"In Europa ci sono già i presupposti per l'esplosione di un conflitto sociale. Questo è il seme del malcontento, dell'egoismo e della disperazione che la classe politica e la classe dirigente hanno sparso. Questo è terreno fertile per la xenofobia, la violenza, il terrorismo interno, il successo del populismo e dell'estremismo politico."

sabato 28 novembre 2020

Video: "La bottega di Maastricht" di @durezzadelviver, su Libertà di pensiero MDN

La bottega di Maastricht

@durezzadelviver Il tema del video è in generale la distruzione del lavoro autonomo e del commercio al dettaglio ad opera del grande capitale, attraverso il trattato di Maastricht e la legislazione italiana che ne è conseguita, sino alla crisi Covid, in cui i "ristori" attuati dal governo sono evidentemente insufficienti.

martedì 24 novembre 2020

Come i servizi segreti stanno cambiando il mondo: strutture e tecniche di nuova generazione, un libro.

I principali servizi segreti e i nuovi scenari mondiali

PRESSENZA 23.11.2020 - Damiano Mazzotti



Aldo Giannuli è uno storico specializzato nello studio dei servizi segreti e nel 2018 scrisse un saggio profetico: “Come i servizi segreti stanno cambiando il mondo” (Ponte alle Grazie, 260 pagine).
I servizi segreti degli Stati moderni sono nati dai servizi d’informazione militari della prima guerra mondiale e sono stati istituzionalizzati a livello civile poco prima o poco dopo la seconda guerra mondiale. Poi venne la Guerra Fredda e la politica delle guerre rivoluzionarie, anche in alcuni paesi non allineati agli Stati Uniti, con risultati altalenanti per gli Usa.
Di conseguenza si affinarono due fattori decisivi: “la nozione di “strategia indiretta” e l’idea dell’uso combinato di vari strumenti di pressione nella guerra coperta, nella quale si registrava una pausa solo momentanea” (p. 26). Negli ultimi anni i servizi segreti hanno “consolidato il ruolo strategico e di primo piano nei comandi militari” (p. 26).

Quindi si è arrivati alla concezione di “guerra asimmetrica” multiforme e proteiforme, espressa in un saggio militare cinese oramai famoso (Qiao Liang e Wang Xiangsui, sono probabilmente nomi di copertura, http://gnosis.aisi.gov.it/sito/Rivista24.nsf/servnavig/31). La guerra aerea americana attuata in Kosovo, forse non è più applicabile: “funzionò, ma servi a cinesi e russi per capire i punti deboli dell’aereo invisibile e a Gheddafi per sperimentare una tattica di combattimento per una guerra tutta aerea” (p. 125). Infatti Gheddafi morì dopo sei mesi e più di dodicimila missioni aeree, con costi spropositati (p. 148).
L’attuale dottrina militare cinese utilizza i servizi segreti come punta di diamante delle loro operazioni militari non convenzionali, che spaziano in ogni sfera umana: politica, economia, sociologia, psicologia, biologia, comunicazione, eccetera (p. 31).
Inizia così la guerra senza limiti, di spazio e di tempo, che coinvolge tutti e tutto, seguendo la regola del minimo sforzo, della minima spesa, del minimo coinvolgimento diretto e della minima visibilità operativa, e di forte impatto mediatico. Detto con le parole dei due colonnelli cinesi: “il centro di gravità dell’assalto è sempre un punto che provocherà un profondo shock psicologico nell’avversario” (citazione di p. 32).

Per quanto riguarda gli Stati Uniti si sa che “la CIA è stata dotata di una flotta di ottanta droni con i quali sono state compiute centinaia di missioni. I servizi segreti hanno sempre compiuto operazioni omicide” (p. 46). Ma la rete organizzativa più pervasiva è sicuramente rappresentata da “Echelon, che per i servizi segreti significò il sopravvento della SIGINT sull’HUMINT: l’estesa rete di intercettazioni rendeva obsolete le fonti umane, o così sembrò sino all’11 settembre 2001 quando l’ombrello di Echelon non si dimostrò in grado di cogliere i segnali dell’attentato” (a mio parere nessuno può escludere che si sia trattato di un inside job americano attuato da servizi deviati).
Naturalmente i servizi americani operano in stretta sinergia con i servizi israeliani, soprattutto nel campo dell’innovazione tecnologica nella sorveglianza e nella ricerca e sviluppo di tecnologie dirompenti: https://www.agoravox.it/Start-up-Nation-Israele-e-i.html.
“Il Mossad ufficialmente non esiste”, ma per capire le abilità estreme di questa organizzazione basta citare questo caso: il “suo agente Eli Cohen che, sotto falsa identità, riuscì a scalare le gerarchie siriane sino a entrare nel governo”. Poi fu impiccato (p. 95, naturalmente in Israele lo considerano un eroe). Il Mossad ha dato inizio alla strategia degli omicidi mirati, anche pubblicizzati, e il target killing è stato poi istituzionalizzato dagli Stati Uniti (occorre la firma presidenziale).

