at hand has little to do with what voters were thinking when they elected the politician. Without consensus, economic and financial experts claim they know best the regulations we should permit, even though most of us haven’t the skill to understand to follow their apparently well-disguised intentions.*
Special interests and greed continue to own unmitigated power. Whether it is duly elected Republican governors in the United States, desiring to eliminate the right of labor unions to collective bargaining, or despotic rulers of poverty stricken countries who have privately pocketed funds that might have been used to elevate the education level of their citizens, the result widens the gap between the socio-economic lives of the richest and poorest of us.
It is ironic, then, that this intended result has the unfortunate unintended consequence of the likelihood of massive political unrest and upheaval. We’ve all witnessed the revolts across the Middle East. I predict we’ll see voters revolt across America in the 2012 elections. Why? Because, the majority of voters are moderates, while left and right-wing extremists dominate the news. If Americans cannot find a moderate candidate to vote for, the extremists elected from the party that lost the previous election will once again again claim that they were elected to put in place their own extremist agenda.
The solution in both the Middle East and in America is moderation. Back in the 1950s, we had moderates practicing a moderate form of politics, promoting moderate religious views, practicing moderately regulated banking and economics, and life was good. I fear we’ll never see the likes of those days again.
Poisoning the Well – The Publishers and the Libraries
April 7, 2010
“Once upon a time,” two tribes fought over which one had rightful access to the crops growing in a local field. One of the angry tribesmen took matters into his own hands, dropping a powerful poison into the well of the opposing tribe. Soon, the opposing tribe’s populace began dying. The poisoner announced his act to the leaders of his own tribe. They rewarded him. But, then the poisoner’s tribesmen started dying, since they were downstream from the opposing tribe. In the end, no one survived.
The story illustrates a principle that publishers have forgotten. Publishing is a vertically integrated business, but it is also horizontally organized. There is a food chain, with the publishers selling to distributors and libraries, who are one step closer to the retail public. But publishers also have competing product lines in hardcover, paperback and eBook lines, and to keep their hardcover business alive they have artificially priced their eBook price much higher than it should be, IMHO. I believe (and have said here before) that, as the $2.99 price Amazon permits as a basic eBook unit price becomes the de facto price, this may eventually maim most traditional publishers and could kill many of them.
Apparently, the suicidal tendency of some of the publishers goes beyond what I saw as merely irrational. On my way back to Northern California from Seattle, I read in a newspaper that some publishers have tried to limit the number of times a library may loan an eBook before having to repurchase the title. The unintended consequences of this path are the deaths of both the libraries, who can’t afford to continually reacquire eBook titles, and the publishers, who will lose the library market and the young readers who use libraries. There is an even more insidious consequence: Given the current budget problems that trickle down from the Federal government to our local governments, libraries are already being tightly squeezed, and so are public schools. Forcing libraries to spend cash they don’t have simply means they won’t have many eBooks available at all. Children who used libraries because they can’t afford to buy books will lose their access and may stop reading. Fewer eBooks means fewer readers. Fewer readers means dumber adults. Dumber adults means a less competitive country, with us all suffering as a result. Here’s a case where poisoning the well is a national security issue.
Anyone have a different opinion? Please, express it here!
“Once upon a time,” two tribes fought over which one had rightful access to the crops growing in a local field. One of the angry tribesmen took matters into his own hands, dropping a powerful poison into the well of the opposing tribe. Soon, the opposing tribe’s populace began dying. The poisoner announced his act to the leaders of his own tribe. They rewarded him. But, then the poisoner’s tribesmen started dying, since they were downstream from the opposing tribe. In the end, no one survived.
The story illustrates a principle that publishers have forgotten. Publishing is a vertically integrated business, but it is also horizontally organized. There is a food chain, with the publishers selling to distributors and libraries, who are one step closer to the retail public. But publishers also have competing product lines in hardcover, paperback and eBook lines, and to keep their hardcover business alive they have artificially priced their eBook price much higher than it should be, IMHO. I believe (and have said here before) that, as the $2.99 price Amazon permits as a basic eBook unit price becomes the de facto price, this may eventually maim most traditional publishers and could kill many of them.
