Pakistan Sept. 2011 – The Agency (CIA) Has Declared An Internal Intelligence War On ISI.

This Mail is from september 2011 and it is about the CIA and the ISI (Pakistan military Intelligence Agency = Inter-Services Intelligence) in Pakistan and it is about the opressing power of the USA in that country. Stratfor Member comments on this Insight View are like: “I find it more interesting that the Agency has declared an internal intelligence war on ISI” and more on that below on the EMail: “Nobody is trusted.” furthermore they say the “CIA” is using “Moscow Rules.” against Pakistan and the ISI.

“The Agency is operating against Pakistan with Moscow Rules.

ISI is an enemy combatant.

The EMail comes from a “STRATFOR’s Pakistani sources” the source said: “I am getting the sense that the United States has decided to coerce Pakistan into compliance.” …, further it goes “If it continues on its current path then the U.S. could escalate matters further and engage in fixed wing airstrikes against militant assets in North Waziristan….”the main Haqqani facility is next door to the Pak army divisional command in Miramshah.” The source call this a “collateral damage”…”So in addition to collateral damage given the densely populated area a U.S. assault on the facility could kill many Pak army personnel.”

you can read the full EMAil the following lines:

Re: INSIGHT – U.S./PAKISTAN – Behind the escalation ***PROTECT SOURCE& INTEL***

Date 2011-09-28 15:12:30
From burton@stratfor.com
To sean.noonan@stratfor.com
secure@stratfor.com
Others MessageId:
InReplyTo: 1233806656-1317215394-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-528774114-@b28.c15.bise6.blackberry

Text

Smoking gun, Libya levels after La Belle Disco bombing.

I find it more interesting that the Agency has declared an internal
intelligence war on ISI.

Nobody is trusted.

On 9/28/2011 8:09 AM, Sean Noonan wrote:

I wonder how much signals intercept the US has to show the Paks
lying…….

———————————————————————-

From: Fred Burton
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:05:26 -0500 (CDT)
To: Kamran Bokhari
Cc:
Subject: Re: INSIGHT – U.S./PAKISTAN – Behind the escalation ***PROTECT
SOURCE & INTEL***
The ISI-CIA battles have moved into a freezing Cold War. Temperature
has dropped significantly.

The Agency is operating against Pakistan with Moscow Rules.

ISI is an enemy combatant.

On 9/27/2011 8:47 PM, Kamran Bokhari wrote:

SOURCE: PK00
ATTRIBUTION: STRATFOR’s Pakistani sources
SOURCE DESCRIPTION: Pak ambo to DC
PUBLICATION: No
SOURCE RELIABILITY: A
ITEM CREDIBILITY: B/C
SPECIAL HANDLING: Not Applicable
SOURCE HANDLER: Kamran

DC has told Islamabad. Help us reconcile with those under your
influence. As for those that are not under your control, either you
take em out or let us do so. The Haqqanis are not entirely under
Pakistani control. They do a lot of independent stuff.

There was a conversation that Islamabad facilitated in the UAE between
DC and the Haqqanis but then these guys turned around and engaged in a
series of attacks. But the Pakistanis aren’t willing to take action
against them. Spoke with Mullen who told me he has been lied to by his
Pak counterparts.

On the Pakistani side, the problem is that they deeply mistrust the
Americans and suspect that the U.S. is going behind its back and
cutting its own deals with the insurgents. Look at how Tayyeb Agha is
missing after the revelations that the U.S. was dealing with him to
reach Mullah Omar. I am getting the sense that the United States has
decided to coerce Pakistan into compliance.

Islamabad still has some time to help de-escalate matters but not a
whole lot. If it continues on its current path then the U.S. could
escalate matters further and engage in fixed wing airstrikes against
militant assets in North Waziristan. The problem has been that the
main Haqqani facility is next door to the Pak army divisional command
in Miramshah.

So in addition to collateral damage given the densely populated area a
U.S. assault on the facility could kill many Pak army personnel. There
is a growing U.S. view that it can always come back to working with
Pakistan. But for now it may need to get tough to shape behavior.