In Usa, nel caso di pericolo per la sicurezza nazionale, si utilizzano i droni della CIA per colpire qualsiasi persona in quasi tutto il pianeta. Quindi “la guerra è sempre anche rappresentazione e lo è ancora di più oggi, nella società dell’immagine” (p. 125). Naturalmente la politica “non è mai separabile dalla dimensione della forza, soprattutto della forza militare” (p. 126).
E veniamo alla Cina: grazie alle diramazioni economiche della globalizzazione “il sistema di intelligence cinese è uno dei più sofisticati al mondo, articolato in una complessa serie di organismi sia di partito che di Stato e di enti economici e finanziari” (p. 87). La cabina di regia quasi a senso unico del piccolo Comitato di partito, può avere vantaggi nel coordinamento a breve e a medio termine, ma può determinare una visione imprecisa nel raggiungere gli obiettivi a lungo termine, come avvenne per i nazisti durante la Seconda Guerra Mondiale. In ogni caso è stato lo spionaggio industriale a favorire la crescita della Cina, molto più dei bassi salari iniziali (p. 88).
Comunque alcuni paesi asiatici hanno salari molto più bassi di quelli cinesi e l’intelligence cinese si è quindi concentrata sul settore finanziario, “che ha permesso di acquisire informazioni determinanti per la politica di shopping di aziende, società finanziarie, strutture logistiche, alberghi e anche squadre di calcio” in tutto il mondo (p. 89). Però la Cina non apre alle acquisizioni straniere in patria e tutte le multinazionali non cinesi hanno vita molto dura in Cina (dal punto di vista accademico una vera multinazionale ha un capitale misto di almeno due nazioni diverse).

La Russia non è da sottovalutare, grazie alle grandi predisposizioni informatiche e diplomatiche. L’arte geopolitica russa di oggi si concentra nel “generare uno stato continuo di confusione nell’avversario: contrapporre le istituzioni fra loro, alimentare campagne fortemente divisive, disorientare l’opinione pubblica… alimentare le sfiducia degli investitori stranieri, suscitare scandali nella classe di governo” (p. 81, però tutto queste operazioni vengono fatte da molti Stati).
Bisogna tenere presente che in varie regioni del mondo, dal 2014 al 2017, ben sei ambasciatori russi e una quarantina di personalità russe, sono morte in circostanze più o meno strane (p. 121). Negli ultimi anni non sono nate alleanze geopolitiche solide, ma banali coalizioni provvisorie basate su alcuni interessi nazionali: “ci sono solo convergenze occasionali e parziali, destinate a lasciare subito il passo a nuove convergenze opposte alle precedenti.

venerdì 20 novembre 2020

BCE annuncia l'Euro digitale e si affretta a precisare "Non sostituirà il cash". Per ora.

A digital euro

"Even if a digital euro has not been necessary so far, we should be ready if and when developments make one necessary."