Apparently, the suicidal tendency of some of the publishers goes beyond what I saw as merely irrational. On my way back to Northern California from Seattle, I read in a newspaper that some publishers have tried to limit the number of times a library may loan an eBook before having to repurchase the title. The unintended consequences of this path are the deaths of both the libraries, who can’t afford to continually reacquire eBook titles, and the publishers, who will lose the library market and the young readers who use libraries. There is an even more insidious consequence: Given the current budget problems that trickle down from the Federal government to our local governments, libraries are already being tightly squeezed, and so are public schools. Forcing libraries to spend cash they don’t have simply means they won’t have many eBooks available at all. Children who used libraries because they can’t afford to buy books will lose their access and may stop reading. Fewer eBooks means fewer readers. Fewer readers means dumber adults. Dumber adults means a less competitive country, with us all suffering as a result. Here’s a case where poisoning the well is a national security issue.
Anyone have a different opinion? Please, express it here!
Wikileaks and hacking in general
December 6, 2010
I believe all humans lie and all keep secrets. When I worked as a subcontractor for the government, one of the things I could do was lie well enough to pass a lie detector test. Most of my lies were lies of omission, but some were untruths I told. All spies lie. We have to in order to survive. Alternate identities are a lie. The way we walk is a deception: I am harmless. The way we talk is often a lie: I am not who you think. When we steal the secrets of others, we lie: I have nothing that could compromise you.
I stumbled across a secret that could have gotten me into massive trouble, had I revealed it. So, I never did. Even though its value has diminished over the years, I never will. Not telling is a lie. All secrets are, in essence, lies.
Our government tells us lies every day. Some of the lies are lies of omission, but many more are lies crafted by political parties to invoke fear into voters. Power is often maintained through a fabric of lies. When our government listens to its intelligence services for information relating to enfolding world events, it often is hearing lies. I know this, because by not telling my handler what I’d found out, I was, in effect, crafting a place where a lie could sit as its substitute. And, at least one lie did find its way into the fabric of our government’s understanding of world events because of my own actions.
When Julian Assange created Wikileaks, he and his followers worked for a world where truth can be more easily available. If no government lied to the world, what would the world be like?
Computer hackers have existed almost since the day computers were invented. Before I ever worked for the government, one of my major focuses as a management consultant was computer security. I worked on several computer crimes and solved them. I was quoted in Institutional Investor and in Pension and Investment Age on computer fraud and countermeasures and wrote an article for the Journal of Cash Management. I’ve been an expert on the topic of computer hacking for decades. About fifteen years ago, someone broke inot our house and stole documents that made it possible for them to sell my wife’s and my identity. I used my skills to track the culprit and find him (3,000 miles away). I helped get him arrested. My skills are still functional.
I think most hackers are better as fictional devices than as real people. In fiction, a writer can use a hacker to do either good or bad things. In real life, most of the hacking I know about is identity theft and its relatives. Nasty stuff. But, not all is bad. The hackers who “stole” secrets from our government and used Wikileaks to post them for all to see are doing us all a service, in my humble opinion.
The truth is out there. The hackers are setting it free.
I believe all humans lie and all keep secrets. When I worked as a subcontractor for the government, one of the things I could do was lie well enough to pass a lie detector test. Most of my lies were lies of omission, but some were untruths I told. All spies lie. We have to in order to survive. Alternate identities are a lie. The way we walk is a deception: I am harmless. The way we talk is often a lie: I am not who you think. When we steal the secrets of others, we lie: I have nothing that could compromise you.
I stumbled across a secret that could have gotten me into massive trouble, had I revealed it. So, I never did. Even though its value has diminished over the years, I never will. Not telling is a lie. All secrets are, in essence, lies.
Our government tells us lies every day. Some of the lies are lies of omission, but many more are lies crafted by political parties to invoke fear into voters. Power is often maintained through a fabric of lies. When our government listens to its intelligence services for information relating to enfolding world events, it often is hearing lies. I know this, because by not telling my handler what I’d found out, I was, in effect, crafting a place where a lie could sit as its substitute. And, at least one lie did find its way into the fabric of our government’s understanding of world events because of my own actions.
When Julian Assange created Wikileaks, he and his followers worked for a world where truth can be more easily available. If no government lied to the world, what would the world be like?
Computer hackers have existed almost since the day computers were invented. Before I ever worked for the government, one of my major focuses as a management consultant was computer security. I worked on several computer crimes and solved them. I was quoted in Institutional Investor and in Pension and Investment Age on computer fraud and countermeasures and wrote an article for the Journal of Cash Management. I’ve been an expert on the topic of computer hacking for decades. About fifteen years ago, someone broke inot our house and stole documents that made it possible for them to sell my wife’s and my identity. I used my skills to track the culprit and find him (3,000 miles away). I helped get him arrested. My skills are still functional.
