The Pentagon already employs legions of elite hackers trained in cyberwarfare. But they mostly play defense, and that's what Naval Postgraduate School professor John Arquilla wants to change. He'd like the US military's coders to team up with network specialists abroad to form a global geek squad. Together, they could launch preemptive online strikes to head off real-world battles.
Armies (even guerrilla armies) are so dependent on digital communications these days that a well-placed network hit could hobble their forces. Do these cyberattacks right—and openly—and the belligerents will think twice before starting trouble. Arquilla calls his plan "a nonlethal way to deter lethal conflict."
Sure, it's risky. A misinterpreted or misattributed attack could inflame tensions. Or you might fritz the good guys and civilians by mistake. But Arquilla says this "kinder, gentler deterrence" is better than threatening to strangle an adversary's economy or reduce its cities to radioactive cinders. Here are three scenarios in which preemptive cyberattacks could prevent bloodshed.
Scenario: Defusing South Asia
Situation: Pakistan and India are massing armies on their shared border.
Solution: Take out the command-and-control networks on both sides before these nuclear-armed foes can go to war for a fifth time. In the 1951 film The Day the Earth Stood Still, Arquilla notes, a benevolent alien shuts down the machines of Earth's superpowers before they can spread nukes to other planets. Here, US- led hackers play the ET role to put the conflict on ice.
Scenario: Disconnecting al Qaeda
Situation: Intelligence sources report that al Qaeda is about to launch another 9/11.
Solution: Track down militants online and let them know we're watching. Spy agencies already eavesdrop on al Qaeda's networks and occasionally take down its Web sites. But to really disrupt increasingly Web-dependent terror groups, you have to convince them they're not safe anywhere on the Net. Set up online honeypots—like a fake jihadist discussion forum—to lure in and bust wannabe Osamas. And even if you break up terror cells by other means, give public credit to your online spadework. A little fudging is acceptable if it keeps killers from clicking for the cause.
Scenario: Restraining Russia
Situation: Russia is mobilizing its troops for another showdown with Georgia.
Solution: Deploy a US-led or NATO-sponsored cyberdeterrent squad to disrupt the Russian military's communication networks, forcing the Kremlin to delay an attack on the former Soviet republic. The intervention would buy time for diplomacy to work. Arquilla says, "I like the idea of cyberdeterrence being used against anyone who would start a war"—even, he muses, the US.
Saturday, October 03, 2009
Friday, October 02, 2009
The Long Path to Nowhere: Suing State Sponsors of Terrorism by IPT
Over the past decade, victims of terrorist attacks have taken to federal courts in an attempt to hold state sponsors of terrorism civilly liable—a practice that has become nothing more than a "meaningless kabuki dance," the chief U.S. District Court judge in Washington writes in a recent opinion. Calling this system of justice a "failed policy," Judge Royce Lamberth called upon Congress and the President to reexamine the laws permitting these suits to consider whether there might be a viable alternative to private litigation.
The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act ("FSIA") allows foreign governments to be sued if they are engaged in acts of terrorism, either directly or through the provision of "material support or resources." When this law was passed, the popular sentiment was that "terrorism victims were going to 'sue the terrorists out of business.'"
A decade later, hundreds of claims representing thousands of victims have been brought against Iran seeking compensatory and punitive damages for the rogue nation's support for terrorist organizations such as Hamas and Hizballah. The combined results of these suits have been judgments totaling $9 million. As the court points out, however, these are nothing but pyrrhic victories, with victims seldom - if ever - able to recover their damages.
The court's 191-page opinion is dedicated to laying out the substantive hurdles victims of terrorism face, from the technical application of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to more complicated "separation of powers" issues. In the case of Iran, the assets are simply unreachable. Based on a recent estimate, Iranian assets in the United States total $45 million, a mere drop in the bucket compared to the judgments entered against it. As Judge Lambert explained in detailing the problem, courts have tried "with very little success, to locate and attach Iranian government assets in aid of their execution of their civil judgments."
Although the instant opinion dealt solely with the challenges facing victims of terrorism who bring suit under the FSIA, those who file under the Anti-Terrorism Act ("ATA") against individuals who provide "material support or resources" face similar hurdles to enforcing judgments. Just as "the overwhelming majority of successful FSIA plaintiffs with judgments against Iran still have not received the relief," ATA plaintiffs likewise have been denied justice.
In light of these concerns, the court called upon the government, both Congress and the President, to work towards meaningful reform of the FSIA. Although he proposed the creation of an administrative agency-style commission, Judge Lamberth explained that reform should be undertaken by the political branches of government, rather than the courts.
The court properly recognized the need for reform. The current system of justice is simply untenable. As the court warned, "as long as civil litigation is a means by which our political branches choose to redress the harms suffered as a result of terrorism . . . the victims in these cases will continue to be unwitting participants in a meaningless charade."
The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act ("FSIA") allows foreign governments to be sued if they are engaged in acts of terrorism, either directly or through the provision of "material support or resources." When this law was passed, the popular sentiment was that "terrorism victims were going to 'sue the terrorists out of business.'"
A decade later, hundreds of claims representing thousands of victims have been brought against Iran seeking compensatory and punitive damages for the rogue nation's support for terrorist organizations such as Hamas and Hizballah. The combined results of these suits have been judgments totaling $9 million. As the court points out, however, these are nothing but pyrrhic victories, with victims seldom - if ever - able to recover their damages.
The court's 191-page opinion is dedicated to laying out the substantive hurdles victims of terrorism face, from the technical application of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to more complicated "separation of powers" issues. In the case of Iran, the assets are simply unreachable. Based on a recent estimate, Iranian assets in the United States total $45 million, a mere drop in the bucket compared to the judgments entered against it. As Judge Lambert explained in detailing the problem, courts have tried "with very little success, to locate and attach Iranian government assets in aid of their execution of their civil judgments."
Although the instant opinion dealt solely with the challenges facing victims of terrorism who bring suit under the FSIA, those who file under the Anti-Terrorism Act ("ATA") against individuals who provide "material support or resources" face similar hurdles to enforcing judgments. Just as "the overwhelming majority of successful FSIA plaintiffs with judgments against Iran still have not received the relief," ATA plaintiffs likewise have been denied justice.
In light of these concerns, the court called upon the government, both Congress and the President, to work towards meaningful reform of the FSIA. Although he proposed the creation of an administrative agency-style commission, Judge Lamberth explained that reform should be undertaken by the political branches of government, rather than the courts.
The court properly recognized the need for reform. The current system of justice is simply untenable. As the court warned, "as long as civil litigation is a means by which our political branches choose to redress the harms suffered as a result of terrorism . . . the victims in these cases will continue to be unwitting participants in a meaningless charade."
It’s Just a Matter of Semantics by James Hendler
What do web giant Google (GOOG), the New York Times (NYT), the pharmaceutical leader UCB, and web startups Garlik and Bintro have in common?
They are among the approximately two hundred companies that have announced, this month alone, details of how they will be enhancing their businesses by using the emerging technology of the Semantic Web. They join a rapidly growing list of companies already using this new Web stuff. So what is it, and why haven’t we heard more about it?
You’ve likely heard of what’s known as Web 2.0 thanks to social media companies such as Facebook, YouTube and Wikipedia. The Semantic Web, on the other hand, tends to play “below the hood,” making applications, search and social networks better rather than replacing them altogether. (It is sort of the online equivalent of the BASF motto: The Semantic Web doesn’t make online tools. It makes online tools better.)
Today online collaboration is very evident in written documents and communications – a Wikipedia entry gets better as more people contribute to it; Facebook gets richer as a subscriber connects to more friends. But business software and tools, such as databases, usually reside inside corporate networks and on users’ desktops and laptops – making difficult the kind of global collaboration that’s rampant in the consumer world.
A little goes a long way.
That’s where semantics come in. A user may see the number “12203” – but not know if it is an order number, a zip code, an employee identifier, or anything else. Applications need to know what those numbers mean, and that requires a semantic technology – something more powerful than current databases provide.
Traditional artificial intelligence tools can help make applications smarter, but AI machines and software are expensive to build and do not scale very well. Semantic Web technologies, on the other hand, are scalable and affordable. And on the Web, a little semantics goes a long way.
That’s because semantics shifts the burden of knowledge collecting from computers to users – we just need enough knowledge to get the right data to the right users, and let people do the thinking.
So, for example, when the Obama administration started sharing government data, there were hundreds of different datasets with thousands of different properties and millions of numbers. Using traditional data modeling approaches, just integrating this data available could take months. Using Semantic Web technologies a couple of my students were able to pull the data to the Web, integrate it, and build a number of interactive demos in under a week.
Does that sound too simple to be a revolution?
We’ll see. Remember, it was just a bit more than a decade ago when a couple of Stanford students realized out that a simple algorithm could help us search for and find the right documents. Now semantic technology is leading to new and exciting data-rich applications that will change how business is done and the Web forever.
They are among the approximately two hundred companies that have announced, this month alone, details of how they will be enhancing their businesses by using the emerging technology of the Semantic Web. They join a rapidly growing list of companies already using this new Web stuff. So what is it, and why haven’t we heard more about it?
You’ve likely heard of what’s known as Web 2.0 thanks to social media companies such as Facebook, YouTube and Wikipedia. The Semantic Web, on the other hand, tends to play “below the hood,” making applications, search and social networks better rather than replacing them altogether. (It is sort of the online equivalent of the BASF motto: The Semantic Web doesn’t make online tools. It makes online tools better.)
Today online collaboration is very evident in written documents and communications – a Wikipedia entry gets better as more people contribute to it; Facebook gets richer as a subscriber connects to more friends. But business software and tools, such as databases, usually reside inside corporate networks and on users’ desktops and laptops – making difficult the kind of global collaboration that’s rampant in the consumer world.
A little goes a long way.
That’s where semantics come in. A user may see the number “12203” – but not know if it is an order number, a zip code, an employee identifier, or anything else. Applications need to know what those numbers mean, and that requires a semantic technology – something more powerful than current databases provide.
Traditional artificial intelligence tools can help make applications smarter, but AI machines and software are expensive to build and do not scale very well. Semantic Web technologies, on the other hand, are scalable and affordable. And on the Web, a little semantics goes a long way.
That’s because semantics shifts the burden of knowledge collecting from computers to users – we just need enough knowledge to get the right data to the right users, and let people do the thinking.
So, for example, when the Obama administration started sharing government data, there were hundreds of different datasets with thousands of different properties and millions of numbers. Using traditional data modeling approaches, just integrating this data available could take months. Using Semantic Web technologies a couple of my students were able to pull the data to the Web, integrate it, and build a number of interactive demos in under a week.
Does that sound too simple to be a revolution?
We’ll see. Remember, it was just a bit more than a decade ago when a couple of Stanford students realized out that a simple algorithm could help us search for and find the right documents. Now semantic technology is leading to new and exciting data-rich applications that will change how business is done and the Web forever.
Thursday, October 01, 2009
Wireless Network Modded to See Through Walls by KentuckyFC
The way signal strength varies in a wireless network can reveal what's going on behind closed doors.
It's every schoolboy's dream: an easy way of looking through walls to spy on neighbors, monitor siblings, and keep tabs on the sweet jar. And now a dream no longer...
Researchers at the University of Utah say that the way radio signals vary in a wireless network can reveal the movement of people behind closed doors. Joey Wilson and Neal Patwari have developed a technique called variance-based radio tomographic imaging that processes the signals to reveal signs of movement. They've even tested the idea with a 34-node wireless network using the IEEE 802.15.4 wireless protocol, the protocol for personal area networks employed by home automation services such as ZigBee.
The basic idea is straightforward. The signal strength at any point in a network is the sum of all the paths the radio waves can take to get to the receiver. Any change in the volume of space through which the signals pass, for example caused by the movement of a person, makes the signal strength vary. So by "interrogating" this volume of space with many signals, picked up by multiple receivers, it is possible to build up a picture of the movement within it.
In tests with a 34-node network set up outside a standard living room, Wilson and Patwari say they were able to locate moving objects in the room to within a meter or so. That's not bad, and the team says there is ample potential for improvement by increasing accuracy while reducing the number of nodes.
The advantage of this technique over others is, first, its cost. The nodes in such a network are off-the-shelf and therefore cheap. Other through-wall viewing systems cost in excess of $100,000. The second advantage is the ease with which it can be set up. Wilson and Patwari say that adding a GPS receiver to each node allows it to work out its own location, which should dramatically speed up the imaging process. Other systems have to be "trained" to recognize the environment.
Wilson and Patwari have even worked out how their system might be used:
"We envision a building imaging scenario similar to the following. Emergency responders, military forces, or police arrive at a scene where entry into a building is potentially dangerous. They deploy radio sensors around (and potentially on top of) the building area, either by throwing or launching them, or dropping them while moving around the building. The nodes immediately form a network and self-localize, perhaps using information about the size and shape of the building from a database (eg Google maps) and some known-location coordinates (eg using GPS). Then, nodes begin to transmit, making signal strength measurements on links which cross the building or area of interest. The received signal strength measurements of each link are transmitted back to a base station and used to estimate the positions of moving people and objects within the building."
That's ambitious, but if they do get their system to the point where it can be used like this, it raises another problem: privacy.
How might such cheap and easy-to-configure monitoring networks be used if they become widely available? What's to stop next door's teenage brats from monitoring your every move, or house thieves choosing their targets on the basis that nobody is inside?
Of course, in the cat-and-mouse game of surveillance, it shouldn't be too hard to build a device that disables such a monitoring network. But only if you know it's there in the first place.
There are fun and games galore to be had with this idea.
