[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: economic espionage (@#$%^&*) (fwd)
Forwarded message:
> Date: Thu, 21 Sep 1995 22:46:09 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Black Unicorn <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: economic espionage (@#$%^&*)
> >
> > ah yes, just like the way Clinton alone came up with the whole
> > Clipper idea as a way to balance the legitimate goals
> > of law enforcement with the right to privacy in society.
>
> Uh, how do you see balancing in the economic intelligence issue?
> Do you believe espionage is never justified?
> "Gentlemen don't read each other's mail" almost lost a war.
>
All out espionage should, idealy at least, only take place if there is
evidence that a nations indipendance is directly involved. By this I mean
active methods versus passive eavesdropping. It is one thing to send aloft
satellites to record cellular traffic between cars and quite another to
actively insert agents provocateur.
> 'Intelligence officials in the United States estimate that at least twenty
> foreign nations are currently engaged in intelligence activities
> "detrimental to our economic interests...."'
>
I had hoped they were better investigators than this, only 20? Or perhaps
this is a truer indication of our national paranoia.
>
> 'The White House Office on Science and Technology estimates losses to U.S.
> businesses from foreign economic espionage at nearly one hundred billion
> dollars per year.'
>
What are its estimates on what US business gains with its present industrial
espionage infrastructure? Without these numbers the quoted above are
useless.
Jim