I think most hackers are better as fictional devices than as real people. In fiction, a writer can use a hacker to do either good or bad things. In real life, most of the hacking I know about is identity theft and its relatives. Nasty stuff. But, not all is bad. The hackers who “stole” secrets from our government and used Wikileaks to post them for all to see are doing us all a service, in my humble opinion.
The truth is out there. The hackers are setting it free.
Spy Toys
Friday, February 25, 2011
Like most thriller writers, my secret weapons really are secret weapons.
When I was writing my first thriller manuscript, I had a conversation with James Rollins, who told me where he found out about liquid armor. He got it from the US Army’s website, and has used it in some of his Sigma series. I borrowed the tech toy from him.
One of my friends is a computer hacker. He’s helped me with the theme and tech content of one of my manuscripts.
I know some folks who’ve worked at D.A.R.P.A. and they spoke to me about projects they had cancelled. Great spy tech. Even for cancelled projects, I thought D.A.R.P.A. was off limits.
Lately, however, spy technology I know about and wouldn’t have ever put in a story has showed up on television. NCIS and other shows have used tech I thought was classified. Seeing on the tube what I thought was the province of a classified status has shaken my understanding of the rules.
So then, what are the rules? Should they be followed? I thought anything with a current field use should be kept secret. I thought anything that could be used as a weapon against my government should be kept out of my fiction. Was I wrong? If NCIS, NCIS LA, and a few movies recently released offer examples of the new rules, then fiction writers can write about whatever they want.
Live and learn.
Like most thriller writers, my secret weapons really are secret weapons.
When I was writing my first thriller manuscript, I had a conversation with James Rollins, who told me where he found out about liquid armor. He got it from the US Army’s website, and has used it in some of his Sigma series. I borrowed the tech toy from him.
One of my friends is a computer hacker. He’s helped me with the theme and tech content of one of my manuscripts.
I know some folks who’ve worked at D.A.R.P.A. and they spoke to me about projects they had cancelled. Great spy tech. Even for cancelled projects, I thought D.A.R.P.A. was off limits.
Lately, however, spy technology I know about and wouldn’t have ever put in a story has showed up on television. NCIS and other shows have used tech I thought was classified. Seeing on the tube what I thought was the province of a classified status has shaken my understanding of the rules.
So then, what are the rules? Should they be followed? I thought anything with a current field use should be kept secret. I thought anything that could be used as a weapon against my government should be kept out of my fiction. Was I wrong? If NCIS, NCIS LA, and a few movies recently released offer examples of the new rules, then fiction writers can write about whatever they want.
Live and learn.
Computer Fraud and Countermeasures
March 14, 2010
I just read an article in slicon.com about corporate cyberespionage (Cyber espionage: Firms fail to take threat seriously, by Shelly Portet, http://www.silicon.com/technology/security/2011/03/09/cyber-espionage-firms-fail-to-take-threat-seriously-39747112/).
Computer fraud has been responsible for a massive number of cases of identity theft over the last decade, and there is no end in sight. Both my wife and I have had our identities stolen, and sold to criminals. As a result, we needed an attorney’s help to work with the IRS, which thought we had an offshore bank account funding terrorism. Nasty.
Has this happened to you or someone you know? Do you track your credit reports to stop identity theft (after it’s occurred)?
From the article, it appears most corporations haven’t awakened to the possibility that a cybercriminal has hacked their corporate website and stolen proprietary information for resale or competitive response.
The author of the report recommends that corporate users not copy files to their own computers, since it would provide more targets for a hacker. But there’s a problem in not having multiple copies out there: A single copy on a cloud server provides less work for a hacker who desires to modify the file so it either contains viruses or, even worse, is no longer an accurate depiction of the thoughts of its creator. Without multiple copies, reconstructing the original version would be difficult or impossible. Seems to me, offsite, offline copies would be a better alternative.
I wrote an article years ago entitled “Cash Management Data Security,” for the Journal of Cash Management (under my real name: Volume 4, Number 5, page 74). I also was quoted on the subject of computer fraud corporate cybercrime in Pension & Investment Age on November 12, “Workstation Technology Dominates Conference,” 1984, page 26): “Nothing in the field of data security has really changed over the past seven years, only the prominence of the problem.”
Now, with cloud computing becoming prevalent, it appears we’re ripe for a bigger problem than ever.