It's every schoolboy's dream: an easy way of looking through walls to spy on neighbors, monitor siblings, and keep tabs on the sweet jar. And now a dream no longer...
Researchers at the University of Utah say that the way radio signals vary in a wireless network can reveal the movement of people behind closed doors. Joey Wilson and Neal Patwari have developed a technique called variance-based radio tomographic imaging that processes the signals to reveal signs of movement. They've even tested the idea with a 34-node wireless network using the IEEE 802.15.4 wireless protocol, the protocol for personal area networks employed by home automation services such as ZigBee.
The basic idea is straightforward. The signal strength at any point in a network is the sum of all the paths the radio waves can take to get to the receiver. Any change in the volume of space through which the signals pass, for example caused by the movement of a person, makes the signal strength vary. So by "interrogating" this volume of space with many signals, picked up by multiple receivers, it is possible to build up a picture of the movement within it.
In tests with a 34-node network set up outside a standard living room, Wilson and Patwari say they were able to locate moving objects in the room to within a meter or so. That's not bad, and the team says there is ample potential for improvement by increasing accuracy while reducing the number of nodes.
The advantage of this technique over others is, first, its cost. The nodes in such a network are off-the-shelf and therefore cheap. Other through-wall viewing systems cost in excess of $100,000. The second advantage is the ease with which it can be set up. Wilson and Patwari say that adding a GPS receiver to each node allows it to work out its own location, which should dramatically speed up the imaging process. Other systems have to be "trained" to recognize the environment.
Wilson and Patwari have even worked out how their system might be used:
"We envision a building imaging scenario similar to the following. Emergency responders, military forces, or police arrive at a scene where entry into a building is potentially dangerous. They deploy radio sensors around (and potentially on top of) the building area, either by throwing or launching them, or dropping them while moving around the building. The nodes immediately form a network and self-localize, perhaps using information about the size and shape of the building from a database (eg Google maps) and some known-location coordinates (eg using GPS). Then, nodes begin to transmit, making signal strength measurements on links which cross the building or area of interest. The received signal strength measurements of each link are transmitted back to a base station and used to estimate the positions of moving people and objects within the building."
That's ambitious, but if they do get their system to the point where it can be used like this, it raises another problem: privacy.
How might such cheap and easy-to-configure monitoring networks be used if they become widely available? What's to stop next door's teenage brats from monitoring your every move, or house thieves choosing their targets on the basis that nobody is inside?
Of course, in the cat-and-mouse game of surveillance, it shouldn't be too hard to build a device that disables such a monitoring network. But only if you know it's there in the first place.
There are fun and games galore to be had with this idea.
In Pakistan's Swat valley, volunteers form anti-Taliban militias by Saeed Shah
With government support, thousands of armed volunteers have banded together to form traditional militias against the Taliban in Pakistan's Swat valley, which the army recently wrested back from the hands of extremists.
The militias — known as a "lashkar" — are being organized in individual villages across Swat, a scenic area in Pakistan's North West Frontier province, where the Taliban had unleashed a reign of terror.
The creation of a home-grown security service could bring a measure of stability to Swat, which has a population of about 2 million, but it carries the risk that the armed groups will operate independently and could slip out of state control, setting up a system of warlords.
Some critics say the establishment of lashkars is an indictment of the Pakistani military, which stood by when the Pakistani Taliban established a base in Swat and took complete control of the region.
The Pakistani Taliban, a spinoff of the Afghan extremist movement that's closely linked to al Qaida, developed in lawless tribal areas, then began spreading district by district through the NWFP, which is close to the heart of Pakistan. It was only under severe U.S. pressure that the Pakistani army launched a full-scale operation in April to drive the militants out of Swat, an offensive that won strong praise inside and outside the country.
"It is our duty to kill them, the terrorists. What should we do, kiss them?" said Afzal "Lala" Khan, a former Pakistani Cabinet minister, speaking at his home in the Matta area of Swat, where he held out against the Taliban for two years. He's the only political leader who dared to stay in the valley.
In recent days, Khan raised a lashkar of more than 2,000 men to defend his village and the surrounding locality. An army brigadier general who addressed the lashkar said that each village must organize its own militia, with a man from every household taking part.
"These (lashkars) are no danger to the state. They'll maintain the peace," Khan said. "Our thinkers and column writers worry about what will happen in the future, after decades, but they've got no other solution."
The men in the lashkars — which their leaders often call by the less militaristic name of "village defense committees" — provide their own arms. At the biggest such gathering so far, 10,000 men rallied at the airport just outside Swat's main town of Mingora last week. Many had modern arms, such as Kalashnikovs, but others arrived with old shotguns, rusty pistols and more than one white-bearded man turned up with an ax or even a stick.
The mayor of Swat, Jamal Nasir, who was forced from his home in the Matta area in 2007, formed a 2,500 strong lashkar in recent days for his village, and turned up at the first gathering brandishing an M4 machine gun. Nasir, who'd landed near the top of the Taliban hit list, is now able to resume his duties as mayor but said that rebuilding schools and other damaged infrastructure will have to wait while he organizes the lashkar.
"We waited for three years for the government to come to help us, but we were not rescued," Nasir said. "We don't want to wait for three more years if the Taliban comes back."
Swat was a relatively developed part of Pakistan's otherwise tradition-bound NWFP. The militias didn't exist when the Taliban began their drive for power, so members are having to re-learn the lashkar culture. There are already reports of lashkar members dying in skirmishes with the Taliban, as well as of the militia gunning down extremists.
Many people in Swat appear to support the lashkars, but those with misgivings think that they could end up being used to settle old scores with non-Taliban rivals and that the lashkar leaders, usually the big local landowners, could become de facto warlords. Zia-ud-Din Yusufzai, a school principal in Mingora who had taken a stand against the Taliban, said it was the job of the state to defend citizens.
"Why militarize the whole society? We need books, not guns," Yusufzai said. "The world is progressing ahead. Why should we go back to the caves?"
The army spokesman in Swat, Col. Akhtar Abbas, said that the army coordinated activities with the lashkars to prevent accidental clashes with them, but provided only "moral support."
"The army will only be there for a limited time," said Fazal Karim, the top government official for Swat and surrounding districts. "The police is meant for normal circumstances; they are not trained to confront an insurgency. We are passing through very extraordinary times . . . The lashkars are something very positive. People realized the need to defend themselves against this scale of menace."
The militias — known as a "lashkar" — are being organized in individual villages across Swat, a scenic area in Pakistan's North West Frontier province, where the Taliban had unleashed a reign of terror.
The creation of a home-grown security service could bring a measure of stability to Swat, which has a population of about 2 million, but it carries the risk that the armed groups will operate independently and could slip out of state control, setting up a system of warlords.
Some critics say the establishment of lashkars is an indictment of the Pakistani military, which stood by when the Pakistani Taliban established a base in Swat and took complete control of the region.
The Pakistani Taliban, a spinoff of the Afghan extremist movement that's closely linked to al Qaida, developed in lawless tribal areas, then began spreading district by district through the NWFP, which is close to the heart of Pakistan. It was only under severe U.S. pressure that the Pakistani army launched a full-scale operation in April to drive the militants out of Swat, an offensive that won strong praise inside and outside the country.
"It is our duty to kill them, the terrorists. What should we do, kiss them?" said Afzal "Lala" Khan, a former Pakistani Cabinet minister, speaking at his home in the Matta area of Swat, where he held out against the Taliban for two years. He's the only political leader who dared to stay in the valley.
In recent days, Khan raised a lashkar of more than 2,000 men to defend his village and the surrounding locality. An army brigadier general who addressed the lashkar said that each village must organize its own militia, with a man from every household taking part.
"These (lashkars) are no danger to the state. They'll maintain the peace," Khan said. "Our thinkers and column writers worry about what will happen in the future, after decades, but they've got no other solution."
The men in the lashkars — which their leaders often call by the less militaristic name of "village defense committees" — provide their own arms. At the biggest such gathering so far, 10,000 men rallied at the airport just outside Swat's main town of Mingora last week. Many had modern arms, such as Kalashnikovs, but others arrived with old shotguns, rusty pistols and more than one white-bearded man turned up with an ax or even a stick.
The mayor of Swat, Jamal Nasir, who was forced from his home in the Matta area in 2007, formed a 2,500 strong lashkar in recent days for his village, and turned up at the first gathering brandishing an M4 machine gun. Nasir, who'd landed near the top of the Taliban hit list, is now able to resume his duties as mayor but said that rebuilding schools and other damaged infrastructure will have to wait while he organizes the lashkar.
"We waited for three years for the government to come to help us, but we were not rescued," Nasir said. "We don't want to wait for three more years if the Taliban comes back."
Swat was a relatively developed part of Pakistan's otherwise tradition-bound NWFP. The militias didn't exist when the Taliban began their drive for power, so members are having to re-learn the lashkar culture. There are already reports of lashkar members dying in skirmishes with the Taliban, as well as of the militia gunning down extremists.
Many people in Swat appear to support the lashkars, but those with misgivings think that they could end up being used to settle old scores with non-Taliban rivals and that the lashkar leaders, usually the big local landowners, could become de facto warlords. Zia-ud-Din Yusufzai, a school principal in Mingora who had taken a stand against the Taliban, said it was the job of the state to defend citizens.
"Why militarize the whole society? We need books, not guns," Yusufzai said. "The world is progressing ahead. Why should we go back to the caves?"
The army spokesman in Swat, Col. Akhtar Abbas, said that the army coordinated activities with the lashkars to prevent accidental clashes with them, but provided only "moral support."
"The army will only be there for a limited time," said Fazal Karim, the top government official for Swat and surrounding districts. "The police is meant for normal circumstances; they are not trained to confront an insurgency. We are passing through very extraordinary times . . . The lashkars are something very positive. People realized the need to defend themselves against this scale of menace."
Al-Qaeda and Taliban Status Check: A Resurgent Threat? by Matthew Levitt
Despite recent reports of a wounded al-Qaeda core, the terrorist organization's affiliates in Yemen, Somalia, and elsewhere appear to be gaining strength. In Afghanistan and Pakistan, the Taliban -- al-Qaeda's close ally -- also continue to pose a growing challenge.
The Washington Institute's Stein Program on Counterterrorism and Intelligence invited Richard Barrett to discuss these issues at a special Policy Forum. This event is part of the Institute's ongoing lecture series with senior counterterrorism officials.
Over the past few years, Mr. Barrett noted, the pace of attacks perpetrated by the al Qaeda network has slackened, due to challenges internal to al Qaeda as well as improvements on the national security front. Most critically, intelligence collection – in particular the ability to penetrate terrorist networks and collect human intelligence —has steadily improved. Counterterrorism officials today have learned from past mistakes, have better intelligence, and a clearer understanding of the threat.
Today, there are fewer individuals engaged in terrorism, and new recruits are often not as skilled or ideologically committed. For al Qaeda, today’s key audience is comprised of young adults now in the late teens and twenties for whom 9/11 was less a personal experience than a learned memory. Meanwhile, al-Qaeda’s international image has deteriorated into one that is unsustainable.
Groups that subscribe to al-Qaeda’s ideology increasingly preoccupy themselves with parochial concerns that are local, not global. Al-Qaeda’s emphasis of global issues is becoming dated as local issues begin to play a more substantial role in determining the sequence of events. Public opinion, too, has turned against al-Qaeda for the most part. Surveys indicate while anti-Americanism has not decreased in recent years, support for al-Qaeda and its tactics has.
A transcript of Mr. Barrett's full remarks is available here, and an audio of this event is available here.
The Washington Institute's Stein Program on Counterterrorism and Intelligence invited Richard Barrett to discuss these issues at a special Policy Forum. This event is part of the Institute's ongoing lecture series with senior counterterrorism officials.
Over the past few years, Mr. Barrett noted, the pace of attacks perpetrated by the al Qaeda network has slackened, due to challenges internal to al Qaeda as well as improvements on the national security front. Most critically, intelligence collection – in particular the ability to penetrate terrorist networks and collect human intelligence —has steadily improved. Counterterrorism officials today have learned from past mistakes, have better intelligence, and a clearer understanding of the threat.
Today, there are fewer individuals engaged in terrorism, and new recruits are often not as skilled or ideologically committed. For al Qaeda, today’s key audience is comprised of young adults now in the late teens and twenties for whom 9/11 was less a personal experience than a learned memory. Meanwhile, al-Qaeda’s international image has deteriorated into one that is unsustainable.
Groups that subscribe to al-Qaeda’s ideology increasingly preoccupy themselves with parochial concerns that are local, not global. Al-Qaeda’s emphasis of global issues is becoming dated as local issues begin to play a more substantial role in determining the sequence of events. Public opinion, too, has turned against al-Qaeda for the most part. Surveys indicate while anti-Americanism has not decreased in recent years, support for al-Qaeda and its tactics has.
A transcript of Mr. Barrett's full remarks is available here, and an audio of this event is available here.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Are you ready for the upturn? by Christopher Lochhead
A lot of CEOs got caught flat-footed by the recession: they just didn't see the global downturn coming. They didn't act quickly enough, and as a result, their companies' revenues and earnings suffered more than they needed to. So did their people, customers, and shareholders.
It goes without saying that a lot of executives likewise will misjudge the upturn. Don’t be one of them.
