Re: economic espionage (@#$%^&*) (fwd)

[Black Unicorn <unicorn@polaris.mindport.net>]

On Thu, 21 Sep 1995, Jim Choate wrote:

> 
> Forwarded message:
> 
> > Date: Thu, 21 Sep 1995 22:46:09 -0400 (EDT)
> > From: Black Unicorn <unicorn@polaris.mindport.net>
> > 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.

Not all agents are agents provocateur.  Human Intelligence is often 
required to determine if the criteria you cite above are present.


> > 
> > '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.

The distinction is in the difference between private and government 
sponsored espionage and intelligence.

Most of the French activity is, for example, government sponsored.  As is 
most of the Japanese activity.  U.S. activity is mostly private, by 
corporations and such.

I believe the numbers above are quite helpful really, in identifying 
scope, and demonstrating a need for counterespionage.


> 
>                                                Jim
> 
> 

---
"In fact, had Bancroft not existed,       potestas scientiae in usu est
Franklin might have had to invent him."    in nihilum nil posse reverti
00B9289C28DC0E55  E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information