Tag Archives: David Vigneault

September 30, 2023 · 21:27

I tend to disagree

There are a few issues and they all relate to the CBC articles. I do not think that the CBC is doing anything wrong. They merely report on a point of view I disagree with and we all have that at times. It started earlier, but what set me off was the article (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/national-security-canada-military-defence-ward-elcock-1.6963391) where we see ‘Canada needs to ditch the complacency and get serious about national security, experts say’. My initial question is ‘Who are these so called experts?’ I know I am not one, but I think these claiming to be could be seen as Monday morning quarterbacks. We are then pushed onto “something unexpected happened last week when the Business Council of Canada issued an urgent call for the federal government to develop a national security strategy with economic security as one of its pillars”. So who exactly are the members of the Business Council of America? It gets worse from here. You see, when we go back several weeks we get (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/foreign-interference-china-russia-csis-business-council-canada-1.6958627) ‘Business council says CSIS should start warning private companies of foreign interference’. This sounds nice, but we have two issues at this point.

The validity of Business Intelligence
The issue of American linked businesses.

The CSIS (aka the Client Server Integrity Society). If the NSA is allowed its ‘different’ version (No Such Agency) then the CSIS is allowed the same thing. My larger issue is “One of the country’s leading business voices warned Thursday that Canada’s economic security faces external threats — and called on Ottawa to give its spies the power to share intelligence with private firms being targeted for foreign interference.” The direct linked question becomes “Who exactly is that leading business voice?” And which idiot yahoo decided to throw sharing intel with places that have leaks larger than any sif into the mix? You see, there is a larger station here. ‘Targeted for foreign interference’ is a large setting. We tend to think China and what the reality is, is that Wall Street is also a source of foreign interference. Those people do not play nice. In addition too many Canadian businesses would have to up their cyber security by a lot. I merely showed one aspect earlier this week, one of close to half a dozen. Microsoft cannot stop emails leaking, what gives you the idea that Canada is any different?

So when we get to “The group — which has a long, influential history of pushing for policies like free trade, fiscal responsibility and tax reform — said it believes Canada is deeply vulnerable in this era of renewed great power competition.” We get to the larger disagreement. Canada is not more vulnerable, it is less interesting to a lot of power players. It is roughly 10% of the US and merely 50% of the United Kingdom and is spread over a whole area. In all this the larger station is not merely foreign interference, it is the danger of American interference for its own need for greed and that takes a different approach and until the Business Council of Canada gets its members to up their Cyber Security by a lot, any action is a wasted one and the CSIS keeping its actions secret is the best course of action at present. This might not be the right view, but it is my view.

Then we get to the interesting quote “CSIS jealously guards its sources and methods of collecting information. In one espionage case, it even kept the RCMP in the dark about a former sailor who was stealing classified information for the Russians.” The CSIS is confronted with too may leaks. There is no factual evidence that it amounts to corruption, but that word was mentioned more than once in sources I looked at. The important question was whether that traitor was caught in time. How long was that person active and how was that person (in the end) caught? It was not jealousy, that is the word of a reporter out for flames. The larger station becomes that Canada has vulnerability issues and not all of them are from China or Russia. American businesses are ready to expand and get the Canadian corporations as well, some politicians seem to cater to that need and the CSIS for sure does not. As such whatever the CSIS is doing now, it is seemingly doing right. From here we get to the dangerous statement “Neiman said Canada’s allies have found ways to strike that balance between secrecy and disclosure.” I believe it to be dangerous, because Canada’s allies are all catering to big business. Microsoft, Google, Amazon, IBM and Meta. You name it, it has a stakeholder trying to find a balance of intelligence at their exposure and risks they can mitigate and Intelligence at the expense to mitigate risk is not sharing Intel, it is giving nations options away to greed driven people and the CSIS, in particular that person with grey hairs (aka David Vigneault) needs to cater to the need of Canada and its citizens, not the needs of a Business Council and its friends.