Opportunity may be knocking. As a few rays of light cut through the economic storm clouds, it’s time for action. It is time to start planning, and taking selective thoughtful actions. Here are eight ideas for leading the upturn:
1. Get your smartest six people together to brainstorm for action If you've read my posts before, you know that I strongly believe legendary people produce legendary results. This week take six of your best people (not 60 – committees do dumb things), and put them in charge of figuring out how, where, and when to play the upturn. Ask them to look into:
New technology
New marketing campaigns
New hires
New product development
New companies to buy or partner with
New geographical expansion
New cost cutting measures
2. Launch an aggressive marketing campaign–now. Being visible before your customers fully open their wallets is smart. Mindshare now translates into market share later. If your company sells to businesses you must be aware that your customers with fiscal years ending Dec. 31 may spend a little more in the fourth quarter.
You want to be first in line if that happens. If your outfit sells to consumers — ho ho ho. Christmas is coming. This holiday season probably won’t be a blockbuster, but after a year of little buying, consumers are itchy to buy stuff. Be the first to hand them a back scratcher. Oh, and in the spirit of transparency, as a marketing buy I almost always advocate aggressive, smart marketing.
3. Lock suppliers into long-term, low-priced deals. Buy low, sell high. Right now things are still cheap. Suppliers will trade price for stability. Especially if discounts are connected to minimum purchases over a longer period. Now is the time to use what ever buying power you have to lock in a long-term price advantage with your key suppliers.
4. Invest in new technology. The recession didn’t repeal Moore’s law. Technology kept advancing – even if companies weren’t buying very much. Like all economic recoveries technology is a seminal fuel for the winning cars….gentlemen, start your engines. Now is the time to start investing in new Enterprise 2.0 applications, mobile technology, social marketing, and business technology infrastructure. One big shift in technology is that software increasingly will be delivered as a service (rather than installed on your companies' servers and PCs). If you invest in these so-called cloud services today, ahead of your competition, you'll benefit from the price advantages of this new model before the other guy catches on.
5. Fire losers. If you didn’t lay off the “C” players in your company during the recession, now is the time to whack ‘em. It sounds harsh, but business is business – while the recession is still on, you have a good excuse to cut under-performers.
6. High big brains before the next talent war. It isn't easy to hire rock stars during boom times. So now is the time to start selectively adding “A” players to your bench while it is still easy to hire. Hire in the areas that will create the most competitive advantage, product development, marketing, and sales.
7. Buy some companies. Valuations and market caps remain low. Buy a few companies while they are cheap. Chances are your competitors are still on the sidelines. With a few well placed acquisitions now you can broaden your product line, expand geographically or enter new markets. This will position you for even more growth when the purse strings loosen.
8. Make your #1 competitor sue you. Okay, this strategy is a little controversial, but consider doing something (hire some of their top people, steal a few key customers, attack their core offering, launch a knock-off of their best selling product, etc.) that will make your key competitor launch a lawsuit against your firm. Their suit will make them look weak in the minds of customers and distract their management at the same time. As they focus on suing you, they won’t be focused on customers. (Oh, and your customers will be reading stories about how badly Brand X has been damaged – allegedly– by your firm.) It will also give your lawyers something fun to do for a change. Just don't do anything illegal.
Of course, bad times may not be over yet. Some experts are projecting a “W” in the stock market – ie. their could be a drop or two coming before this recession is really over. Others are predicting that their are more bubbles about to burst. So a prudent, well thought-out approach will be best.
But executives, and CEOs in particular, get paid to create growth in revenue, earrings and market cap. We could be at the front end of a giant growth opportunity. Now is the time for thoughtful, aggressive, action.
It goes without saying that a lot of executives likewise will misjudge the upturn. Don’t be one of them.
Opportunity may be knocking. As a few rays of light cut through the economic storm clouds, it’s time for action. It is time to start planning, and taking selective thoughtful actions. Here are eight ideas for leading the upturn:
1. Get your smartest six people together to brainstorm for action If you've read my posts before, you know that I strongly believe legendary people produce legendary results. This week take six of your best people (not 60 – committees do dumb things), and put them in charge of figuring out how, where, and when to play the upturn. Ask them to look into:
New technology
New marketing campaigns
New hires
New product development
New companies to buy or partner with
New geographical expansion
New cost cutting measures
2. Launch an aggressive marketing campaign–now. Being visible before your customers fully open their wallets is smart. Mindshare now translates into market share later. If your company sells to businesses you must be aware that your customers with fiscal years ending Dec. 31 may spend a little more in the fourth quarter.
You want to be first in line if that happens. If your outfit sells to consumers — ho ho ho. Christmas is coming. This holiday season probably won’t be a blockbuster, but after a year of little buying, consumers are itchy to buy stuff. Be the first to hand them a back scratcher. Oh, and in the spirit of transparency, as a marketing buy I almost always advocate aggressive, smart marketing.
3. Lock suppliers into long-term, low-priced deals. Buy low, sell high. Right now things are still cheap. Suppliers will trade price for stability. Especially if discounts are connected to minimum purchases over a longer period. Now is the time to use what ever buying power you have to lock in a long-term price advantage with your key suppliers.
4. Invest in new technology. The recession didn’t repeal Moore’s law. Technology kept advancing – even if companies weren’t buying very much. Like all economic recoveries technology is a seminal fuel for the winning cars….gentlemen, start your engines. Now is the time to start investing in new Enterprise 2.0 applications, mobile technology, social marketing, and business technology infrastructure. One big shift in technology is that software increasingly will be delivered as a service (rather than installed on your companies' servers and PCs). If you invest in these so-called cloud services today, ahead of your competition, you'll benefit from the price advantages of this new model before the other guy catches on.
5. Fire losers. If you didn’t lay off the “C” players in your company during the recession, now is the time to whack ‘em. It sounds harsh, but business is business – while the recession is still on, you have a good excuse to cut under-performers.
6. High big brains before the next talent war. It isn't easy to hire rock stars during boom times. So now is the time to start selectively adding “A” players to your bench while it is still easy to hire. Hire in the areas that will create the most competitive advantage, product development, marketing, and sales.
7. Buy some companies. Valuations and market caps remain low. Buy a few companies while they are cheap. Chances are your competitors are still on the sidelines. With a few well placed acquisitions now you can broaden your product line, expand geographically or enter new markets. This will position you for even more growth when the purse strings loosen.
8. Make your #1 competitor sue you. Okay, this strategy is a little controversial, but consider doing something (hire some of their top people, steal a few key customers, attack their core offering, launch a knock-off of their best selling product, etc.) that will make your key competitor launch a lawsuit against your firm. Their suit will make them look weak in the minds of customers and distract their management at the same time. As they focus on suing you, they won’t be focused on customers. (Oh, and your customers will be reading stories about how badly Brand X has been damaged – allegedly– by your firm.) It will also give your lawyers something fun to do for a change. Just don't do anything illegal.
Of course, bad times may not be over yet. Some experts are projecting a “W” in the stock market – ie. their could be a drop or two coming before this recession is really over. Others are predicting that their are more bubbles about to burst. So a prudent, well thought-out approach will be best.
But executives, and CEOs in particular, get paid to create growth in revenue, earrings and market cap. We could be at the front end of a giant growth opportunity. Now is the time for thoughtful, aggressive, action.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
McChrystal’s War by Evan Thomas
On McChrystal's shelf is a novel called Once an Eagle by Anton Myrer. The book, which pits a noble warrior named Sam Damon against a conniving careerist named Courtney Massengale, has a cult following in the military. "I've read it about six times," says McChrystal. He is "flattered" to be compared to the Damon character, as he often is by his admiring staff. But he adds that the book is actually complex, and that the Damon hero is a "bit too rigid," while the villain Massengale is "brilliant when he wants to be." McChrystal has an appealing earnestness and openness (he doesn't hesitate to tick off his flaws: "I'm impatient, I shoot from the hip, I ride my staff too hard…"), but one senses a certain wiliness as well. There are many ways to be a good soldier, and McChrystal wants to be them all.
Iran's Global Foray Has Mixed Results by Steve Stecklow and Farnaz Fassihi
Last year, a delegation of Iranians and other foreigners arrived at this tiny, remote coastal village in speedboats. They came to map out plans to build a $350 million deep-water port and a new city.
The three-dozen families who live here weren't pleased to see them. For more than two hours, they say, they berated the Iranians for not consulting them first about the development, and they videotaped the clash. "We said we would defend our homes with guns, knives, machetes, whatever," says William Claire Duncan.
The Iranians haven't been back since.
Last year, the residents of Monkey Point berated a delegation of Iranians and others who dropped by to scout sites for a proposed deepwater port development. Steve Stecklow reports.
Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has described his oil-rich nation as a superpower with worldly ambitions. Since taking power in 2005 he has signed scores of trade agreements with African and Central and Latin American countries, opened a Venezuelan bank, and built factories and housing projects.
On Sunday, Iran said it test-fired short-range missiles, just days after it confirmed it is building a second uranium-enrichment facility. It's all part of an Iranian campaign to project power and greatness world-wide -- including in America's own backyard.
But a close, on-site examination of some of Iran's projects on two continents -- in Nicaragua, Venezuela and Senegal -- reveals mixed results.
Some efforts, like the one at Monkey Point, which was announced by Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega more than two years ago, so far haven't materialized. "The Iranians have promised a lot but have delivered very little," said a Western official in Nicaragua.
Nearly all of the 25,000 taxis on the streets of Dakar, Senegal, are over a decade old and run-down, except for 500 new cabs manufactured in Iran.
Journal Community
Vote: How great a threat is Iran's nuclear program? Other investments sometimes seem to make little economic sense. For example, Iran Khodro, a state-owned Iranian auto maker that spent tens of millions of dollars opening factories in Venezuela and Senegal, recently required a $1.4 billion Iranian-government bailout.
The Senegalese plant, SenIran Auto, produced only 20 cars in its first three months of this year, plant officials there say, well short of the thousands they had been expecting to produce by then.
No one knows the true intent of Iran's widening activities abroad. Interviews with diplomatic officials suggest Western intelligence is very limited.
Iran's longstanding financial ties to Hezbollah, a Lebanese Shiite militant group, create some concern that Iran is quietly developing an infrastructure to strike the West if it is ever attacked by the U.S. or Israel.
Another worry: On Friday, Venezuela's mining minister, Rodolfo Sanz, said Iran is helping the country test and survey its uranium reserves. The U.S., Britain and other countries have accused Iran of trying to develop nuclear weapons, which Iran denies.
"Their activities require watching," says Robert Morgenthau, the Manhattan district attorney in New York City, who gave a speech this month in Washington warning about Iran's "cozy financial, political and military" ties to Venezuela and its leftist president, Hugo Chávez.
Mr. Morgenthau's office has been investigating banks that allegedly have been involved in circumventing U.S. sanctions against Iran.Iran denies any links to terrorism. In a letter to Mr. Morgenthau, Bernardo Alvarez Herrera, Venezuela's ambassador to the U.S., called the speech "simply outrageous" and "irresponsible."
Some experts believe Iran mainly wants to build a global coalition of anti-American nations to support its interests at the United Nations. A diplomatic source in Caracas suggested trade was another motive. "You can't necessarily assume that everything that happens here has a terrorism-related purpose. The Iranians definitely have an incentive to make money."
Alireza Salari, Iran's deputy foreign minister for Americas affairs, said in an interview that the point of its foreign policy is to show "it does not need the United States to survive."
"Iran's international prestige today is higher than ever," he said. "Everywhere you go in the world they recognize Iran's name, they know our president's name."
Distrust over Iran's intentions can be seen in Venezuela, an oil producer with an inflation-ravaged economy. Mr. Chávez, who visited Tehran this month, has embraced Mr. Ahmadinejad. Iran has financed a variety of Venezuelan development projects making everything from tractors to dairy products, government officials say.
There's a weekly flight from Tehran to Caracas. The number of Iranians living in the Venezuelan capital has swelled to about 2,000 from under 200 since the flights began two years ago, says an Iranian businessman.
The Venezuelan Embassy in Washington, D.C., said it couldn't confirm the numbers.
Mr. Chávez's critics claim the Iranian factories may have darker purposes. The plants include Fanabi, a joint Iranian-Venezuelan bicycle factory in Tinaquillo, about a three-hour drive from Caracas.
Mr. Morgenthau referred to factories like this in his recent speech. Given their placement in "remote" areas and their "secretive nature," he said, "we should be concerned that illegal activity might be taking place." However, he said, evidence is "limited."
Although there are suspicions in diplomatic and other circles about the real purposes of some of the Iranian-financed factories and projects, so far there is no hard evidence that they are anything other than what they claim to be.
Ambassador Herrera responded in his letter to Mr. Morgenthau: "What you refer to in your speech as 'suspicious factories' are providing Venezuelans with food, transportation and agricultural equipment," as well as bikes and consumer goods.
During a reporter's unannounced visit this month to the bicycle facility -- a bright red-and-beige building in an industrial park -- the plant's president, José Aranguren, a Venezuelan, agreed to provide a tour and permit photos to be taken. The plant's Iranian vice president, Reza Dai, declined to be interviewed.
Mr. Aranguren noted that when the bike plant opened last year, local opposition newspapers reported that it "exists to enrich uranium" and "we were building bombs." He called the allegations "total lies."
To poke fun at the claims, Mr. Chávez, who visited the plant when it opened, suggested a brand name now used on all bike models: Atomic.
Iris Cano, a Venezuelan in charge of sales, opened spreadsheets on her computer showing that the factory last year sold out its entire initial production run of 4,860 bicycles.
The company employs 44 workers and offers at least eight bike models, she said, including for women, children and one with a large rear basket designed for deliveries. The bikes are made from Iranian parts and are 50% subsidized by the Venezuelan government. Mr. Aranguren calls it "a socialist enterprise."