Related Links:
http://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/284258_re-insight-u-s-pakistan-behind-the-escalation-protect-source.html

WikiLeaks Forum:
http://www.wikileaks-forum.com/index.php/topic,17765.0.html

Cloud Computing in China Can Allways Be Intercepted By The Government

The following EMail will give you a view on chinese Internet SSL/TLS Security and cloud computing in china. The Source of this EMAil is an Stratfor called “Professional hacker” with an own “internet security company that consultswith companies globally including China”. Cloud Computing is one of the most common services providers deliver these days to their users/employees also for companies and agencys in china. but there is still a high risk in china if the websites are hosted in the country. It is way easy for the chinese government to intercept your SSL/TLS connection in china because they have root certificates in their browsers – “can still intercept and see SSL/TLS encrypted traffic because “Chinese
governments can still intercept and see SSL/TLS encrypted traffic because they have root certificates in the browser.” and there is nothing a private person or a company can do against this. The source claims that this is “especially true if they manage the infrastructure and don’t just provide hosting.”

you can see the whole EMail follows here:

INSIGHT – CHINA – Cloud Computing – CN64

Date 2011-02-15 20:51:29
From michael.wilson@stratfor.com
To analysts@stratfor.com
Others Listname: mailto:analysts@stratfor.com
MessageId:
InReplyTo: 4D5ACE22.2000406@stratfor.com

Text
**In response to what we just wrote on the CSM

SOURCE: CN64
ATTRIBUTION: Professional hacker
SOURCE DESCRIPTION: Owns his own internet security company that consults
with companies globally including China
PUBLICATION: Yes
SOURCE RELIABILITY: A
ITEM CREDIBILITY: 1
DISTRIBUTION: Analysts
SPECIAL HANDLING: None
SOURCE HANDLER: Jen

In concept this article is factually correct that it is possible (although
the word “clouds” is probably not ideal – “cloud network” is better).
Some might say things like “Well we only use SSL/TLS connections to the
machines, and we have XYZ security in place to prevent direct tampering.”
The problem is if the site is located within China, the Chinese
governments can still intercept and see SSL/TLS encrypted traffic because
they have root certificates in the browser. Once something is in the
physical hands of the enemy there is virtually nothing that the end
company can do. That is especially true if they manage the infrastructure
and don’t just provide hosting. Overall I think it’s a bad idea for
everyone but China. But I’m sure they’d say the same regarding the NSA’s
spying activities, https://www.eff.org/nsa/hepting So it’s a bit like the
pot calling the kettle black.

—
Jennifer Richmond
China Director
Director of International Projects
richmond@stratfor.com
(512) 744-4324
http://www.stratfor.com

Related Links:
http://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/1126742_insight-china-cloud-computing-cn64-.html

WikiLeaks Forum:
http://www.wikileaks-forum.com/index.php/topic,17764.0.html

Background info on Chinese intelligence/political figures

The following EMail(s) are/is again is from a Former FBI FCI agent – it gives you a short view into the history of chinese intelligence work and the political figures behind and involved. the internal problems and the near future of chinese intelligence services. the EMail is dated -2010-03-05 17:17:18-

Re: INSIGHT-CHINA-Background info on Chinese intelligence/political figures
Date 2010-03-05 17:17:18

From burton@stratfor.com
To sean.noonan@stratfor.com
Others MessageId:
InReplyTo: 4B912E59.60409@stratfor.com