That is how I see it and I might be wrong, but so far in history whenever a business person wanted intel to be shared, we were confronted by a leak the size of the Grand Canyon right behind it. So before we rinse, shave, grate and repeat Trevor Neiman and optionally these non mentioned friends of his, we should be told who they were EXACTLY. In that the CBC missed the plank by a fair bit.

Enjoy the weekend.

Two sides to anything

Yes, there are two sides to anything, there is their side and there is your side, then some say the third side is the truth, but that tends to boil over to both other sides. What matters is what we need to believe and in this day and age this is getting harder and harder.

The issue is the CBC article ‘U.S. ran secret probe into China’s operations in Canada, new book alleges’ (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/us-dragon-lord-probe-book-1.6783063) here we get to two issues. The first is not if it is true, we can merely assume that this is the case. The issue is that this is an event that started 30 years ago. So was there no aftermath, was there an investigation, and were protocols upgraded? We are given “The book says the project, code-named Operation Dragon Lord, led to an unnerving takeaway: that Beijing’s activities in Canada represented a security threat to the United States”, now we do get that Americans are good at tall tales and not just when phishing, it happens with a rod and with other equipment too, but if there was a real threat this threat wasn’t just for the USA, it would have impacted the Commonwealth via Canada and Canada as well, so where is the follow up? But then we get the most damning of all quotes. With “Canada was aware of these threats for 25 years and has allowed them to manifest” we see Scott McGregor, a former RCMP intelligence official give out the lash in no insignificant way. There is the thought that politicians are merely late to the party, but that would be wrong. Something set this off and there are a few scenarios that come to mind. If someone told me that MY country was being used to spy on the US and my name was David Vigneault, the first question in my mind is not what are they spying on, but ‘What are they spying on here?’ And that is the larger stage, from that statement we get to the implied thought that Canada has been overrun by sleeper agents and deep cover installations that have been creating a cover for decades. So how many Chinese people came to Canada since then? I do not know the answer and out of 100 perhaps 1 is the fishy one, but these people have been able to apply a cover for decades, good luck finding them now.

Then we get “The five-page memo says the American probe examined this alleged alliance of convenience between Beijing and criminal groups” merely 5 pages? The fact that there was a memo is not the setting, the mention that it was 5 pages is a concern, 5 pages over 6 agencies implies (not proves) a minor work that is little more than a homework exercise. I cannot tell how much of a danger China is, and with the wok seemingly done on it, neither can you.

The BS document by the UN on Khashoggi was at least 106 pages, as such they hid their BS in ink, China wasn’t given that courtesy with the 5 pages the semi-interested parties took. Weird eh?

Lets be clear, we spy on them, they spy on us. That has been a given fact for a very long time, as such I am not overly bothered, but the idea that a local intelligence agency is dragging its feet for decades is concerning, not merely because of China spying, but who else has been spying on us and we merely shrugged? Now we see more and more Russian actions all over the place and we see very little action against these people and now we do have a problem and that problem is likely to be seen all over the Commonwealth. I have no delusions that they are alone in this, they are likely the first one to be found dragging their feet which is not good. So what happens next? I reckon that is known when the CSIS reports to parliament this Monday, and that is the earliest when we learn what will be next.

That first step

That was the setting I was given when ABC decided to skip water with stones. The article (at https://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/pm/pressure-on-spy-boss-to-ease-up-on-foreign-interference/102010914) gives us ‘Pressure on spy boss to “ease up” on foreign interference’, a radio piece no less. It boils down to “In his annual threat assessment, the head of Australia’s security agency also revealed he’d been directly pressured by public servants, academics and businesspeople to “ease up” his focus on foreign influence” and apart from the one typo I saw, I also wonder who these people are. They are as I personally see them and as I have mentioned them the ‘stakeholders’ connected to corporations. I wonder who the Australian business people are, what THEY have to gain. I mentioned a long time ago that the media is filtered by Shareholders, stakeholders and advertisers. As I personally see it, it is the advertisers (with interests in Russia) and stakeholders with Russian connection that are the problem. In the first (and I apologise for the language) “Who the fuck do these academics and businesspeople think they are to oppose the security of Australia?” In the second, who are these public servants and business people? I think we need to put them out in the limelight and see what stakeholders become visible when we shake those trees. It is bbad enough that we are confronted with stakeholders stopping news from getting to the people, but when it comes to foreign influence in Australian governance, it becomes a whole new ball of wax and questions should be asked. The fact that this is now an issue, but we get limited exposure to this is another matter and we need to get this into the limelight.