The bike factory has hit a serious obstacle this year. Iran has failed to deliver many needed parts, and production has dropped 90%, plant officials say. Iran has promised to deliver enough parts to assemble an additional 25,000 bikes, Mr. Aranguren says, but has mainly delivered cartons of frames, wheels and handlebars, which are stored in a warehouse down the street.
"We're a bit paralyzed because we don't have all of our raw materials from Iran," he says.
In the financial district of Caracas, the Iranian-owned Banco Internacional de Desarrollo, or BID, has its own problems. The U.S. Treasury Department last year imposed sanctions against the bank and its parent, the Export Development Bank of Iran, which it accused of violating U.N. sanctions by helping Iran procure weapons of mass destruction. As a result, BID isn't allowed to do business with the U.S. banking system.
BID's clients include Iranian factories such as Fanabi and an Iranian company that builds housing, bank officials say. According to a sign, it offers checking and savings accounts, loans and trade finance.
Inside the bank, employees complain the sanctions mean they can't offer credit or debit cards to its 200 customers. "I can't have a relationship with Maestro, Visa or American Express," says Raymundo Velasquez, the branch manager. "It's terrible. According to them, this bank finances terrorists."
Mr. Velasquez was standing in the gleaming branch office, which had tellers and a security guard, but no customers. Upstairs, in a back office, employees entered data into computers. The 21 employees include five Iranians. The bank's Iranian president declined to be interviewed.
José Antonio Gonzalez, the bank's legal representative, said the purpose of the bank, which opened last year, is "to help all the [Iranian development] projects." Iran "came here to help in many ways, but not militarily," he said. Fernando Illarmendi, the only Venezuelan on BID's board of directors, said he wouldn't work at the bank if it was connected in any way to weapons.
Mr. Morgenthau, the Manhattan district attorney, had suggested in his speech that BID's purpose was to violate U.S. sanctions by establishing relationships with foreign banks that do business with U.S. banks. Mr. Gonzalez said BID has no such relationships with foreign banks, and does no international transactions.
In Senegal, a Muslim country on the western coast of Africa, Iran installed electric lines last year to power the town of Touba, a holy city that attracts hundreds of thousands of Muslim pilgrims each year. But Iran's most visible impact here: the arrival of shiny, new, Iranian-made yellow taxis. They stand in stark contrast to the city's aging fleet of rickety vehicles with dented doors and broken lights.
"Everyone now knows Iran because of the cabs. We go to a remote village, and children run after our car shouting 'Iranian car, Iranian car,'" says 53-year-old Modou Sogk, chairman of the taxi-driver association, who owns an Iranian cab and hopes to buy a second one.
Still, Iran has fallen behind on its promise to help phase out Dakar's 25,000 cabs. Senegal and Iran had an agreement to replace 2,000 taxis by the end of last year, but so far only about 500 have been delivered.
Many other planned ventures, including a storage facility for Iranian oil, haven't materialized. The project is currently suspended due to high costs, according to Mamadou Diop, Senegal's minister of commerce.
Meanwhile, an Iranian-built $75 million auto plant in Thies, which opened last year, produced only 20 cars in this year's first quarter when the goal was to produce 80% of the targeted annual output of 10,000 cars by middle of this year, plant managers say. Managers say they suffered from delays in opening the factory, a lack of spare parts and a shortage of skilled workers in Senegal.
Even if production increases, "the project has no economic return, and maybe it never will," says Hassan Davoudi Deilami, the plant's financial manager. He says the factory's purpose is simply to give Iran a presence in Africa.
Iran is producing more cars in Venezuela. A Venezuelan official at the factory says the plant, called Venirauto, currently makes six cars an hour. Customers drove off with two of the small sedans, the upholstery still covered in plastic, when a reporter showed up earlier this month.
Despite an overall shortage of new cars in Venezuela, the Iranian cars are available only to government ministries, the official said. He described the factory as a "social" program not intended to make a profit.
One man, standing outside a security office at the factory gate, said he had traveled eight hours on a bus hoping to buy one of the cars. He said he was convinced the only way was "knowing somebody or bribing someone." A few minutes later, a security official told him none were for sale to the general public.
Unlike Venezuela and Senegal, Nicaragua so far appears to be mostly a case of unfulfilled promises. Despite a host of projects announced by the Iranian and Nicaraguan governments -- their presidents have exchanged visits -- "this so-called relationship has given nothing close to the expectations" for Nicaragua, says Felix Maradiaga, a political-science professor at Nicaragua's American University who has monitored the proposed projects.
Mr. Maradiaga tracked more than two dozen projects publicly discussed in 2007 and 2008 by either Nicaragua's President Ortega or Iranian officials, including several power plants, a giant housing project for the poor, and milk-processing plants. The announced projects totaled about $1 billion in investments, he says.
To date, he says, the only project under way is a $1.5 million hospital. Construction began this month.
Officials in Nicaragua's Foreign Ministry declined to answer questions for this article.
Back at Monkey Point -- part of an English-speaking, autonomous region along Nicaragua's Atlantic Coast -- the residents are still puzzled over the delegation that arrived by boat in March 2008.
"They said they were told this was just jungle," says Allen Clair, vice president of Monkey Point's communal government. He says about 160 residents made it clear to the foreigners that this was their land. "Everybody was yelling at the people."
Mr. Clair says the residents were tipped off about the visit by a local journalist and arranged to videotape it. In the film, a man who identifies himself as "a representative of Iran" says, "Our goal in coming here is to attract Iranian investors and entrepreneurs with the goal of helping the supportive, resilient and long-suffering people of Nicaragua."
Local officials say they aren't against development or Iranians, but want to be consulted on any development projects. But the matter may be moot.
"That was the last time we saw them," says Pearl Watson, the communal government's president.
The three-dozen families who live here weren't pleased to see them. For more than two hours, they say, they berated the Iranians for not consulting them first about the development, and they videotaped the clash. "We said we would defend our homes with guns, knives, machetes, whatever," says William Claire Duncan.
The Iranians haven't been back since.
Last year, the residents of Monkey Point berated a delegation of Iranians and others who dropped by to scout sites for a proposed deepwater port development. Steve Stecklow reports.
Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has described his oil-rich nation as a superpower with worldly ambitions. Since taking power in 2005 he has signed scores of trade agreements with African and Central and Latin American countries, opened a Venezuelan bank, and built factories and housing projects.
On Sunday, Iran said it test-fired short-range missiles, just days after it confirmed it is building a second uranium-enrichment facility. It's all part of an Iranian campaign to project power and greatness world-wide -- including in America's own backyard.
But a close, on-site examination of some of Iran's projects on two continents -- in Nicaragua, Venezuela and Senegal -- reveals mixed results.
Some efforts, like the one at Monkey Point, which was announced by Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega more than two years ago, so far haven't materialized. "The Iranians have promised a lot but have delivered very little," said a Western official in Nicaragua.
Nearly all of the 25,000 taxis on the streets of Dakar, Senegal, are over a decade old and run-down, except for 500 new cabs manufactured in Iran.
Journal Community
Vote: How great a threat is Iran's nuclear program? Other investments sometimes seem to make little economic sense. For example, Iran Khodro, a state-owned Iranian auto maker that spent tens of millions of dollars opening factories in Venezuela and Senegal, recently required a $1.4 billion Iranian-government bailout.
The Senegalese plant, SenIran Auto, produced only 20 cars in its first three months of this year, plant officials there say, well short of the thousands they had been expecting to produce by then.
No one knows the true intent of Iran's widening activities abroad. Interviews with diplomatic officials suggest Western intelligence is very limited.
Iran's longstanding financial ties to Hezbollah, a Lebanese Shiite militant group, create some concern that Iran is quietly developing an infrastructure to strike the West if it is ever attacked by the U.S. or Israel.
Another worry: On Friday, Venezuela's mining minister, Rodolfo Sanz, said Iran is helping the country test and survey its uranium reserves. The U.S., Britain and other countries have accused Iran of trying to develop nuclear weapons, which Iran denies.
"Their activities require watching," says Robert Morgenthau, the Manhattan district attorney in New York City, who gave a speech this month in Washington warning about Iran's "cozy financial, political and military" ties to Venezuela and its leftist president, Hugo Chávez.
Mr. Morgenthau's office has been investigating banks that allegedly have been involved in circumventing U.S. sanctions against Iran.Iran denies any links to terrorism. In a letter to Mr. Morgenthau, Bernardo Alvarez Herrera, Venezuela's ambassador to the U.S., called the speech "simply outrageous" and "irresponsible."
Some experts believe Iran mainly wants to build a global coalition of anti-American nations to support its interests at the United Nations. A diplomatic source in Caracas suggested trade was another motive. "You can't necessarily assume that everything that happens here has a terrorism-related purpose. The Iranians definitely have an incentive to make money."
Alireza Salari, Iran's deputy foreign minister for Americas affairs, said in an interview that the point of its foreign policy is to show "it does not need the United States to survive."
"Iran's international prestige today is higher than ever," he said. "Everywhere you go in the world they recognize Iran's name, they know our president's name."
Distrust over Iran's intentions can be seen in Venezuela, an oil producer with an inflation-ravaged economy. Mr. Chávez, who visited Tehran this month, has embraced Mr. Ahmadinejad. Iran has financed a variety of Venezuelan development projects making everything from tractors to dairy products, government officials say.
There's a weekly flight from Tehran to Caracas. The number of Iranians living in the Venezuelan capital has swelled to about 2,000 from under 200 since the flights began two years ago, says an Iranian businessman.
The Venezuelan Embassy in Washington, D.C., said it couldn't confirm the numbers.
Mr. Chávez's critics claim the Iranian factories may have darker purposes. The plants include Fanabi, a joint Iranian-Venezuelan bicycle factory in Tinaquillo, about a three-hour drive from Caracas.
Mr. Morgenthau referred to factories like this in his recent speech. Given their placement in "remote" areas and their "secretive nature," he said, "we should be concerned that illegal activity might be taking place." However, he said, evidence is "limited."
Although there are suspicions in diplomatic and other circles about the real purposes of some of the Iranian-financed factories and projects, so far there is no hard evidence that they are anything other than what they claim to be.
Ambassador Herrera responded in his letter to Mr. Morgenthau: "What you refer to in your speech as 'suspicious factories' are providing Venezuelans with food, transportation and agricultural equipment," as well as bikes and consumer goods.
During a reporter's unannounced visit this month to the bicycle facility -- a bright red-and-beige building in an industrial park -- the plant's president, José Aranguren, a Venezuelan, agreed to provide a tour and permit photos to be taken. The plant's Iranian vice president, Reza Dai, declined to be interviewed.
Mr. Aranguren noted that when the bike plant opened last year, local opposition newspapers reported that it "exists to enrich uranium" and "we were building bombs." He called the allegations "total lies."
To poke fun at the claims, Mr. Chávez, who visited the plant when it opened, suggested a brand name now used on all bike models: Atomic.
Iris Cano, a Venezuelan in charge of sales, opened spreadsheets on her computer showing that the factory last year sold out its entire initial production run of 4,860 bicycles.
The company employs 44 workers and offers at least eight bike models, she said, including for women, children and one with a large rear basket designed for deliveries. The bikes are made from Iranian parts and are 50% subsidized by the Venezuelan government. Mr. Aranguren calls it "a socialist enterprise."
The bike factory has hit a serious obstacle this year. Iran has failed to deliver many needed parts, and production has dropped 90%, plant officials say. Iran has promised to deliver enough parts to assemble an additional 25,000 bikes, Mr. Aranguren says, but has mainly delivered cartons of frames, wheels and handlebars, which are stored in a warehouse down the street.
"We're a bit paralyzed because we don't have all of our raw materials from Iran," he says.
In the financial district of Caracas, the Iranian-owned Banco Internacional de Desarrollo, or BID, has its own problems. The U.S. Treasury Department last year imposed sanctions against the bank and its parent, the Export Development Bank of Iran, which it accused of violating U.N. sanctions by helping Iran procure weapons of mass destruction. As a result, BID isn't allowed to do business with the U.S. banking system.
BID's clients include Iranian factories such as Fanabi and an Iranian company that builds housing, bank officials say. According to a sign, it offers checking and savings accounts, loans and trade finance.
Inside the bank, employees complain the sanctions mean they can't offer credit or debit cards to its 200 customers. "I can't have a relationship with Maestro, Visa or American Express," says Raymundo Velasquez, the branch manager. "It's terrible. According to them, this bank finances terrorists."
Mr. Velasquez was standing in the gleaming branch office, which had tellers and a security guard, but no customers. Upstairs, in a back office, employees entered data into computers. The 21 employees include five Iranians. The bank's Iranian president declined to be interviewed.
José Antonio Gonzalez, the bank's legal representative, said the purpose of the bank, which opened last year, is "to help all the [Iranian development] projects." Iran "came here to help in many ways, but not militarily," he said. Fernando Illarmendi, the only Venezuelan on BID's board of directors, said he wouldn't work at the bank if it was connected in any way to weapons.
Mr. Morgenthau, the Manhattan district attorney, had suggested in his speech that BID's purpose was to violate U.S. sanctions by establishing relationships with foreign banks that do business with U.S. banks. Mr. Gonzalez said BID has no such relationships with foreign banks, and does no international transactions.
In Senegal, a Muslim country on the western coast of Africa, Iran installed electric lines last year to power the town of Touba, a holy city that attracts hundreds of thousands of Muslim pilgrims each year. But Iran's most visible impact here: the arrival of shiny, new, Iranian-made yellow taxis. They stand in stark contrast to the city's aging fleet of rickety vehicles with dented doors and broken lights.