Text

Yes

Sean Noonan wrote:
> this was from IC Smith right? (collating all the insight and adding a
> few modification to the CI China piece right now)
>
> Fred Burton wrote:
>> Interesting historical perspective.
>>
>> Kang sounds like a ruthless SOB.
>> ————————————————————————
>> *From: * Korena Zucha
>> *Date: *Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:06:03 -0600
>> *To: *’Secure List’
>> *Subject: *INSIGHT-CHINA-Background info on Chinese
>> intelligence/political figures
>>
>> SOURCE: US701
>> ATTRIBUTION: STRATFOR security source
>> SOURCE DESCRIPTION: Former FBI FCI agent
>> PUBLICATION: if desired
>> SOURCE RELIABILITY: Still testing, relatively new source
>> ITEM CREDIBILITY: 2
>> DISTRIBUTION: Secure
>> SPECIAL HANDLING: None
>> SOURCE HANDLER: Fred
>>
>> One of the characteristics of Chinese politics and this applies to the
>> intelligence/security agencies as well, is that rank is not always a
>> firm indicator of importance and power. Remember, Deng Xiaoping never
>> succeeded either Chairman Mao or Premier Zhou, but he was
>> unquestionably the man in charge. It is clear that Kang retained
>> great power and there are those who think Li Kenong was essentially
>> his mouthpiece. I’m not completely sure that’s the case, but at any
>> rate, Kang continued to wield immense power, really up to his death in
>> 1975. But historically I think he falls in that rather gray area
>> where they would just as soon that he is forgotten, but no one has the
>> courage to pull the trigger. And this is, in my view, for two
>> reasons. He was simply brutal (I’ve often times said that never in
>> the history of conflict have the two opposing intelligence chiefs been
>> so completely sadistic as was Kang Sheng and Dai Li.) and given that
>> historical brutality (where he is said to have killed more of his
>> friends than his enemies) it is easy for Chinese today to really not
>> want to remember him. In many ways, I find Kang the single most
>> interesting character coming out of the Chinese Civil War.
>>
>> But also, there is Kang’s role starting the Cultural Revolutionl.
>> Note how the Chinese treat the Gang of Four for instance, relegating
>> them to memories trash can, except to further dump on them, but Kang,
>> (and Mao) have escaped such criticism, relatively speaking. Kang was
>> never threatened during the CR as was Deng and others…including even
>> some of the more prominent generals, i.e.He Long. But most of the
>> future leaders were indeed, treated harshly by the Red Guards (one of
>> Deng’s sons, Deng Pufeng, was thrown out of a window and is in a
>> wheelchair today) and when I chatted with my friend who was affiliated
>> with the MPS/MSS, even he didn’t really want to discuss Kang.
>>
>> I think Kang is one of the more intriguing characters in Chinese
>> history that hasn’t gotten the notoriety and attention he really
>> deserves, though such books as those by Byron and Pack (The Claws of
>> the Dragon) and Faligot and Kauffer (The Chinese Secret Service) are
>> good starts.
>>
>> But his completely sinister background (though he is said to have been
>> able to write calligraphy with both hands, at the same time!) and his
>> role in the CR are the reasons, I believe, he isn’t lionized as
>> perhaps others, i.e. Mao, Zhou Enlai, Deng, Zhe De (who was treated
>> harshly during the CR), He Long, etc. etc.
>>
>> Re Zhou Yangkang….I don’t really know the extent of his influence,
>> but I doubt its as powerful as Kang’s was at the height of his power.
>> Actually, I’m of the opinion that one of the reasons Deng Xiaoping
>> formed the MSS is that he didn’t trust the MPS, which was Kang’s
>> organization and had treated Deng himself badly during the CR. But I
>> have no real idea as to the extent of Zhou’s influence.
>>
>> And as for Jia, he too, seems to have dropped off the scope in many
>> ways. I don’t know if that’s by choice or by design on the part of
>> the ruling elite, but he seems to be in complete
>> retirement…..something that didn’t use to occur in China, especially
>> for those on the reviewing stands, etc. I havent heard of him of him
>> in quite some time…had actually rather forgotten about him. But I
>> should tell you, I don’t keep up with the current comings and goings
>> in China to the extent I did when I had to work for a living.
>
> —
> Sean Noonan
> ADP- Tactical Intelligence
> Mobile: +1 512-758-5967
> Strategic Forecasting, Inc.
> http://www.stratfor.com

Related Links
http://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/1655848_re-insight-china-background-info-on-chinese-intelligence.html

http://www.wikileaks-forum.com/index.php/topic,17688.0.html

Stratfor Source a former VP (vice president) of FDP

Well of course the content of this email is interessting too but the german ellections are coming and Stratfor has deep ties into germanys politics. so it is a very nice to see that one of the current political party that rules germany together with CDU was an Stratfpr informant and it was an former vice president of FDP.

the EMail is dated: 2010-01-29

So who may be this source?

INSIGHT – IRAN/GERMANY – Berlin’s shift on Iran

Date	2010-01-29 17:54:00
From	goodrich@stratfor.com
To	watchofficer@stratfor.com
Others	MessageId: <4B6312A8.1060106@stratfor.com> InReplyTo: 4B62E3B2.5030507@stratfor.com
Text
CODE: DE101 PUBLICATION: yes ATTRIBUTION: Stratfor sources in Berlin SOURCE DESCRIPTION: former VP of FDP, heads democracy thinktank & briefs German and US government on Islam/Iran specifically SOURCE RELIABILITY: first contact, so still weighing ITEM CREDIBILITY: A SUGGESTED DISTRIBUTION: Analysts HANDLER: LaurenFrom what I understand the new German administration will be more strict and consequent addressing and opposing Irans nuclear weapons program. The main reason for this is that the former government partner of the CDU, the SPD with foreign minister Steinmeier up front, were quite cautious and hesitant in confronting Irans illegal activities. Not necessarily because they believed that Irans actions where legal but because they thought that dialog and benefits might work better. The majority of FDP MP’s, however, believe that strict sanctions are neccessary and so does the CDU including Chancellor Merkel. I am quite sure that this new “coalition” will have further implications for Siemens and other German companies. As you probably know Siemens technology on its way to Iran has been confiscated in December 2009 and the company might face charges for violating the German foreign trade law. — Lauren Goodrich Director of Analysis Senior Eurasia Analyst Stratfor T: 512.744.4311 F: 512.744.4334 lauren.goodrich@stratfor.com http://www.stratfor.com