Mikey Mike (the spy catcher) has a bad enough setting as it is, lets cooperate with him, we owe him that much. He is trying to keep Australia safe and fair dinkum honest. In addition to that, if WE face it, make no mistake that there are equal issues in the United Kingdom, Canada (where currently unconfirmed rumours have it that Pierre Poilievre is engaging with trolls to get his visibility out there), India and optionally New Zealand, but the last reference is more speculation from me than fact. So Australia is not alone and as I see it Mike Burgess (ASIO), David Vigneault (CSIS) and Ken McCallum (MI5) should pool resources and see which stakeholders have more than one shoreline they are fishing at, them and the direct connection they have. I think it is time to light up that collected Riffraff. I am still all for electing the actual traitors with a Accuracy International AXMC (the .338 edition) but apparently that is an illegal act (darn). And I admit, traitors make my blood boil and the blood gets a few degrees warmer when it is done for money. A first step is required and personally I think that illuminating these stakeholders will make them rush like the roaches they are for any place offering shades. When we have there visibility we can see who THEY are connected to. That does not mean that the connection are guilty, but it gives us the frame of an image and that image optionally colours the roadmap to something that could be a solution. Yes, there are issues with ‘could’ and ‘optional’ but in the dark we know nothing and we owe Mikey Mike more, or t least a stage where he can operate and three groups with self serving interests are not the way to go, especially when it is about the safety of a nation. It is even more when you consider that this could affect the whole Commonwealth. In this I could be wrong, I really could be, but should we allow this level of interference to go unattended to? I say no and it is time that you realise that in the Commonwealth stakeholders are given too much leeway and that needs to stop (or massively dampened). We need to realise that we have a problem and the first step to solving that problem is admitting we have one.

So have a great Friday and make your Friday a ‘Friyay’.

Six of one

Six of one, or half a dozen of the other. You will have heard the expression. It is widely used, yet the meaning has changed. This reminds me of an old WW2 movie. A sergeant tells the soldier, we kill them, they murder us. It is more than semantics and weirdly enough there is a chance that this was on the back of my mind when I wrote ‘Jump into the deep part’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/12/06/jump-into-the-deep-part/), yet the CBC (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/csis-trudeau-china-media-1.6270750) just drove it to the forefront of my mind. You see the article gives us in the article ‘Spy agency warned Trudeau China’s tactics becoming more ‘sophisticated … insidious’’ and here we see “As Canada’s spy agency warns that China’s efforts to distort the news and influence media outlets in Canada “have become normalised,” critics are renewing calls for Ottawa to take a far tougher approach to foreign media interference”. I am not debating the events in Canada, but the field is actually a lot larger. The media with (as I personally see it) unsubstantiated accusations towards the NSO group by the Guardian. Attacks without supporting evidence towards Saudi Arabia, the papers are drenched in that mess and it is not merely ‘foreign media interference’. You see if these people are serious they will take a hard look at media stakeholders, but they will not, will they?