"Everyone now knows Iran because of the cabs. We go to a remote village, and children run after our car shouting 'Iranian car, Iranian car,'" says 53-year-old Modou Sogk, chairman of the taxi-driver association, who owns an Iranian cab and hopes to buy a second one.
Still, Iran has fallen behind on its promise to help phase out Dakar's 25,000 cabs. Senegal and Iran had an agreement to replace 2,000 taxis by the end of last year, but so far only about 500 have been delivered.
Many other planned ventures, including a storage facility for Iranian oil, haven't materialized. The project is currently suspended due to high costs, according to Mamadou Diop, Senegal's minister of commerce.
Meanwhile, an Iranian-built $75 million auto plant in Thies, which opened last year, produced only 20 cars in this year's first quarter when the goal was to produce 80% of the targeted annual output of 10,000 cars by middle of this year, plant managers say. Managers say they suffered from delays in opening the factory, a lack of spare parts and a shortage of skilled workers in Senegal.
Even if production increases, "the project has no economic return, and maybe it never will," says Hassan Davoudi Deilami, the plant's financial manager. He says the factory's purpose is simply to give Iran a presence in Africa.
Iran is producing more cars in Venezuela. A Venezuelan official at the factory says the plant, called Venirauto, currently makes six cars an hour. Customers drove off with two of the small sedans, the upholstery still covered in plastic, when a reporter showed up earlier this month.
Despite an overall shortage of new cars in Venezuela, the Iranian cars are available only to government ministries, the official said. He described the factory as a "social" program not intended to make a profit.
One man, standing outside a security office at the factory gate, said he had traveled eight hours on a bus hoping to buy one of the cars. He said he was convinced the only way was "knowing somebody or bribing someone." A few minutes later, a security official told him none were for sale to the general public.
Unlike Venezuela and Senegal, Nicaragua so far appears to be mostly a case of unfulfilled promises. Despite a host of projects announced by the Iranian and Nicaraguan governments -- their presidents have exchanged visits -- "this so-called relationship has given nothing close to the expectations" for Nicaragua, says Felix Maradiaga, a political-science professor at Nicaragua's American University who has monitored the proposed projects.
Mr. Maradiaga tracked more than two dozen projects publicly discussed in 2007 and 2008 by either Nicaragua's President Ortega or Iranian officials, including several power plants, a giant housing project for the poor, and milk-processing plants. The announced projects totaled about $1 billion in investments, he says.
To date, he says, the only project under way is a $1.5 million hospital. Construction began this month.
Officials in Nicaragua's Foreign Ministry declined to answer questions for this article.
Back at Monkey Point -- part of an English-speaking, autonomous region along Nicaragua's Atlantic Coast -- the residents are still puzzled over the delegation that arrived by boat in March 2008.
"They said they were told this was just jungle," says Allen Clair, vice president of Monkey Point's communal government. He says about 160 residents made it clear to the foreigners that this was their land. "Everybody was yelling at the people."
Mr. Clair says the residents were tipped off about the visit by a local journalist and arranged to videotape it. In the film, a man who identifies himself as "a representative of Iran" says, "Our goal in coming here is to attract Iranian investors and entrepreneurs with the goal of helping the supportive, resilient and long-suffering people of Nicaragua."
Local officials say they aren't against development or Iranians, but want to be consulted on any development projects. But the matter may be moot.
"That was the last time we saw them," says Pearl Watson, the communal government's president.
Zoom In on Lagoon Nebula with Super-High-Res Image by Alexis Madrigal
A huge new image of the Lagoon Nebula, covering an area of the sky eight times larger than the full moon, has been released by the European Southern Observatory.Located four to five thousand light-years away in the direction of Sagittarius, the nebula is a cloud of dust and gas about 100 light-years across. Bright, star-forming clusters can be seen scattered throughout the reddish nebula, which acquires its color from small particles that scatter white light.
The full 668-megabyte TIFF is available, and an online zoomable version, too.
The image is the third in a “trilogy” plotted and executed by the ESO for the International Year of Astronomy 2009. The previous GigaGalazy Zoom images showcased the best the unaided human eye and an amateur telescope could do. The latest photo steps up to the pro level by using the 67-million-pixel Wide Field Imager attached to the 2.2-meter telescope at the La Silla Observatory in the Atacama desert of Chile.
Akamai Routes Around ‘Middle Mile’ of Internet to Deliver HD Video by Eliot Van Buskirk
Large-scale bandwidth provider Akamai says it has a solution to a riddle that has caused Mark Cuban and others to declare the internet unfit for the streaming of high-definition video: getting around internet congestion that occurs between the company’s servers and the last mile of service that connects consumers’ computers to the internet.
Its solution is obvious in retrospect: putting 50,000 HD video delivery servers in that last-mile-of-service layer so that when congestion strikes, Akamai can serve video from closer to the viewer’s home. So far, the company says it has embedded these servers in 750 cities around the world to deliver Flash, Silverlight, and iPhone video at high definition bit rates to millions of simultaneous connections.
“The internet today is ready for HD,” declared Akamai co-founder and chief scientist Tom Leighton, in a meeting with press and investors on Tuesday that was webcasting using the very same Akamai Edge Network HD Video system.
Akamai’s Edge Network system toggles video bandwidth depending on the user’s internet connection, processing speed, and network congestion. That’s familiar technology by now, but Akamai says its version of adaptive bit rate is different because its last-mile servers let it switch between bandwidths in a way that’s less noticeable to the viewer.
Akamai says it can deliver 2 Mbps streams to over two thirds of U.S. users, and 5 Mbps streams to over a quarter of them, and expects those speeds and percentages to improve. That’s still nowhere near the resolution of Blu-Ray, but it does approach the resolution of many “HD” services that broadcast via cable and satellite. According to Akamai, the real innovation here is in figuring out how to route around internet congestion by putting servers near the edge of the internet, rather than relying solely on centralized data centers to pipe content through ISPs.
“We’ve optimized HD video to be more responsive,” said Akamai CEO Paul Sagan, adding that Akamai’s “unique network model” of putting servers on the edge of the internet lets them offer more responsive controls. If the typical user pauses the programming, said Sagan, less than a second will pass between the button being pressed and the stream pausing.
Akamai seeks big customers for its HD video streaming service in the television, film, and cable industries, but says smaller video producers and distributors could become a part of the equation. In addition to routing around the “middle mile” of the internet, Akamai says its value proposition includes the ability to scale to prime-time audiences on the level of the one that watched the Obama inauguration (10 million), and improved analytic capabilities.
The company said it expects most uses of its technology to be supported by advertisements rather than paid subscriptions.
So, who does Akamai think will want to watch these high-quality (if not strictly high-def) streams? People sitting at their desktop or laptop are obviously contenders, but Akamai also pointed towards the 50 million gaming consoles and 45 million iPhones that can receive high-quality video programming as areas ripe for exploration.
Its solution is obvious in retrospect: putting 50,000 HD video delivery servers in that last-mile-of-service layer so that when congestion strikes, Akamai can serve video from closer to the viewer’s home. So far, the company says it has embedded these servers in 750 cities around the world to deliver Flash, Silverlight, and iPhone video at high definition bit rates to millions of simultaneous connections.
“The internet today is ready for HD,” declared Akamai co-founder and chief scientist Tom Leighton, in a meeting with press and investors on Tuesday that was webcasting using the very same Akamai Edge Network HD Video system.
Akamai’s Edge Network system toggles video bandwidth depending on the user’s internet connection, processing speed, and network congestion. That’s familiar technology by now, but Akamai says its version of adaptive bit rate is different because its last-mile servers let it switch between bandwidths in a way that’s less noticeable to the viewer.
Akamai says it can deliver 2 Mbps streams to over two thirds of U.S. users, and 5 Mbps streams to over a quarter of them, and expects those speeds and percentages to improve. That’s still nowhere near the resolution of Blu-Ray, but it does approach the resolution of many “HD” services that broadcast via cable and satellite. According to Akamai, the real innovation here is in figuring out how to route around internet congestion by putting servers near the edge of the internet, rather than relying solely on centralized data centers to pipe content through ISPs.
“We’ve optimized HD video to be more responsive,” said Akamai CEO Paul Sagan, adding that Akamai’s “unique network model” of putting servers on the edge of the internet lets them offer more responsive controls. If the typical user pauses the programming, said Sagan, less than a second will pass between the button being pressed and the stream pausing.
Akamai seeks big customers for its HD video streaming service in the television, film, and cable industries, but says smaller video producers and distributors could become a part of the equation. In addition to routing around the “middle mile” of the internet, Akamai says its value proposition includes the ability to scale to prime-time audiences on the level of the one that watched the Obama inauguration (10 million), and improved analytic capabilities.
The company said it expects most uses of its technology to be supported by advertisements rather than paid subscriptions.
So, who does Akamai think will want to watch these high-quality (if not strictly high-def) streams? People sitting at their desktop or laptop are obviously contenders, but Akamai also pointed towards the 50 million gaming consoles and 45 million iPhones that can receive high-quality video programming as areas ripe for exploration.
Dark Matter Hunters Construct a New Weapon by Brandon Keim
That dark matter has never been found is no deterrent to the physicists who are looking for it.
“Even if we don’t know what dark matter is, we know how it must act,” said Eduardo Abancens, a physicist at Spain’s University of Zaragoza and designer of a prototype dark matter detector.
According to physicists, only around five percent of what makes up the universe can presently be detected. The existence of dark matter is inferred from the behavior of faraway galaxies, which move in ways that can only be explained by a gravitational pull caused by more mass than can be seen. They estimate dark matter represents around 20 percent of the universe, with the other 75 percent made up of dark energy, a repulsive force that is causing the universe to expand at an ever-quickening pace.
At the heart of Abancens’ team’s detector, which is called a scintillating bolometer and resembles a prop from The Golden Compass, is a crystal so pure it can conduct the energy ostensibly generated when a particle of dark matter strikes the nucleus of one of its atoms.
To prevent interference by cosmic rays, the bolometer is sheathed in lead and kept underground, under half a mile of rock. It’s also frozen to near-absolute zero, the temperature at which all motion stops. At the edge of absolute zero, it’s possible to measure expected changes of a few millionths of a degree Fahrenheit.
Researchers like Abancens call this “a high heat signal.”
As described in a paper published in the August Optical Materials and released online Friday, the bolometer is currently able to distinguish between the vibrations produced by trembling nuclei and spinning electrons.
Abancens said it could be operational in five years.
But in order for the bolometer to work reliably, it needs to become even more sensitive, and maintain that sensitivity as it’s scaled up from the 46-gram prototype to a half-ton working model, said Rick Gaitskell, a Brown University physicist who was not involved in the research.
At near-absolute zero, conducting research is “quite challenging,” said Gaitskell, who spent a decade trying to make detection systems work at that temperature.
“Now we’re using using liquid xenon. It’s relatively warm, only minus 150 degrees Fahrenheit,” he said. “You can nearly get to that in an industrial-strength refrigerator.”
“Even if we don’t know what dark matter is, we know how it must act,” said Eduardo Abancens, a physicist at Spain’s University of Zaragoza and designer of a prototype dark matter detector.
According to physicists, only around five percent of what makes up the universe can presently be detected. The existence of dark matter is inferred from the behavior of faraway galaxies, which move in ways that can only be explained by a gravitational pull caused by more mass than can be seen. They estimate dark matter represents around 20 percent of the universe, with the other 75 percent made up of dark energy, a repulsive force that is causing the universe to expand at an ever-quickening pace.
At the heart of Abancens’ team’s detector, which is called a scintillating bolometer and resembles a prop from The Golden Compass, is a crystal so pure it can conduct the energy ostensibly generated when a particle of dark matter strikes the nucleus of one of its atoms.
To prevent interference by cosmic rays, the bolometer is sheathed in lead and kept underground, under half a mile of rock. It’s also frozen to near-absolute zero, the temperature at which all motion stops. At the edge of absolute zero, it’s possible to measure expected changes of a few millionths of a degree Fahrenheit.
Researchers like Abancens call this “a high heat signal.”
As described in a paper published in the August Optical Materials and released online Friday, the bolometer is currently able to distinguish between the vibrations produced by trembling nuclei and spinning electrons.
Abancens said it could be operational in five years.
But in order for the bolometer to work reliably, it needs to become even more sensitive, and maintain that sensitivity as it’s scaled up from the 46-gram prototype to a half-ton working model, said Rick Gaitskell, a Brown University physicist who was not involved in the research.
At near-absolute zero, conducting research is “quite challenging,” said Gaitskell, who spent a decade trying to make detection systems work at that temperature.
“Now we’re using using liquid xenon. It’s relatively warm, only minus 150 degrees Fahrenheit,” he said. “You can nearly get to that in an industrial-strength refrigerator.”
The World Can't Trust Iran by Matthew Levitt and Michael Jacobson
Standing with the leaders of France and Great Britain at the G20 meeting in Pittsburgh on Friday, Barack Obama disclosed Iran's construction of yet another secret nuclear structure: a uranium enrichment facility near the holy city of Qom. How much hope should western powers have for the upcoming diplomatic negotiations when the regime in Tehran continues to pursue a secret nuclear programme beyond the reach of international inspectors?
The answer, based on Iran's record of deception, is little to none. Describing the Iranian nuclear programme as "the most urgent proliferation challenge that the world faces today," Gordon Brown noted that Iran has accumulated a record of "serial deception".
Iran's deception, however, has not been limited strictly to what it has disclosed -- or failed to disclose -- about its nuclear programme to the IAEA. Iran has engaged in deceptive conduct along many fronts over many years, including international finance, shipping and trade.