The ECB, as guardian of the euro, provides currency in two forms: we issue banknotes and we transfer electronic deposits to banks and other financial institutions.
Digitalisation has spread to every corner of our lives and transformed how we pay. In this new era, a digital euro would guarantee that citizens in the euro area can maintain free access to a simple, universally accepted, safe and trusted means of payment.
A digital euro would be an electronic form of central bank money accessible to all citizens and firms – like banknotes but in a digital form. It is not meant to replace cash, but rather to complement it. Together, they give people more choices about how to pay, and make it easier for them to do so, increasing financial inclusion.
The Eurosystem will continue to ensure that all citizens have access to euro banknotes and coins across the euro area. “The euro belongs to Europeans and we are its guardian. We should be prepared to issue a digital euro, should the need arise.” Christine Lagarde, President of the ECB

Why a digital euro?
A digital euro would make your daily payments faster, easier and more secure. It could support the digitalisation of the European economy and actively encourage innovation in retail payments. The ECB and the national central banks of the euro area are exploring the benefits and risks so that money continues to serve Europeans well. Report on a digital euro

What are other benefits of a digital euro?
A digital euro would preserve the benefits that the euro provides to all of us. It would help to deal with situations in which people no longer prefer cash. It would help cushion the impact of extreme events – such as natural disasters or pandemics – when traditional payment services may no longer function. It could also be crucial if people were to turn to foreign digital means of payment, which might undermine financial stability and monetary sovereignty in the euro area.

When will it be ready?
During the preparation phase, we are working on the concept, starting practical experimentation on possible designs, and discussing with stakeholders and international partners. Towards the middle of 2021 we will decide whether to launch a digital euro project. This will be followed by an investigation phase on user requirements and service providers.
It would take time to develop a safe, accessible and efficient digital currency. We will ensure that the systems we use to pay keep up with the needs of the people who use them. “We need to make sure that our currency is fit for the future. Inaction is not an option.” Fabio Panetta, ECB Executive Board Member

What might it look like?
It is too early to identify any specific type of digital euro. Experts from the ECB and the national central banks of the euro area have laid down a number of basic requirements for a digital euro, such as easy accessibility, robustness, safety, efficiency, privacy and compliance with the law. These will help us to define what it might look like.
Even if a digital euro has not been necessary so far, we should be ready if and when developments make one necessary.

Will the ECB manage a digital euro?
The ECB is the custodian of the euro, be it as banknotes or in digital form, on behalf of the people of Europe. We want to make sure the value of our money is preserved and that any form of digital euro is ultimately safeguarded and regulated by the central bank. Whatever the design and the functioning of a digital euro, it would be an electronic form of central bank money, accessible to all citizens and firms – like banknotes but in a digital form – to make their daily payments in a fast, easy and secure way.

Why would a digital euro not be a crypto-asset?
Crypto-assets are fundamentally different from central bank money: their prices are volatile because they lack any intrinsic value and there is no reliable institution backing them.
People using a digital euro would have the same level of confidence as with cash, since they are both backed by a central bank, which is something crypto-assets such as stablecoins cannot provide.

Read the Report on a digital euro:

A new horizon for pan-European payments Payments are undergoing a fundamental change, and central banks have a key role to play in this process.
European payments must be underpinned by a competitive and innovative market capable of meeting consumer demand while preserving European sovereignty. In this context we have set out a comprehensive payments strategy for the digital age.

lunedì 16 novembre 2020

Antonello Zedda introduce "Uropia il protocollo Maynards" su Libertà di Pensiero- MDN

Ripropongo la bella chiacchierata di venerdì sera con Antonello Zedda su Libertà di pensiero - MDN a proposito di "Uropia".

Tanti retroscena, curiosità, attualità, documenti, e le interessantissime domande del pubblico che hanno animato questa piacevole e a tratti divertente presentazione.

Qui e sotto il link per gustarsi il video, buon ascolto!







giovedì 12 novembre 2020

I Social Media saranno autorizzati a rimuovere contenuti "illegali" e "violenti", secondo il Parlamento Europeo.

Platforms should be allowed to take ‘voluntary measures’ in content removal, MEP says



By Samuel Stolton | EURACTIV.com, 9 nov 2020

The EU should focus on regulating illegal content as part of its upcoming Digital Services Act, which aims to present an ambitious new regulatory framework for online services, but platforms should also be allowed to take ‘voluntary measures’ to remove harmful content, MEP Dita Charanzová says.

Dita Charanzová is a Renew Europe MEP who represented the group as part of the European Parliament’s initiative report on the Digital Services Act for the Internal Market Committee.
EURACTIV’s Samuel Stolton heard about what she had to say on the plans.

You negotiated for Renew as part of the Internal Market’s initiative report on the Digital Services Act. For you, what were the most important compromises to reach?