What do your think? If the company you work for is prepared to defend itself against cybercriminals, I’d like to know about it. BUT, don’t leave your company’s name (in your blogspot comment). We wouldn’t want to tempt fate now, would we?
I just read an article in slicon.com about corporate cyberespionage (Cyber espionage: Firms fail to take threat seriously, by Shelly Portet, http://www.silicon.com/technology/security/2011/03/09/cyber-espionage-firms-fail-to-take-threat-seriously-39747112/).
Computer fraud has been responsible for a massive number of cases of identity theft over the last decade, and there is no end in sight. Both my wife and I have had our identities stolen, and sold to criminals. As a result, we needed an attorney’s help to work with the IRS, which thought we had an offshore bank account funding terrorism. Nasty.
Has this happened to you or someone you know? Do you track your credit reports to stop identity theft (after it’s occurred)?
From the article, it appears most corporations haven’t awakened to the possibility that a cybercriminal has hacked their corporate website and stolen proprietary information for resale or competitive response.
The author of the report recommends that corporate users not copy files to their own computers, since it would provide more targets for a hacker. But there’s a problem in not having multiple copies out there: A single copy on a cloud server provides less work for a hacker who desires to modify the file so it either contains viruses or, even worse, is no longer an accurate depiction of the thoughts of its creator. Without multiple copies, reconstructing the original version would be difficult or impossible. Seems to me, offsite, offline copies would be a better alternative.
I wrote an article years ago entitled “Cash Management Data Security,” for the Journal of Cash Management (under my real name: Volume 4, Number 5, page 74). I also was quoted on the subject of computer fraud corporate cybercrime in Pension & Investment Age on November 12, “Workstation Technology Dominates Conference,” 1984, page 26): “Nothing in the field of data security has really changed over the past seven years, only the prominence of the problem.”
Now, with cloud computing becoming prevalent, it appears we’re ripe for a bigger problem than ever.
What do your think? If the company you work for is prepared to defend itself against cybercriminals, I’d like to know about it. BUT, don’t leave your company’s name (in your blogspot comment). We wouldn’t want to tempt fate now, would we?
We’re all Prisoners of the Medical System… And we’re on Death Row
May 5, 2011
Just in case you’re healthy, take a look at what you’ll face when you’re not: The FDA belongs to drug companies, and they’d rather treat diseases than cure them. Of course, curing a disease is suicide to a medical corporation since once you’re cured, you are no longer a customer. It’s come to my attention that on several occasions, a large pharmaceutical company has purchased the stock of a corporation which has developed a cure for one of the diseases they treat. The large corporation then “sunsets” the cure, placing it in their inventory of research not to be pursued.
I keep a count of such things. From the leaks I’ve encountered, so far three cures for cancer and two cures for Type I diabetes have been sunsetted.
Of course, I have no real proof to offer. If I did and offered it, the pharmaceutical companies I named would sue me. So, do your own research. It’s not that hard.
The ethics of sunsetting a cure for any disease are questionable at best. The FDA and the SEC let this happen. It’s capitalism at its best. Conservatives don’t notice the lack of ethics and liberals don’t seem to care either.
When Obama rushed the Health Care bill into law, he and the democrats made many compromises. One of them appears to be that there won’t be any improved regulation of big pharmaceutical companies. In my opinion, this is not good.
What do you think?
Just in case you’re healthy, take a look at what you’ll face when you’re not: The FDA belongs to drug companies, and they’d rather treat diseases than cure them. Of course, curing a disease is suicide to a medical corporation since once you’re cured, you are no longer a customer. It’s come to my attention that on several occasions, a large pharmaceutical company has purchased the stock of a corporation which has developed a cure for one of the diseases they treat. The large corporation then “sunsets” the cure, placing it in their inventory of research not to be pursued.
I keep a count of such things. From the leaks I’ve encountered, so far three cures for cancer and two cures for Type I diabetes have been sunsetted.
Of course, I have no real proof to offer. If I did and offered it, the pharmaceutical companies I named would sue me. So, do your own research. It’s not that hard.
The ethics of sunsetting a cure for any disease are questionable at best. The FDA and the SEC let this happen. It’s capitalism at its best. Conservatives don’t notice the lack of ethics and liberals don’t seem to care either.
When Obama rushed the Health Care bill into law, he and the democrats made many compromises. One of them appears to be that there won’t be any improved regulation of big pharmaceutical companies. In my opinion, this is not good.
What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