Consider a few examples:
In September 2008, the US treasury department designated the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL) for its proliferation activities, noting: "Not only does IRISL facilitate the transport of cargo for UN designated proliferators, it also falsifies documents and uses deceptive schemes to shroud its involvement in illicit commerce." IRISL has used generic terms to describe shipments to avoid the scrutiny of shipping authorities and created cover entities to conduct its business, according to the treasury.
Iran has also made extensive use of front companies and proxies to circumvent UN, EU and US sanctions and procure dual-use and other sensitive technologies. The US justice department has prosecuted over 20 companies and individuals over the past year for sending a wide range of sensitive technology to Iran, including missile guidance systems, military aircraft parts and components for improvised explosive devices.
The Iranians have been doing this for years in Dubai, but as the Emirates have begun to crack down, new countries have emerged as safe havens, with Malaysia at the top of the list. Hong Kong is also becoming more of a problem in this area, with Iranian front companies and procurement agents setting up shop there. In addition, many of the designated Iranian shipping vessels are owned by German front companies.
In fact, Iran's deceptive activity was so widespread that in 2007, then-treasury secretary Henry Paulson warned that Iran's business practices -- including its use of front companies -- make it difficult to "know your customers". He went on to caution that "It is increasingly likely that if you are doing business with Iran, you are somehow doing business with the IRGC" -- a disturbing prospect given the important role that this paramilitary organisation plays in Iran's terrorism and proliferation activities.
Iran's state owned banks -- including the central bank -- have also been heavily engaged in deceptive conduct in an effort to facilitate the regime 's support for terrorism and WMD programmes. Iran's state-owned Bank Sepah, blacklisted in 2007 by the US treasury for providing "extensive" financial services to Iranian entities involved in WMD-related activities, is a good example. Sepah, according to the US government, engaged in "a range of deceptive financial practices in an effort to avoid detection", which included asking that its name be removed from international transactions.
Western banks have at times helped facilitate this activity. In January 2009, the British bank Lloyds TSB acknowledged, in a settlement agreement with the US government and the Manhattan DA's office, that from 1995 to 2007, it had falsified information on wire transfers involving sanctioned countries, such as Iran, so transactions could pass through the US financial system unnoticed. Under the agreement, Lloyds admitted responsibility for the criminal conduct and paid $350m, split evenly between New York county and the federal government.
As the US government stressed on Friday, the exposure of yet another secret nuclear facility "follows a familiar pattern of concealment and deception by Iran and casts serious doubts on its claims of peaceful intent". As the west moves forward, it must be prepared to meet Iran's deception with countermeasures to, at a minimum, disrupt the regime's illicit conduct.
The options for additional sanctions -- from targeting Iran's dependence on foreign refineries to sanctioning additional Iranian banks, and from multilateral sanctions at the UN to unilateral or regional sanctions imposed by individual countries or regional bodies -- are well known. More creative ideas, such as leveraging the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) in the US, or encouraging the implementation of the World Customs Organisation's (WCO) draft Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade, are also already on the table.
What Friday's revelations add to the mix is the impetus to move forward expeditiously on some of these existing ideas. As Iran's record of deception makes clear, trusting in Iran's good intentions at the negotiating table is simply a fool's errand.
The answer, based on Iran's record of deception, is little to none. Describing the Iranian nuclear programme as "the most urgent proliferation challenge that the world faces today," Gordon Brown noted that Iran has accumulated a record of "serial deception".
Iran's deception, however, has not been limited strictly to what it has disclosed -- or failed to disclose -- about its nuclear programme to the IAEA. Iran has engaged in deceptive conduct along many fronts over many years, including international finance, shipping and trade.
Consider a few examples:
In September 2008, the US treasury department designated the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL) for its proliferation activities, noting: "Not only does IRISL facilitate the transport of cargo for UN designated proliferators, it also falsifies documents and uses deceptive schemes to shroud its involvement in illicit commerce." IRISL has used generic terms to describe shipments to avoid the scrutiny of shipping authorities and created cover entities to conduct its business, according to the treasury.
Iran has also made extensive use of front companies and proxies to circumvent UN, EU and US sanctions and procure dual-use and other sensitive technologies. The US justice department has prosecuted over 20 companies and individuals over the past year for sending a wide range of sensitive technology to Iran, including missile guidance systems, military aircraft parts and components for improvised explosive devices.
The Iranians have been doing this for years in Dubai, but as the Emirates have begun to crack down, new countries have emerged as safe havens, with Malaysia at the top of the list. Hong Kong is also becoming more of a problem in this area, with Iranian front companies and procurement agents setting up shop there. In addition, many of the designated Iranian shipping vessels are owned by German front companies.
In fact, Iran's deceptive activity was so widespread that in 2007, then-treasury secretary Henry Paulson warned that Iran's business practices -- including its use of front companies -- make it difficult to "know your customers". He went on to caution that "It is increasingly likely that if you are doing business with Iran, you are somehow doing business with the IRGC" -- a disturbing prospect given the important role that this paramilitary organisation plays in Iran's terrorism and proliferation activities.
Iran's state owned banks -- including the central bank -- have also been heavily engaged in deceptive conduct in an effort to facilitate the regime 's support for terrorism and WMD programmes. Iran's state-owned Bank Sepah, blacklisted in 2007 by the US treasury for providing "extensive" financial services to Iranian entities involved in WMD-related activities, is a good example. Sepah, according to the US government, engaged in "a range of deceptive financial practices in an effort to avoid detection", which included asking that its name be removed from international transactions.
Western banks have at times helped facilitate this activity. In January 2009, the British bank Lloyds TSB acknowledged, in a settlement agreement with the US government and the Manhattan DA's office, that from 1995 to 2007, it had falsified information on wire transfers involving sanctioned countries, such as Iran, so transactions could pass through the US financial system unnoticed. Under the agreement, Lloyds admitted responsibility for the criminal conduct and paid $350m, split evenly between New York county and the federal government.
As the US government stressed on Friday, the exposure of yet another secret nuclear facility "follows a familiar pattern of concealment and deception by Iran and casts serious doubts on its claims of peaceful intent". As the west moves forward, it must be prepared to meet Iran's deception with countermeasures to, at a minimum, disrupt the regime's illicit conduct.
The options for additional sanctions -- from targeting Iran's dependence on foreign refineries to sanctioning additional Iranian banks, and from multilateral sanctions at the UN to unilateral or regional sanctions imposed by individual countries or regional bodies -- are well known. More creative ideas, such as leveraging the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) in the US, or encouraging the implementation of the World Customs Organisation's (WCO) draft Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade, are also already on the table.
What Friday's revelations add to the mix is the impetus to move forward expeditiously on some of these existing ideas. As Iran's record of deception makes clear, trusting in Iran's good intentions at the negotiating table is simply a fool's errand.
Hardware Nerds Are Hot by Sam Blackman
Whether we knew it or not, we’ve all been relying on something called “Moore’s Law.” Back in the 1960s, Intel (INTC) co-founder Gordon Moore noticed that the number of transistors that could cheaply be placed on an integrated circuit had been doubling every two years.
That meant that central processing units, or CPUs — the chips that drive computer performance — were getting twice as fast in that same time period. That amazing rate of technological change has held up for more than 40 years.
Moore’s Law is why we take it for granted that the cell phone we carry around today is more powerful (and cost us less) than the top-of-the-line desktop computer we bought ten years ago. It is also why we’re not surprised that in less than a decade the Web has changed from a place to look at ugly text pages to a place to watch high-definition TV shows.
But after 40 years, Moore’s Law is slowing down. We’ve finally reached the point where faster processors consume too much power, and manufacturing them to achieve ever-higher frequencies gets to be too expensive. This technological pressure will radically reshape the way we build computers and write software in the years to come.
Going forward, computers will get faster by adding additional processors that work together to solve problems. That’s why we hear more these days about the number of cores in the CPU rather than how fast the processor is in our computer. Giants like Intel and Nvidia (NVDA) are racing to create new “massively parallel solutions,” composed of as many as 240 individual processors designed to work in concert to solve problems.
Unfortunately, writing software that runs well on massively parallel systems is incredibly difficult. Engineers need to figure out how to break big problems down into smaller pieces that individual processors can work on at the same time, how to keep all of the individual processors coordinated with each other, and how to assemble all of the work into a useful output.
At the recent Hot Chips microprocessor design conference in Palo Alto, Calif., John Hennessey, the president of Stanford University, called parallel computing “the hardest problem in computer science.”
To date engineers have only solved a small set of problems using parallel systems, and it’s not for lack of trying. Microsoft (MSFT) and Intel think that figuring out parallel computing is so important that they’ve invested $20 million funding parallel computing research centers at the University of California Berkeley and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Difficult or not, the future of computing is going to be on massively parallel systems. Some savvy companies are already taking advantage of massively parallel systems to trade stocks, search for oil, and offer online video games. At Elemental Technologies, we’re building software to help professionals process video files faster and more economically than ever before.
To build the kind of team that can take advantage of these massively parallel systems, software companies are going to have to rethink the mix of engineers that they are hiring. They will need people with experience in hardware design and low-level “close to the metal” programming. Engineers who understand how these new massively parallel architectures work, and know how to parallelize problems. Today, programmers with these skills are in seriously short supply.
There’s a pool of great engineers who don’t even realize that their future is working for software companies yet, though. They’re the digital hardware engineers who have spent their career working for chip companies and startups working on things like embedded systems and integrated circuits – where the parallel processing paradigm has been in use for years, since that is the way physical devices work. The smartest software companies will snap up as many of these engineers as soon as possible in the next few years and put them to work building software that can take advantage of the computers of the future.
Companies that don’t harness this resource will find themselves disrupted by faster, cheaper, and smarter software from competitors who did.
That meant that central processing units, or CPUs — the chips that drive computer performance — were getting twice as fast in that same time period. That amazing rate of technological change has held up for more than 40 years.
Moore’s Law is why we take it for granted that the cell phone we carry around today is more powerful (and cost us less) than the top-of-the-line desktop computer we bought ten years ago. It is also why we’re not surprised that in less than a decade the Web has changed from a place to look at ugly text pages to a place to watch high-definition TV shows.
But after 40 years, Moore’s Law is slowing down. We’ve finally reached the point where faster processors consume too much power, and manufacturing them to achieve ever-higher frequencies gets to be too expensive. This technological pressure will radically reshape the way we build computers and write software in the years to come.
Going forward, computers will get faster by adding additional processors that work together to solve problems. That’s why we hear more these days about the number of cores in the CPU rather than how fast the processor is in our computer. Giants like Intel and Nvidia (NVDA) are racing to create new “massively parallel solutions,” composed of as many as 240 individual processors designed to work in concert to solve problems.
Unfortunately, writing software that runs well on massively parallel systems is incredibly difficult. Engineers need to figure out how to break big problems down into smaller pieces that individual processors can work on at the same time, how to keep all of the individual processors coordinated with each other, and how to assemble all of the work into a useful output.
At the recent Hot Chips microprocessor design conference in Palo Alto, Calif., John Hennessey, the president of Stanford University, called parallel computing “the hardest problem in computer science.”
To date engineers have only solved a small set of problems using parallel systems, and it’s not for lack of trying. Microsoft (MSFT) and Intel think that figuring out parallel computing is so important that they’ve invested $20 million funding parallel computing research centers at the University of California Berkeley and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Difficult or not, the future of computing is going to be on massively parallel systems. Some savvy companies are already taking advantage of massively parallel systems to trade stocks, search for oil, and offer online video games. At Elemental Technologies, we’re building software to help professionals process video files faster and more economically than ever before.
To build the kind of team that can take advantage of these massively parallel systems, software companies are going to have to rethink the mix of engineers that they are hiring. They will need people with experience in hardware design and low-level “close to the metal” programming. Engineers who understand how these new massively parallel architectures work, and know how to parallelize problems. Today, programmers with these skills are in seriously short supply.
There’s a pool of great engineers who don’t even realize that their future is working for software companies yet, though. They’re the digital hardware engineers who have spent their career working for chip companies and startups working on things like embedded systems and integrated circuits – where the parallel processing paradigm has been in use for years, since that is the way physical devices work. The smartest software companies will snap up as many of these engineers as soon as possible in the next few years and put them to work building software that can take advantage of the computers of the future.
Companies that don’t harness this resource will find themselves disrupted by faster, cheaper, and smarter software from competitors who did.
Monday, September 28, 2009
Playing Chicken With Suicide Bombers by John Farmer Jr.
The nation is abuzz with praise for law enforcement. After months of careful investigation, involving extensive surveillance and international monitoring of travel and financial records, the authorities disrupt a major Qaeda cell operating domestically, arresting the primary conspirators. The conspirators are indicted and detained, and the nation breathes a sigh of relief.
Until the subway explodes.
The situation described above is not, thankfully, what has happened in the wake of the arrests this month of Najibullah Zazi, his father and several alleged confederates in Colorado and New York. Instead, it describes what happened in England in 2004 when the authorities, in Operation Crevice, arrested several terrorists (five of whom were eventually convicted) but had insufficient evidence to charge several other associates. Those other men went on to bomb the London subway on July 7, 2005.
Taken together, the Zazi and British cases illustrate a daunting challenge facing the criminal justice system in dealing with domestic terrorism attacks: law enforcement must constantly balance its need to develop evidence sufficient to convict the conspirators against the potentially devastating consequences of allowing the conspiracy to ripen into an attack.
To arrest the suspects prematurely is to run the risks of acquittal, of forcing prosecutors to advocate and courts to accept overly broad interpretations of existing criminal statutes, and perhaps of arresting innocent people. To decide to wait, however, continuing surveillance in the hope of developing better proof, is to risk losing the suspects and placing the public in mortal peril.