It’s hard to pick what the most important compromise was because the report was so long and we touched on many important things. But for me, the most important thing was that all groups supported that the fundamentals of the E-Commerce Directive should be maintained. These are the country of origin principle, the limited liability regime, and the ban on general monitoring. In addition, I was very happy to see the support given to a Good Samaritan clause being included in the future DSA. While I believe that there should be no general monitoring requirement, if we want platforms to take more voluntary measures against unwelcome content then we must give them the legal means to do so.

Reports have recently surfaced that the Commission may think about establishing a sanctions regime for platforms that host illegal content online, what are your opinions on this prospect?

I think that as long as we respect the current system and rules of the E-commerce Directive, there is limited need of such a sanctions regime. That said, if a website is blatantly hosting illegal content, and is taking no measures to remove such content, then it is potentially liable and might need to be subject to sanctions. This, however, must be a measure of last resort. Before then, we must follow the notice and action mechanism. But nothing should weaken the current limited liability protections under the Directive.

In light of the various terrorist attacks in Europe, do you believe that this will have an impact on not only how ‘illegal’ content is regulated, but also ‘harmful’ content, or is it important to maintain a clear distinction between the two?

Clearly, these attacks will put pressure on Brussels to regulate more on this. Nevertheless, we must maintain a distinction between illegal and harmful content. The DSA must only regulate illegal content. Illegal content is clearly set down in law, and there is a judicial process for deciding if something is illegal or not. When it comes to harmful content though, this is very much in the eye of the beholder. Something that is not harmful in the Netherlands may, for instance, be seen as harmful in Poland. This said websites should take their social responsibility and take voluntary measures to ensure what they think is harmful content is removed from their websites. But this must not endanger their protections under the E-commerce Directive. There is a difference between social responsibility and liability.

With regards to the leaked blacklist of prohibited practices that recently emerged, what’s your take on these?

My take is that any measures that are potentially included in the Digital Markets Act must primarily be applied on a case-by-case basis. The practices of a video streaming platform are nothing like those of a marketplace, or those that allow user-generated content, or those that are closed ecosystems. To apply blanket regulations to everyone may lead to unnecessary and burdensome regulation of platforms without any benefit for consumers or fairness in the marketplace.

The DSA will also be presented alongside the Digital Markets Act, which aims to rebalance fair competition in the platform economy. Under what conditions do you envisage that its market investigation tool will be put to use? In the platform economy, what conditions have to be met in order to determine if a market is close to ‘tipping’?

I believe that the EU should primarily act when there is a market failure and the investigation tools should be used to determine if there is such a failure. Primarily I do not think it is the role of the European Commission or anyone else to go looking for problems that are not apparent. If businesses or consumers do not feel that there is a market failure, then we should primarily let the market continue to function. Any actions against market tipping must be rare and exceptional and be based upon solid evidence.

To how much of an extent do you believe that the EU should reform some of the core provisions of the eCommerce directive, if at all? What are the potential risks or benefits of doing so?

I do not believe that the core provisions should be reformed, I think that they are as valid today as they were 20 years ago. The potential risk of reforming them is that we will break a system that works. Today in Europe we have an open and free internet. Much of the reason for innovation and growth online is because we set some basic rules, and got out of the way. If we regulate too much, we risk that we will create new barriers instead of fixing the limited ones that exist today.

A lot of talk on the Digital Services Act and the Digital Markets Act has centred on the operation of the tech giants, but in what ways could Europe’s SMEs be impacted by the new rules?

A lot of European SMEs rely upon the large platforms for their businesses to help them enable their businesses. European SMEs have been able to grow far more because of the platforms than they would have without them.

The key to any regulation is to ensure that the platforms continue to be useful for our SMEs, but also that any rules that apply to the platforms do not trickle down to SME users. While the large platforms have the money and time to implement regulations, SMEs do not have the lawyers or staff to be implementing transparency reports and many other rules. We, therefore, have to be careful that any regulation of the large platforms is targeted and proportional.

[Edited by Sam Morgan]

lunedì 9 novembre 2020

Presentazione in diretta di "Uropia" su "Libertà di pensiero MDN" venerdì 13 novembre alle ore 18:00

Questo venerdì alle ore 18:00 su "Libertà di pensiero MDN" presenterò LIVE con Antonello Zedda il mio "Uropia il protocollo Maynards".

