SRA International part of CIA's In-Q-Tel Silicon Valley and stock market infiltration vehicles and subsidized by U.S. taxpayers because U.S.only the government is corrupt and stupid enough to pay for their 'services' has now returned to the stock market since I complained about them in 2005 and are now listed as CSRA on NY Stock Exchange and advertise even during Superbowl to attract possibe investor victims to their worthless share only subsidized by govwernment agencies CIA gets them 'work' with.Although SRA is a known CIA company ,' the government has hired the same firm, SRA International, to serve both the prosecution and defense teams, sparking concerns ...',
The U.S. Government Has Been Outsourcing The Gitmo Trials
https://www.buzzfeed.com/.../the-us-government-has-been-outsourcing-the-gitmo-tria...
May 3, 2016 - What's more, the government has hired the same firm, SRA International, to serve both the prosecution and defense teams, sparking concerns ...SRA International,Mantas Inc.,CIA and Bellador Group - UK Indymedia
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/12/330499.html
Dec 24, 2005 - Does CIA have a stake in Mantas ? It certainly has an investment in its parent companySRA International and its 'NetOwl' web search engine.sra international google netowl
http://politicalandsciencerhymes.blogspot.com/2018/05/stanford-universitygoogle-and-cia-sra.html
Guantanamo,Stanford University,Google And CIA SRA International War And Finance Cyber Criminals
CIA's Google Connected SRA International Major Stock Fraud Money Launderers Control Guantanamo Trials,Covers Up CIA,Israeli.et.al.,involvement in 9-11
How can a CIA created 'public company' that sold its own worthless shares in a boiler room in Kuala Lumpur called Bellador Group in 2005 and whose anti-money laundering software failed to stop worthless penny stock frauds from being run from Charles Schwab accounts now be the broker for Guantanamo guilt or innocence in any fair tril ? And when the CIA along with Israelis who guarded Logan Airport and U.S. DEFENSE software on SEPTEMBER 11,2001 how can the CIA be considered an unbiased party in the Guantanamo 911 cover up trials ?
Below you will see I, Tony Ryals,was mentioned by both the NY Post as well as NY Times dealbook blog for complaining about CIA 's SRA International's shares being promoted by a boiler room in Kuala Lumpur.I used the indymedias to voice that complaint although both the NY Post and te NY Times made sure they didn't mention eirther SRA International nor Bellador Geroup by name theywere both named by me in indymedia posts I made in or around 2005,Now although I exposed SRA as a CIA company at that time with White House and other government agency 'IT' business and a Google like Netowl search system and Mantas anti-money laundering business that sold its own shares through a suspect boiler room in Kuala Lumpur the U.S. FBI and SEC did nothing but protect their criminal offshore money laundering with stock shares activity !
The Cloud Panopticon: Google, Cloud Computing and the ...
https://www.counterpunch.org/.../the-cloud-panopticon-google-cloud-computing-and...
May 12, 2017 - In June 2007, Privacy International, a U.K.-based privacy rights watchdog, ... SRA's NetOwl program, for example, has been described by a ...Spy-Fund Story vs. Spy-Fund Story - DealBook - The New York Times
https://dealbook.nytimes.com/2006/05/18/spy-fund-story-vs-spy-fund-story/
May 18, 2006 - In doing a search of 'sra international'on offshorebusiness.com ... Agency(CIA) funded venture capital firm, we employ 'NetOwl' text mining ...CIA's CSRA Advetrtises In Super Bowl To Ilegally P... - wolfblitzzer0
wolfblitzzer0.blogspot.com/2018/05/cias-csra-advetrtises-in-super-bowl-to.html
May 11, 2018 - political and science rhymes: CIA's SRA International Major Stock . ... Google,Guantanamo,Stanford University,Google And CIA SRA - political and ...
politicalandsciencerhymes.blogspot.com/.../stanford-universitygoogle-and-cia-sra.htm...
May 1, 2018 - CIA's Google Connected SRA International Major Stock Fraud ... and other government agency 'IT' business and a Google like Netowl search ...with Google and SRA International - political and science rhymes
politicalandsciencerhymes.blogspot.com/.../google-sra-international-cia-google-sra.ht...
Apr 19, 2018 - wolfblitzzer0: CIA's SRA International,Guantanamo,W Bush,Bill Clinton . ... Agency(CIA) funded venture capital firm, we employ 'NetOwl' text ...wolfblitzzer0
wolfblitzzer0.blogspot.com/2018/05/cias-csra-advetrtises-in-super-bowl-to.html
May 11, 2018 - No one else would hire these Guantanamo torturing cover up scumbags posing as ...Google,Netowl,SRA International Guilty In CIA Torture Of .ISB Partners with Google and SRA International on Cancer Genomics ...
www.frontlinegenomics.com/.../isb-partners-google-sra-international-cancer-genomics...
Oct 14, 2014 - ISB, Google and SRA International are going to make it easier to access and analyse genomic data. The NIH's National Cancer Institute (NCI) ...https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/05/12/the-cloud-panopticon-google-cloud-computing-and-the-surveillance-industrial-complex/
Google also works with some of the top players in the surveillance industry, notably Lockheed Martin and SRA International. SRA is listed as a Google “enterprise partner” – more than a hundred such partners are listed on the Google website. Both companies, Lockheed and SRA, have engineered and sold data-mining software to the intelligence agencies. SRA’s NetOwl program, for example, has been described by a blogger at Pennsylvania State University, who watched the application in action at a corporate recruiter forum, as “searching all kinds of documents using Google for a certain person.” In response to our inquiries for further information on these programs and how they might have been developed in cooperation with Google, a Lockheed Martin spokesperson told us, “The work we do with Google is exclusively related to their Google Earth system.” SRA International’s vice president for public affairs, Sheila Blackwell, states, “We don’t discuss the specifics of our intelligence clients’ business.”