Police departments, prosecutors and the F.B.I. all face similar challenges in other criminal contexts. Anyone who has been involved at a senior level in serious investigations is aware of the suspected sexual predator or armed bank robber — or even the suspected serial killer — who must be left at large because of the lack of admissible evidence. Sometimes, proof is developed and the perpetrator is caught; sometimes, people get hurt.
As a society, we have weighed the risks to public safety in curtailing police power against the risks to public liberty of allowing too much police power. The balance we have struck is reflected in our constitutional protections. The question posed by terrorism, however, is whether the stakes — possibly tens of thousands of deaths — are sufficiently higher to alter that balance in favor of greater government power.
History shows that our decisions have yielded mixed results. During the mid-1990s, the authorities were able to develop strong evidence against Omar Abdel-Rahman, known as the Blind Sheik, and his fellow conspirators who were plotting to blow up New York City landmarks; they were convicted in 1995. In an earlier case, however, the unwillingness of a confidential informant to develop evidence that could be used in court led the F.B.I. to cut ties with him in 1992; the group on which he had been informing went on to bomb the World Trade Center the following February.
Prosecutors in the Zazi case to date have been unable to charge several other suspected co-conspirators — as many as 24, according to some reports. And while Mr. Zazi has now been accused by authorities of conspiring to make bombs, the other arrestees have been charged only with the relatively minor offense of lying to the authorities. Law enforcement is described in several news reports as “stretched thin” as it conducts surveillance of Mr. Zazi’s associates.
This has an ominous precedent: in the wake of the 2004 arrests, British authorities followed the other associates who had appeared on video surveillance with the conspirators, but eventually lost interest and moved on to other investigations. Those forgotten men proceeded to kill 52 people and wound 700 more.
Time will tell whether the decision to arrest Mr. Zazi and his associates was premature. If the case against them does not develop beyond what has been reported, and if no useable evidence is developed against the 24 other men, the decision to arrest will be second-guessed. That would be grossly unfair. From a public safety perspective, law enforcement officers and prosecutors cannot be faulted for acting when they believe that the public is in imminent peril, even if that means compromising an investigation.
The larger issue raised here is whether there is a viable alternative to the nerve-racking game of chicken that law enforcement must play in terrorism cases. The obvious — though extremely unpopular — alternative is the passage of a preventive detention statute.
Such statutes have been upheld in the context of people with a demonstrated proclivity toward violent conduct, like sexual predators; the concept could be adapted, in a way that withstands constitutional scrutiny, to cover people with a demonstrated proclivity toward terrorism. That approach would give law enforcement additional means to disrupt potential terrorist plots. It has the virtue of honesty, obviating the strained and sometimes disingenuous use of material-witness and false-statement statutes that are now frequently used to arrest and hold suspected terrorists, and would remove the temptation to criminalize conduct that borders on free speech.
Still, preventive detention is hardly a panacea. What should the burden of proof be in using “civil commitment” regarding terrorism? When should that burden be adjusted, if ever? How often would a subject’s status be reviewed? How long may someone be held? There is, moreover, something about detaining someone before he has committed an offense that runs counter to our core constitutional values.
The Zazi case may well end up providing more questions than answers. In the absence of some mechanism allowing for preventive detention, the F.B.I. and police must continue to make hair-trigger judgments in real time about whether and when to arrest and charge suspects. Those are decisions our law enforcement officials routinely make, and make well, in other contexts; in terrorism cases, however, we have to ask if the stakes are too high for the system we have in place.
Until the subway explodes.
The situation described above is not, thankfully, what has happened in the wake of the arrests this month of Najibullah Zazi, his father and several alleged confederates in Colorado and New York. Instead, it describes what happened in England in 2004 when the authorities, in Operation Crevice, arrested several terrorists (five of whom were eventually convicted) but had insufficient evidence to charge several other associates. Those other men went on to bomb the London subway on July 7, 2005.
Taken together, the Zazi and British cases illustrate a daunting challenge facing the criminal justice system in dealing with domestic terrorism attacks: law enforcement must constantly balance its need to develop evidence sufficient to convict the conspirators against the potentially devastating consequences of allowing the conspiracy to ripen into an attack.
To arrest the suspects prematurely is to run the risks of acquittal, of forcing prosecutors to advocate and courts to accept overly broad interpretations of existing criminal statutes, and perhaps of arresting innocent people. To decide to wait, however, continuing surveillance in the hope of developing better proof, is to risk losing the suspects and placing the public in mortal peril.
Police departments, prosecutors and the F.B.I. all face similar challenges in other criminal contexts. Anyone who has been involved at a senior level in serious investigations is aware of the suspected sexual predator or armed bank robber — or even the suspected serial killer — who must be left at large because of the lack of admissible evidence. Sometimes, proof is developed and the perpetrator is caught; sometimes, people get hurt.
As a society, we have weighed the risks to public safety in curtailing police power against the risks to public liberty of allowing too much police power. The balance we have struck is reflected in our constitutional protections. The question posed by terrorism, however, is whether the stakes — possibly tens of thousands of deaths — are sufficiently higher to alter that balance in favor of greater government power.
History shows that our decisions have yielded mixed results. During the mid-1990s, the authorities were able to develop strong evidence against Omar Abdel-Rahman, known as the Blind Sheik, and his fellow conspirators who were plotting to blow up New York City landmarks; they were convicted in 1995. In an earlier case, however, the unwillingness of a confidential informant to develop evidence that could be used in court led the F.B.I. to cut ties with him in 1992; the group on which he had been informing went on to bomb the World Trade Center the following February.
Prosecutors in the Zazi case to date have been unable to charge several other suspected co-conspirators — as many as 24, according to some reports. And while Mr. Zazi has now been accused by authorities of conspiring to make bombs, the other arrestees have been charged only with the relatively minor offense of lying to the authorities. Law enforcement is described in several news reports as “stretched thin” as it conducts surveillance of Mr. Zazi’s associates.
This has an ominous precedent: in the wake of the 2004 arrests, British authorities followed the other associates who had appeared on video surveillance with the conspirators, but eventually lost interest and moved on to other investigations. Those forgotten men proceeded to kill 52 people and wound 700 more.
Time will tell whether the decision to arrest Mr. Zazi and his associates was premature. If the case against them does not develop beyond what has been reported, and if no useable evidence is developed against the 24 other men, the decision to arrest will be second-guessed. That would be grossly unfair. From a public safety perspective, law enforcement officers and prosecutors cannot be faulted for acting when they believe that the public is in imminent peril, even if that means compromising an investigation.
The larger issue raised here is whether there is a viable alternative to the nerve-racking game of chicken that law enforcement must play in terrorism cases. The obvious — though extremely unpopular — alternative is the passage of a preventive detention statute.
Such statutes have been upheld in the context of people with a demonstrated proclivity toward violent conduct, like sexual predators; the concept could be adapted, in a way that withstands constitutional scrutiny, to cover people with a demonstrated proclivity toward terrorism. That approach would give law enforcement additional means to disrupt potential terrorist plots. It has the virtue of honesty, obviating the strained and sometimes disingenuous use of material-witness and false-statement statutes that are now frequently used to arrest and hold suspected terrorists, and would remove the temptation to criminalize conduct that borders on free speech.
Still, preventive detention is hardly a panacea. What should the burden of proof be in using “civil commitment” regarding terrorism? When should that burden be adjusted, if ever? How often would a subject’s status be reviewed? How long may someone be held? There is, moreover, something about detaining someone before he has committed an offense that runs counter to our core constitutional values.
The Zazi case may well end up providing more questions than answers. In the absence of some mechanism allowing for preventive detention, the F.B.I. and police must continue to make hair-trigger judgments in real time about whether and when to arrest and charge suspects. Those are decisions our law enforcement officials routinely make, and make well, in other contexts; in terrorism cases, however, we have to ask if the stakes are too high for the system we have in place.
Disunity Threatens Sunni Iraq by Gina Chon
A number of prominent Sunni politicians in Iraq have abandoned a once-formidable bloc, lowering expectations of significant gains in parliamentary elections that are just a few months away.
In 2005, Sunni Arab politicians largely boycotted Iraq's first parliamentary vote, and they've regretted it ever since. Shiite and Kurdish candidates swept those polls, sidelining Sunnis when it came time to assemble a government and put together provincial councils.
Sunni Arabs make up about a fifth of Iraq's population, and they constituted the ruling elite during the era of Saddam Hussein. Despite their electoral defeat in 2005, they participated in the second national elections that year and still retain a strong power base. Shiites, including Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, have courted them to win backing for key legislation and domestic-policy initiatives.
Iraqi Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi, shown in July, said this month that he was quitting the Iraqi Islamic Party and forming a new party.
After many Sunni groups made peace with Mr. Maliki's government, Sunni politicians looked forward to January's election as a way to ratchet up their political standing.
Those hopes are now threatened by disunity. Several prominent politicians have recently left the biggest Sunni Arab political grouping, the Iraqi Islamic Party, or the IIP. After IIP losses to upstart rival Sunni groups in January elections, many bloc members said their political chances would improve outside the group.
The IIP is the largest bloc in an umbrella Sunni alliance known as the Iraq Accord Front, the third-largest bloc in parliament behind a Shia coalition and a Kurdish alliance.
Defections could hurt the slate as it positions itself as the main voice for the Sunni vote. It could also weaken Sunni unity and resolve in hostile disputes with Kurdish officials in Iraq's north.
Sunnis who are worried about being underrepresented in Iraqi politics have been the biggest proponents of a strong federal government in Baghdad, to check any Shiite and Kurdish encroachment. Kurds, however, have pushed forcefully for more sovereignty in the semi-independent northern enclave. Kurds have also squabbled with Sunnis over disputed land, including the oil-rich northern capital, Kirkuk.
"The Kurdish bloc is a coherent one because it shares the common goals of making Kirkuk a part of Kurdistan and other nationalistic issues," said political analyst Watheq Abdul Qadir. "That unity can hurt the Sunnis because they are not coming together as one."
This month, Iraqi Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi said he would leave the IIP to form a new political party, called the Renewal List.
Mr. Hashimi has said his new party strives to rise above sectarian and ethnic divisions that have defined Iraqi politics for the last several years. He hasn't named others who will join him in the new party, but he said it will be made up of tribal leaders and academics, among others.
Earlier this year, another prominent Sunni lawmaker, Omar Abdul Sattar, left the party, saying it had failed to achieve its aims.
"I found working in the party was of no use to help build Iraq," said Mr. Sattar.
Saleem Juboori, an IIP spokesman, cites "differences in vision" in these and other prominent defections. He says the IIP and the Sunni cause haven't been hurt by the moves. He said no matter what banner Sunni politicians run under, they could ultimately come together after the election as a powerful voting bloc in the next parliament.
The IIP has, for now, ruled out an alliance with Mr. Maliki, who has so far declined to join Iraq's main Shiite coalition. Mr. Maliki is widely expected to run independently, at the head of a slate of candidates from several of Iraq's ethno-sectarian groups, including Sunni tribal leaders.
IIP party officials say they are already looking at post-election maneuvering. They have held talks with Mr. Maliki and others about working together after the polls, Mr. Juboori said.
Such formal moves toward cooperation between Shiite and Sunni politicians have been almost unheard of during most of Iraq's short, post-Saddam era.
In 2005, Sunni Arab politicians largely boycotted Iraq's first parliamentary vote, and they've regretted it ever since. Shiite and Kurdish candidates swept those polls, sidelining Sunnis when it came time to assemble a government and put together provincial councils.
Sunni Arabs make up about a fifth of Iraq's population, and they constituted the ruling elite during the era of Saddam Hussein. Despite their electoral defeat in 2005, they participated in the second national elections that year and still retain a strong power base. Shiites, including Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, have courted them to win backing for key legislation and domestic-policy initiatives.
Iraqi Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi, shown in July, said this month that he was quitting the Iraqi Islamic Party and forming a new party.
After many Sunni groups made peace with Mr. Maliki's government, Sunni politicians looked forward to January's election as a way to ratchet up their political standing.
Those hopes are now threatened by disunity. Several prominent politicians have recently left the biggest Sunni Arab political grouping, the Iraqi Islamic Party, or the IIP. After IIP losses to upstart rival Sunni groups in January elections, many bloc members said their political chances would improve outside the group.
The IIP is the largest bloc in an umbrella Sunni alliance known as the Iraq Accord Front, the third-largest bloc in parliament behind a Shia coalition and a Kurdish alliance.
Defections could hurt the slate as it positions itself as the main voice for the Sunni vote. It could also weaken Sunni unity and resolve in hostile disputes with Kurdish officials in Iraq's north.
Sunnis who are worried about being underrepresented in Iraqi politics have been the biggest proponents of a strong federal government in Baghdad, to check any Shiite and Kurdish encroachment. Kurds, however, have pushed forcefully for more sovereignty in the semi-independent northern enclave. Kurds have also squabbled with Sunnis over disputed land, including the oil-rich northern capital, Kirkuk.
"The Kurdish bloc is a coherent one because it shares the common goals of making Kirkuk a part of Kurdistan and other nationalistic issues," said political analyst Watheq Abdul Qadir. "That unity can hurt the Sunnis because they are not coming together as one."
This month, Iraqi Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi said he would leave the IIP to form a new political party, called the Renewal List.
Mr. Hashimi has said his new party strives to rise above sectarian and ethnic divisions that have defined Iraqi politics for the last several years. He hasn't named others who will join him in the new party, but he said it will be made up of tribal leaders and academics, among others.