So as we see “One way foreign states — including the People’s Republic of China (PRC) — try to exert pressure on other countries is through media outlets, say the documents, obtained through an access to information request.” Do they realise that it is not merely ‘foreign states’, in this ‘corporations’ are equally to blame, they all have other goals and they use the same channels, the problem is that the media has become too unreliable, people do not know what or who to believe. In this the CSIS has equally a role to play, and for the most they are all about the safety and security of Canada (as it should be), yet in all this I wrote a few days ago about Saad bin Khalid Al Jabri. So as some might remember “Aljabri gained worldwide attention last year when he filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., alleging he had been the target of a failed assassination plot orchestrated by Mohammed bin Salman”, an assassination attempt? In Canada? So why is the US courts involved? Why is this not set in Canada? Then we get “Sakab Saudi Holding Company, “had no operational business” despite receiving $8 billion US in government funding and was used “almost exclusively” as a vehicle to funnel money to the other companies”. My issue here is not merely whether this is on the up and up, it is happening under the noses (optionally with blessing) of the CSIS, this is an Unites States setting (with $8,000,000,000) and it is happening in Canada. Now, the point is not merely on what the CSIS is doing, because they care for their nation (Canada), yet the media gives us a different view and the Human Rights Watch is joining them with “(Beirut) – Saudi authorities should immediately release the imprisoned children of a former Saudi official following an unfair trial that took place in an apparent effort to coerce him to return to Saudi Arabia, Human Rights Watch said today. Omar Al-Jabri, 23, and Sarah Al-Jabri, 21, the children of Saad Al-Jabri, a former top Saudi intelligence official, were arrested in March 2020 and held incommunicado until January 2021.” Yes, the thousands of children of Yemen are casually forgotten (for that moment) but the children of a multimillionaire, in the eyes of the government of Saudi Arabia a traitor and a thief. The man walks into Canada with $385,000,000 and what we get is “he made at least $385M — and says there’s ‘nothing unusual’ about it”, really? Last time most people made a mere few millions, close to every tax agent within 50 miles came calling for a cup of coffee, but then I must have forgotten about the US and their $8,000,000,000 investment opportunity

So I digressed, but it was important. You see, I am not opposing “Chinese-language media outlets operating in Canada and members of the Chinese-Canadian community are primary targets of PRC-directed foreign influenced activities.” But the problem is larger, PRC is a paid engine, and in this that scammers, Iran and a few other players also use it. I do not think that I am telling director David Vigneault anything he does not know, but the stage is that PRC is used by stakeholders, marketeers, media outlets ho need some ‘casual’ link of evidence, the list goes on. The problem is not that China is involved, they probably are. Yet in that same light Russia is optionally using PRC media pages to make China look bad, Iran uses it to set misinformation onto other streams. In this Forbes gave us in April ‘China-Iran $400 Billion Accord: A Power Shift Threatens Western Energy’, we get to see the references towards Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and a few other matters, yet what is kept in the dark (not intentionally) is how Iran and Turkey are using PRC for marketing politics, a marketing engine devoted to the ‘headlines only people’. And in that stage there are also the corporations. They merely pursue their need for green (dollar bills), but the ploys they use are larger and taint all parties and in this the global media does close to nothing, because corporations represent advertisement dollars and they are all desperate (like a crack whore for a fix) to get those dollars. A little like the Sony 2012 Q3 advertisements needs, yet now a lot larger and many corporations that are a little shy of the limelight.

This gives us the one part I do not fully agree with, it is given in “Mainstream news outlets, as well as community sources, may also be targeted by foreign states who attempt to shape public opinion, debate, and covertly influence participation in the democratic process,”, my issue with this is “may also be targeted by foreign states who attempt to shape public opinion”, it is not wrong, but I think it should state “Mainstream news outlets, as well as community sources, need to be more proactive to stop outside influences from state players and corporations who attempt to shape public opinion, debate, and covertly influence participation in the democratic process,” because corporations have everything to gain and they are trying to do just that, on a global scale no less.

As such six of one or half a dozen of the other is not the same, the two elements tend to represent a very different currency. Consider the alternative six apples or half a dozen bananas, that might make more sense. As such I tend to ‘alter’ another expression to make sense: You say tomato, I say potato. My approach to the setting we see here on a global scale.

1 Comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics

Tagged as BRI, Canada, CBC, China, CSIS, David Vigneault, Forbes, Human Rights watch, Iran, Israel, NSO group, PRC, Saad bin Khalid Al Jabri, Saudi Arabia, Sony, stakeholders, Trudeau