Parleremo di Europa, di democrazia, libertà, terrorismo, pandemie, populismo e tanto altro.

Non mancate, ci saranno curiosità sulla nascita del romanzo, approfondimenti, retroscena e ...segreti.


Qui sotto il link che sarà attivo IN DIRETTA su YouTube VENERDI 13 NOVEMBRE alle 18:00.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsaxvdnZUGM




venerdì 6 novembre 2020

Attentato di Vienna: l'ennesimo fallimento dell'intelligence - che ne era a conoscenza.

Vienna gunman rampaged alone, intelligence was fumbled, minister says

REUTERS, 4 November 2020, by Francois Murphy



VIENNA - Large quantities of mobile phone footage have confirmed that the jihadist who killed four people in a rampage in Vienna on Monday was the only gunman, but Austria fumbled intelligence on him, Interior Minister Karl Nehammer said on Wednesday.
Austria arrested 14 people aged 18 to 28 on Tuesday in connection with the attack and is investigating them on suspicion of belonging to a terrorist organisation, he said. But it would also have to investigate its own actions, he added.

“Before the terror attack began, according to the information currently available, some things also went wrong,” Nehammer told a news conference. In July, neighbouring Slovakia’s intelligence service had handed over information suggesting the attacker had tried and failed to buy ammunition there, Nehammer and a top ministry official, Director General for Public Security Franz Ruf, said.
“In the next steps evidently something went wrong here with communications,” said Nehammer, who called for the formation of an independent commission to examine the errors made. After receiving the tip-off from Slovakia, Austria’s domestic intelligence agencies at the federal and provincial level made the necessary checks and sent questions back to Bratislava, Ruf said.
“It’s up to the commission to clarify whether the process went optimally and in line with the law,” he said, when pressed on what had gone wrong. Austria’s National Security Council signed off on setting up the commission later on Wednesday.

The gunman, who was shot dead by police within minutes of opening fire, was a 20-year-old with dual Austrian and North Macedonian citizenship. Born and raised in Vienna, he had already been convicted of trying to reach Syria to join Islamic State and had spent time in jail. All of those arrested in Austria have a “migration background”, Nehammer said. Vienna police chief Gerhard Puerstl added that some were dual citizens of Bangladesh, North Macedonia, Turkey or Russia.
Neutral Austria, part of the U.S.-led Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS formed in 2014, has for years seen jihadist attacks as its biggest security threat and warned of the danger posed by foreign fighters returning from Iraq or Syria or their admirers. At the end of 2018, the authorities knew of 320 people from Austria who were actively involved or had wanted to participate in jihad in Syria and Iraq. Of these, around 58 people were thought to have died in the region and 93 to have returned to Austria. Another 62 were prevented from leaving the country.

Nehammer repeated criticism of a deradicalisation programme, saying the gunman had “perfectly” fooled the programme to reintegrate jihadists into society. But Moussa Al-Hassan Diaw, a co-founder of Derad, the organisation that runs the programme, rejected Nehammer’s assertion, telling Reuters: “It was always clear that this person was in no way deradicalised.”

LONE GUNMAN

Members of the public had handed in more than 20,000 mobile phone videos that the authorities analyzed before coming to the conclusion that there was only one gunman, Nehammer said, putting an end to lingering confusion on that point.
Switzerland has also arrested two men in connection with the attack. Its justice minister said the two were “obviously friends” with the gunman. Ruf said Austria was in contact with Switzerland and another country that he declined to identify over the investigation.
North Macedonia said on Tuesday three people were somehow involved in the attack and all had dual Austrian and North Macedonian citizenship. It identified them only by initials.

On Wednesday afternoon Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz’s office said President Emmanuel Macron of France, which has suffered two deadly attacks recently amid Islamist anger over the publication of satirical caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad, would visit Vienna on Monday.
Six hours later, it said the meeting was postponed “because of the COVID-19 situation in Europe”, adding: “instead, a video conference will take place at the beginning of the week on the fight against Islamic terrorism and political Islam.”

Reporting by Francois Murphy; Additional reporting by Alexandra Schwarz-Goerlich in Vienna and Michael Shields in Zurich; Writing by Michael Shields and Francois Murphy; Editing by Timothy Heritage, Gareth Jones and Richard Pullin