Earlier this year, another prominent Sunni lawmaker, Omar Abdul Sattar, left the party, saying it had failed to achieve its aims.
"I found working in the party was of no use to help build Iraq," said Mr. Sattar.
Saleem Juboori, an IIP spokesman, cites "differences in vision" in these and other prominent defections. He says the IIP and the Sunni cause haven't been hurt by the moves. He said no matter what banner Sunni politicians run under, they could ultimately come together after the election as a powerful voting bloc in the next parliament.
The IIP has, for now, ruled out an alliance with Mr. Maliki, who has so far declined to join Iraq's main Shiite coalition. Mr. Maliki is widely expected to run independently, at the head of a slate of candidates from several of Iraq's ethno-sectarian groups, including Sunni tribal leaders.
IIP party officials say they are already looking at post-election maneuvering. They have held talks with Mr. Maliki and others about working together after the polls, Mr. Juboori said.
Such formal moves toward cooperation between Shiite and Sunni politicians have been almost unheard of during most of Iraq's short, post-Saddam era.
The Cell Phone as Broadcast Tool by Jon Fortt
Ramu Sunkara was at home in Silicon Valley three years ago, chatting with a friend in Moscow, when inspiration struck. He didn’t just want to hear about his friend.
Now he can. Soon after that phone conversation, Sunkara and two friends started Qik (pronounced "quick"), a company whose software lets cell phones broadcast video live to the Internet.
Today, Qik and other mobile video services are still in their infancy. But consumers finally have an excuse to try them, now that they have access to 3G networks and a new crop of video-equipped smartphones. According to Nielsen VideoCensus, Qik has so far attracted just a tiny audience, though its popularity seems to have spiked recently. Since its iPhone app began working over 3G networks in August, viewers have stayed on the site six times longer.
"When we launched, only two phones were capable of doing live video," says Sunkara, Qik's CEO. "Now practically every new phone can."
Cell phone video in general is a fast-growing category. Google (GOOG) says that YouTube's cell phone video uploads increased fivefold just a week after the release of the latest video-capable iPhones (AAPL). Facebook has begun adding video capture to its cell phone apps. And sites like Ustream and Flixwagon are experimenting in the same live mobile video niche where Qik is making a name for itself.
Mobile video's appeal lies in its simplicity. Whereas standalone camcorders typically require that you plug into a PC to edit video or share it with friends, video-equipped smartphones are always connected. Shoot a short video clip on a smartphone, and seconds later your friends can view it on YouTube, or on social networking sites. (This assumes, of course, that you can get a reliable 3G signal, or find a WiFi hotspot.)
More lame, amateur video?
Live cell phone video is a neat trick, but the jury's still out on whether it's more than another excuse for amateurs to flood the Internet with bad video. Just as YouTube brought us boring webcam monologues and dancing babies, Qik.com is brimming with video of conference presentations and people driving around in their cars.
And sometimes the footage is even more oddball than that. Recently on Qik.com, a user in Benahavis, Spain used the service to stream shaky video of his hotel room, and the pool outside. Another in Bielefeld, Germany filmed himself sitting quietly. Over at Flixwagon, many of the clips were similarly puzzling; one person used the service to display the milk aisle in a grocery store in Greece.
All of which suggests that users have no idea what to do with this new live video technology. On the bright side, though: it can only get better
Now he can. Soon after that phone conversation, Sunkara and two friends started Qik (pronounced "quick"), a company whose software lets cell phones broadcast video live to the Internet.
Today, Qik and other mobile video services are still in their infancy. But consumers finally have an excuse to try them, now that they have access to 3G networks and a new crop of video-equipped smartphones. According to Nielsen VideoCensus, Qik has so far attracted just a tiny audience, though its popularity seems to have spiked recently. Since its iPhone app began working over 3G networks in August, viewers have stayed on the site six times longer.
"When we launched, only two phones were capable of doing live video," says Sunkara, Qik's CEO. "Now practically every new phone can."
Cell phone video in general is a fast-growing category. Google (GOOG) says that YouTube's cell phone video uploads increased fivefold just a week after the release of the latest video-capable iPhones (AAPL). Facebook has begun adding video capture to its cell phone apps. And sites like Ustream and Flixwagon are experimenting in the same live mobile video niche where Qik is making a name for itself.
Mobile video's appeal lies in its simplicity. Whereas standalone camcorders typically require that you plug into a PC to edit video or share it with friends, video-equipped smartphones are always connected. Shoot a short video clip on a smartphone, and seconds later your friends can view it on YouTube, or on social networking sites. (This assumes, of course, that you can get a reliable 3G signal, or find a WiFi hotspot.)
More lame, amateur video?
Live cell phone video is a neat trick, but the jury's still out on whether it's more than another excuse for amateurs to flood the Internet with bad video. Just as YouTube brought us boring webcam monologues and dancing babies, Qik.com is brimming with video of conference presentations and people driving around in their cars.
And sometimes the footage is even more oddball than that. Recently on Qik.com, a user in Benahavis, Spain used the service to stream shaky video of his hotel room, and the pool outside. Another in Bielefeld, Germany filmed himself sitting quietly. Over at Flixwagon, many of the clips were similarly puzzling; one person used the service to display the milk aisle in a grocery store in Greece.
All of which suggests that users have no idea what to do with this new live video technology. On the bright side, though: it can only get better
Safe for Now - Assessing Recent Terror Plot by Aaron Mannes
Within the past week law enforcement has revealed the disruption of three separate terrorist plots against the United States. These actions highlight the continuing threat to the continental United States, but also the barriers discussed here before to conducting successful terrorist attacks within the United States.
Two of the plots were self-starters; individuals who became motivated to commit acts of violence and in their efforts to find allies inadvertently attracted the attention of law enforcement agencies. One had traveled to Pakistan where he may have received some training. All of them highlight the difficulties of carrying out a terrorist attack.
The two self-starters, in Texas and Illinois were both lured into law enforcement‘s clutches by promises of access to explosives. Weapons are frequently the lure that government informants use against suspected terrorists. This has also worked on the Fort Dix Six and against cells of right-wing domestic radicals in the past.
The case of Najibullah Zazi is a bit different. He had the wit to attempt to produce his own explosives, but that raises problems of a different sort. It appears that the process of acquiring the supplies and preparing the explosives left an extensive trail for law enforcement to follow. It is also appears that some intelligence agencies were interested in his activities beforehand, probably due to his travels to Pakistan, as his cel-phone was tapped.
These plots reinforce the reality that terrorist desire to strike the United States remains strong, but that their capabilities have been reduced. The abilities to move, communicate, and to acquire the skills and equipment needed to carryout terror attacks are limited and efforts to do so frequently tip-off law enforcement.
Tools to address the desire end of the equation still need to be developed. Nor can the current apparent limits on terrorist capabilities be taken for granted. These threats have been neutralized due to diligent efforts by American intelligence and law enforcement agencies. Terrorists can continue to turn to other countries with less capable security forces. There may be flaws in the U.S. security net that can exploited. Terrorists may “shorten their punch” by developing a lower-cost weapon of mass murder then previously deployed. None of these possibilities can be ignored.
Organizational Dynamics
In addition, it is possible (even probable) that baring successful attacks security agency emphasis on the problem will decline. In the classic case study, Essence of Decision, Graham Allison and Philip Zelikow explain how before the Challenger accident NASA officials had, based on previous shuttle launches modified the bases on which they made their decisions – ultimately following routine procedures in an unprecedented situation. But it should be emphasized that the routine procedures had served NASA well prior to the Challenger tragedy.
The same could happen on the counter-terror front. One hint of this potential is that the NYPD and the FBI seemed to have had crossed wires in the investigation (NYPD counter-terror officials have been reassigned.) The United States has innumerable law enforcement and intelligence agencies at the federal, state, and local level. The boundaries between their activities are not always clear. As memories of 9/11 fade the possibility of an incident slipping between these seams could increase – it is in the nature of large organizations with competing priorities.
Terrorists have been known to read indictments in terrorism cases for intelligence about what their enemies know about them. They can also consider how to take advantage of agency routines. The terrorist enemy is currently weak, but constantly adapting.
Two of the plots were self-starters; individuals who became motivated to commit acts of violence and in their efforts to find allies inadvertently attracted the attention of law enforcement agencies. One had traveled to Pakistan where he may have received some training. All of them highlight the difficulties of carrying out a terrorist attack.
The two self-starters, in Texas and Illinois were both lured into law enforcement‘s clutches by promises of access to explosives. Weapons are frequently the lure that government informants use against suspected terrorists. This has also worked on the Fort Dix Six and against cells of right-wing domestic radicals in the past.
The case of Najibullah Zazi is a bit different. He had the wit to attempt to produce his own explosives, but that raises problems of a different sort. It appears that the process of acquiring the supplies and preparing the explosives left an extensive trail for law enforcement to follow. It is also appears that some intelligence agencies were interested in his activities beforehand, probably due to his travels to Pakistan, as his cel-phone was tapped.
These plots reinforce the reality that terrorist desire to strike the United States remains strong, but that their capabilities have been reduced. The abilities to move, communicate, and to acquire the skills and equipment needed to carryout terror attacks are limited and efforts to do so frequently tip-off law enforcement.
Tools to address the desire end of the equation still need to be developed. Nor can the current apparent limits on terrorist capabilities be taken for granted. These threats have been neutralized due to diligent efforts by American intelligence and law enforcement agencies. Terrorists can continue to turn to other countries with less capable security forces. There may be flaws in the U.S. security net that can exploited. Terrorists may “shorten their punch” by developing a lower-cost weapon of mass murder then previously deployed. None of these possibilities can be ignored.
Organizational Dynamics
In addition, it is possible (even probable) that baring successful attacks security agency emphasis on the problem will decline. In the classic case study, Essence of Decision, Graham Allison and Philip Zelikow explain how before the Challenger accident NASA officials had, based on previous shuttle launches modified the bases on which they made their decisions – ultimately following routine procedures in an unprecedented situation. But it should be emphasized that the routine procedures had served NASA well prior to the Challenger tragedy.
The same could happen on the counter-terror front. One hint of this potential is that the NYPD and the FBI seemed to have had crossed wires in the investigation (NYPD counter-terror officials have been reassigned.) The United States has innumerable law enforcement and intelligence agencies at the federal, state, and local level. The boundaries between their activities are not always clear. As memories of 9/11 fade the possibility of an incident slipping between these seams could increase – it is in the nature of large organizations with competing priorities.
Terrorists have been known to read indictments in terrorism cases for intelligence about what their enemies know about them. They can also consider how to take advantage of agency routines. The terrorist enemy is currently weak, but constantly adapting.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Asleep at the Switch by Philip Hayden
I am amazed at the lack of informed business executives in today’s marketplace. We all know that we have just been involved in one of the biggest downturns in recent memory, our unemployment numbers are up, our profits are squeezed, our top-line growth has slowed to a crawl and our mental toughness has been severely challenged. Having said all that, I never thought that I would see the day that the US Government, of all people, would recognize a critical business gap before our insightful, thoughtful, strategic business leaders. The fact of the matter is — THEY BEAT YOU TO THE PUNCH —– THE US GOVERNMENT — HOW EMBARRASSING.
The US GOVERNMENT - Those folks in Washington that have ineptly guided our country for years have actually recognized that cyber terrorism is one of the major threats facing this country and the businesses that operate within our borders and around the globe. They have decide to create another bureaucracy to handle this important threat to America, it’s citizens and the business community — except they are choosing not to set standards for private business, guide the direction or assist the taxpayers in any meaningful way. In other words they plan to behave in the fashion that government always behaves — A lot of talk and no RESULTS.
So business execs, what are you waiting for? The majority of you are sitting back thinking that your CIO or techies have you covered. Don’t worry; (you think) they will protect your intellectual capital, your customer information, your strategic plans, and your key information that keeps your doors open. Oh, by the way, remember we are in tough times, so we can’t spend any money now for these types of things. THINK AGAIN!!!! Ask the former and current CEO’s of any of the many, many companies that have experienced major information compromises if they wish that they would have been better informed about cyber security and taken the time to be become more involved, before it was too late. Their answer would be a resounding “YES”.
It is not just about budget, it’s about protecting the very assets that allow your business to exist. Don’t trust your business future soley to your technology department—your real exposure is across your entire organization, not just in the technology area. Look around, get qualified help and act decisively, while you still have time to protect your very existence, as a viable organization.
The US GOVERNMENT - Those folks in Washington that have ineptly guided our country for years have actually recognized that cyber terrorism is one of the major threats facing this country and the businesses that operate within our borders and around the globe. They have decide to create another bureaucracy to handle this important threat to America, it’s citizens and the business community — except they are choosing not to set standards for private business, guide the direction or assist the taxpayers in any meaningful way. In other words they plan to behave in the fashion that government always behaves — A lot of talk and no RESULTS.
So business execs, what are you waiting for? The majority of you are sitting back thinking that your CIO or techies have you covered. Don’t worry; (you think) they will protect your intellectual capital, your customer information, your strategic plans, and your key information that keeps your doors open. Oh, by the way, remember we are in tough times, so we can’t spend any money now for these types of things. THINK AGAIN!!!! Ask the former and current CEO’s of any of the many, many companies that have experienced major information compromises if they wish that they would have been better informed about cyber security and taken the time to be become more involved, before it was too late. Their answer would be a resounding “YES”.
It is not just about budget, it’s about protecting the very assets that allow your business to exist. Don’t trust your business future soley to your technology department—your real exposure is across your entire organization, not just in the technology area. Look around, get qualified help and act decisively, while you still have time to protect your very existence, as a viable organization.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)