Re: Mr Emmett Page, Asst. Sect. Defense, CCCI

["Vladimir Z. Nuri" <vznuri@netcom.com>]

Tim Fulbright <100022.3167@compuserve.com>
>I think you or someone here recently remarked  the U.S.Government has the only
>_real_ capability to wage world  terrorism on the internet, and after I read
>Frank Sowa's  feb. Boardwatch article I'm beginning to wonder.   I suppose
>quoting the article at length will be at least as good as some of the other
>traffic around here... just in case anybody missed it, Sowa reviewed 35 federal
>reports, and quotes Page saying "As a result, we've had no choice but to create
>an offensive capability in cyberspace.  I can't discuss it ... However, you'd
>feel good and feel safe and secure if you knew about it"  (yeah, really)
>Further, Sowa reports the Natl Defense U is forming an elite Information Corps,
>'a F0rce whose scope is to fight the battles of "Information Warfare from the
>Pentagon war room to the home PCs" according to DOD' (p90-92).... And further,
>RAND corp is using an "all out cyberwar simulator at their research center in
>Santa Monica" and... oh well,  the whole article is just crammed with stuff!
>Yikes!   I would sure like to know what people think about it. thanks.

there  seems to be a lot of hyperventilating in the military arena
about "information warfare" lately. I find it rather strange and 
incomprehensible. there are two chief areas that this frenzy seems
to be in response to:

1. propaganda/espionage areas.
2. hacking. (i.e. breaking in, crashing, etc.)

as for (1), I don't know what the fuss is about. what it suggests to
me is that there are branches of government that take "psyops" (psychological
operations) extremely seriously and are very intent on setting up camp
in cyberspace & the internet, and have probably already done so.

it is as if they are deathly terrified of the ability of individuals
to communicate not only with other individuals but other masses through
web pages and email. I find it quite frightening how many people in
our government have the mindset that "free communication can be a very
dangerous thing." personally I think an application for government
should reject anyone that hasn't memorized the entire bill of rights..

but the recent Strassman & Marlow paper on remailers, which addressed (1),
seemed a bit incomprehensible and bordered on unintelligible.
they talked as if remailers are like weapons that can be fired on
an enemy. (huh???)  either they are deep into psyop or spook psychology, or 
they just don't "get it" that remailers are pretty harmless. I 
tend to believe it is a little of both.

(2) is definitely something to take very seriously. if you want to
learn about how/why infiltrating computers is incredibly appealing
to many in the government, check out info on "danny casolaro" and
Inslaw PROMIS software.

the behind-the-scenes theme to a lot of this is that our massive
cold war apparatus is bored and listless now that the Soviet bogeyman
is gone and they are just moving into new territories to continue
to suck up billions of dollars.

but its awfully hard to read the various scrambled entrails that have
been emerging such as the Leahy bill, Strassman & Marlow paper, etc. in
relation to info warfare-- I tend to think some of it is just 
evidence that there are some amazingly addled people in our government.

BTW I like "boardwatch" mag, read it regularly, 
and highly recommend it to anyone as one of the better & more 
quality cyberspace mags. try www.boardwatch.com.