Cable Outage - Is it the Language of Back-Channel Diplomacy or Black Mail?
UPDATE: Mumbai February 5, 2008 - 4th cable snaps, Qatar-UAE traffic disrupted -
'Iran is back online, but... its traffic is now passing through the UK and the US, the latter controlling the 13 primary routers. Can you say wiretap?' queries a blogger.
UPDATE: - Mumbai February 1, 2008 - Net traffic to be hit for 10-15 days - In India, 'there has been a 40 to 50 per cent cut in bandwidth,' according to Rajesh Chharia, president of the Internet Service Providers’ Association of India, adding: 'there’s an urgent need to create more capacity so that these problems do not recur'.
ALSO - STEPS IN REPAIRING A BROKEN UNDERSEA CABLE
+ Find the location of the accident; drag the damaged part to the surface, and replace it with a new stretch of cable
+ May also send light pulses along the fibers in the cable to determine the exact location
+ A working fiber will transmit those pulses all the way across the ocean; a broken one will bounce it back
+ The telecom operator then sends out a large cable ship with a few miles of fresh fibre-optic lines
+ If the faulty part of the cable is less than about 4,000 feet down, a submersible robot can be sent
+ The robot finds the right place; grabs hold of the cable; cuts out the malfunctioning section, and pulls the loose ends back up to the ship
+ Robots do not work in very deep water. In such cases, technicians use a grapnel to cut the cable and hold it
+ A skilled technician (jointer) splices the glass fibers; uses adhesives to attach the new section of cable
+ The repaired cable is then lowered back to the seabed on ropes
The FALCON cable was reported cut at 0559 hrs GMT February 1, 2008, (35 miles from Dubai) further degrading regional internet connectivity just two days after serious service disruptions from damaged FLAG and both of the SEA-ME-WE4 cables.Those tempted to guess that the U.S. is somehow behind the mysterious cuts may be victims of the actual perpetrators' plot. While Iran would appear to be a standout victim of the cable cuts, all is not as it seems. 04 February 2008 - Iran: in anticipation of the 14th March parliamentary elections
Tensions have also increased as a result of the enforcement of Islamic Censorship on social aspects. Demonstrations of students, teachers, bus drivers and women right's supporters, have been nastily repressed, with dozens of arrests. source link
Tehran has been seeking new ways to censor the internet and track dissidents since 2006. source link
Conversely, India and its U.S. and European clients have borne the brunt of adverse economic impacts:
India's 11-billion-dollar outsourcing industry is made up of 1,250 firms that deliver services ranging from answering customer queries to processing credit card and mortgage applications. The industry employs 700,000 people, serving clients mainly in the United States and Europe that sought to cut costs by farming outwork to the country. source link
Iran is certainly a victim of its own, stubborn nuclear ambitions: 2 February 2008 - Chinese banks cut business with Iranian banks: report Meanwhile, Iran's nuclear know-how unimpeded. If state-sponsored, who, besides Canada and Italy are off the hook? Certainly the members of the U.N. Security Council: China, France, Russia, the U.K., the U.S., plus one, Germany. Between Iran and Israel, who would be more likely?
Will we ever know what really happened to the cables? It is unlikely the saboteur would claim responsibility publicly.
Authorities would rarely disclose blackmail demands before trial. It appears that more cables were cut later, assuring some message had been sent for either blackmail or back-channel diplomacy. Intrigue of this boldness is common beneath the sea, but it rarely reaches the public's attention. Details will unfold very slowly, if ever.
Submarines are always silent and strange.
Labels: China France Russia U.K. U.S. Germany Iran Israel India
posted by Vigilis @ 1:54 PM
4 comments
4 Comments:
"Connecting the Dots"
http://www.cyberspaceorbit.com/ConnectingTheDots.htm
"...add to our list of data points the professed intent of the American military to “fight the net”, using a “robust offensive suite of capabilities” in a “ full-range electronic and computer network attack.”
See: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB177/info_ops_roadmap.pdf
As the author points out, during the repair phase is when one inserts one's wiretaps, a la Operation Ivy Bells:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ivy_Bells
G. Randy, had read about the G.W.U. document (thank you for the link) and 'Ivy Bells'.
Richard Sauder's essay, on the other hand, assumes all of his readers buy into what he says was "another 'false flag' attack, like the inside job on 9-11".
Starting with the assumption that Sauder is correct on that point implicates people in Washington some of whom are local, nonlawyers and still trusted.
Not buying Sauder's conspiracy theory at this time. As we both know, the military has been allowed to practice deceptions to maintain secrets and effective strength. My experience has been that competent military officers are honorable and worthy of such trust.
The need for defense secrecy, in my opinion and yours, no doubt, is therefore legitimate. We, the people, are also right to be ever vigilant against corruption in our government. That is always the rub.
The 9-11 Commission certainly seems to be a government cover-up of some very huge and sinister facts here.
Military officers testified, truthfully we may assume, and were discredited. I applaud the public for being suspicious after costly investigations conducted so pitifully that evidence was destroyed.
The investigative conclusions of TWA-800's downing are equally difficult to swallow. Seems to me we must give our government the benefit of the doubt and demand required third-party reviews ae made.
The integrity of those we elect has never been more crucial than it is today, and a few of those who seek to discredit our officials may also be trying to overturn our system of self-governance to enslave us.
These are strange times.
I don't buy Sauder's particular theory either, but somebody certainly did something and calling it the result of a "conspiracy" or a "criminal act" (it wan't no akseedent) is just quibbling over words. You suggested that it might be the action of "criminals" and I couldn't agree more, but the question is, which criminals?
Personally I lean toward the idea that it was an Israeli operation, as for the life of me I don't see the benefit of our military being involved, war on the Internet or no. Still, what with the Air Force Academy "born-again" scandal, I ocassionally question todays chain of command, as everything remotely involved with this administration has turned way too many things to shit.
One of the things I am most proud about in my life is that in being a veteran - as veterans - we remain part of a special community that most people cannot wrap their heads around, fast attacker or fag boomer (I was both). But that doesn't mean I just salute the flag and run myself onto the nearest bayonet just because somebody told me to do it.
What sticks in my craw most about today's military situation is that otherwise patriotic citizens are serving at the pleasure of politicians and "lawyers," not to mention often in the dark about what our actual goals are. "Oil" or "freedom"?
G. Randy, ditto!
Post a Comment
<< Home