Former CIA officer Robert Steele says that the CIA’s Office of Research and Development had, at one point, provided funding for Google. According to its literature, ORD has a charter to push beyond the state of the art, developing and applying technologies and equipment more advanced than anything commercially available, including communications, sensors, semi-conductors, high-speed computing, artificial intelligence, image recognition and database management. Steele says that Google’s liaison at the ORD is Dr. Rick Steinheiser, a counterterrorism data-mining expert and a long-time CIA analyst. (No CIA response about Steinheiser’s work was forthcoming.)
Then, there are the intelligence officials allegedly working at Google’s Mountain View headquarters. When tech guru Stephen Arnold first revealed this information in the 2006 OSS conference. Anthony Kimery, a veteran intelligence reporter at Homeland Security Today, followed up with a report alleging a “secret relationship” between Google and U.S. intelligence. Google was “cooperat[ing] with U.S. intelligence agencies to provide national and homeland security-related user information from its vast databases,” with the intelligence agencies “working to ‘leverage Google’s [user] data monitoring’ capability as part of an effort to glean from this data information of ‘national security intelligence interest’ in the war on terror.” In other words, Google’s databases – or, some targeted portion – may have been dumped straight into the maw of U.S. intelligence agencies.
Like the giants of the surveillance-industrial complex, Google has backed its federal sales force in Reston, Virginia, with a D.C. lobbying operation – spending $2.9 million on lobbying in 2009 – to make sure that privacy is not a priority in the Obama administration. It also works with several industry-supported interest groups: the Interactive Advertising Bureau, the Technology Policy Institute, and the Progress & Freedom Foundation, whose mission statement espouses “an appreciation for the positive impacts of technology with a classically conservative view of the proper role of government… Those opportunities can only be realized if governments resist the temptation to regulate, tax and control.” All these groups are funded by Google, along with a who’s-who of communications behemoths. Their mission: subvert any congressional legislation extending Fourth Amendment-style prohibitions to the data-mining private sector. Their argument, per the Technology Policy Institute: “More privacy … would mean less information, less valuable advertising, and thus fewer resources available for producing new low-priced services” – in other words, privacy is a threat to the economy.
Google has also managed to install favorites in the White House. Andrew McLaughlin, formerly chief of Google’s Global Public Policy and Government Affairs division while also serving as assistant treasurer for Google’s NetPAC lobby, has been appointed as Obama’s deputy chief technology officer for Internet policy, despite protests from privacy advocates. Vivek Kundra, now posted as the Obama administration’s chief information officer at the Office of Management and Budget, formerly served as the chief technology officer for the city of Washington, D.C., where he ditched the use of Microsoft programs for municipal operations in favor of Google products. Concerns were heightened last spring by an administration initiative, proposed in Senate Bill 773, to grant the executive branch authority to disconnect and assume some measure of control over private networks in a declared “cybersecurity emergency.” That could be a quarantine operation to isolate and defeat a viral attack. It could also be an excuse for censorship of certain sites – or, for the cybersecurity agencies to data-mine where they have been hitherto forbidden. Google could be declared “critical infrastructure” in such an emergency, and its management temporarily assumed by federally certified “cybersecurity professionals,” as defined in S.773. It’s not wholly unfeasible that Google’s massive and much coveted behavioral profiles could then be fed into the NSA’s computers. And even without S.773, a long accumulation of executive orders over three decades has likely laid the groundwork for executive authority to take over critical communications networks in a “national emergency.”
But long before such an emergency comes to pass, if ever, the government and the regiments of data-mining companies it contracts with are seeing eye to eye. The commercial surveillance complex and the security surveillance complex have many common interests and methods: the ad gurus’ neuromarketing research complemented by the intel agencies’ longstanding research into mind control, from the CIA’s MK-ULTRA to the NSA’s current “cognitive neuroscience research”; the profiling of political behavior for campaign advertising complemented by the DHS’s elastic definitions of dissidents and “potential terrorists.”
Google is now anonymizing IP addresses from search logs after nine months, down from its previous eighteen-month retention policy. Company spokesperson Chen states, “We’re committed to using data both to improve our services and our security measures for our users and to protect their privacy, and we remain convinced that our current logs retention policy represents a responsible balance.” This is in contrast to Microsoft, which after six months throws out the search query data altogether. “Remember that totally anonymized search queries can be linked together to build an identity,” says Bankston. “Why does Google need to store our data perpetually? They’re very vague about it.”
Indeed, Google could, without violating the law, reveal a lot more about how it cooperates with the intelligence agencies – how many requests for information it receives, from what government entities, how many it complies with. “They could talk about all this, but they don’t,” says Bankston. “Google may not care a lot about your privacy, but they care a whole helluva lot about your perception of your privacy. To remind people of the risk of government access to your data is anathema.”
This article originally appeared in the April print edition of CounterPunch magazine.
Christopher Ketcham is a freelance reporter in Brooklyn, NY. Write him at cketcham99@mindspring.com or find more of his work at christopherketcham.com.
Travis Kelly is a writer, cartoonist and web designer in Moab, UT. Write him at tkelly@citlink.net or find more of his work at traviskelly.com.
Research support for this article was provided by The Investigative Fund at The Nation Institute.
No comments:
Post a Comment