American Security Firms Collaborate on Chinese Olympics

A New York Times story at News.com notes the efforts of American security organizations to help the Chinese government prepare for the coming Olympic games. Critics argue this assistance violates the spirit of Congressional sanctions, and that the technology left behind after the games are over could be used to track dissident elements. "'I don't know of an intelligence-gathering operation in the world that, when given a new toy, doesn't use it,' said Steve Vickers, a former head of criminal intelligence for the Hong Kong police who now leads a consulting firm. Indeed, the autumn issue of the magazine of China's public security ministry prominently listed places of religious worship and Internet cafes as locations to install new cameras. "

Comments

So I guess now it is...

[sokoban]

Me American. Me play joke. Me put listening device in your Coke.

And the new one for the Chinese:

Me Chinese. Me play joke. Me put lead paint in your Coke.

Doesn't make a difference.

[palegray.net]

... and that the technology left behind after the games are over could be used to track dissident elements ... I don't think the Chinese government necessarily needs outside assistance with implementing technologies to track political dissidents. They might be pretty backward with their approach to human rights, but technologically impaired they are not. Their "Great Internet Wall of Censorship" is designed to filter the exposure of the populace to other cultures, for example. I don't think they're going to have any difficulty implementing more severe monitoring programs, with or without Western assistance.

This is not to say that it's ethical for Western security firms to help their government, but business isn't always ethical.

Am I paranoid?

[drspliff]

Or would this be a great trial run before deployment in "the homeland". :)

Re:Am I paranoid?

[sumdumass]

Considering anyone in Iraq has brown skin, I don't see why it was necessary to put that in. Are you insinuating that it is being done for racist reasons? I mean if it was because of racism, why not just kill them and skip the suspected parts and claim they had a gun or something and shot at them.

Indeed, I am having trouble understanding your comment.

Re:Am I paranoid?

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

My point is: with a current trend of power hungry politions, leveraging whatever they have now to ensure their political ideals are on-top in future; are you sure you're happy with that?

Yup, I'm pretty much fine with that. Whatever repulsive-sounding thing they have to do to make the people happy, I'm fine with. So long as they don't actively hide harmful activities from the public, they can do as much bending over backwards, ass-licking, baby-kissing, mud-slinging, etc, as they like, so long as democracy works. That's all I require.

I think the whole paranoia about politicians is a bit of a strawman. The best, most reliable way to stay in power as long as possible is to just give people what they want. It's not rocket-science. A few polls here, a few focus groups there, what they ask for (especially in swinging seats), do it. All you need is the perspective to draft up policies that please the most number of people. That's what most successful politicians do. Their alleged thirst for power can be satisfied rather easily. There's no reason to go to the trouble and risk of instituting a totalitarian state. There'd be so much opposition, so few in favour of it. It would take far too much time to boil the frog slowly, because terms are short, and political layering is complex and completely against such actions. I often find that the premises for films/books like V for Vendetta are often a little too difficult to swallow.

Congressional sanctions?

[rucs_hack]

Would these be the same kind of sanctions that are still being applied to Cuba, decades after they stopped being a Russian pawn?

Honestly, the whole thing about congressional sanctions seems to be a low point on the moral landscape to me when I consider that case. Ok, perhaps relevant three or four decades ago, but still?

The idea that you can pass rules in Washington, and somehow bring about magical barriers to the kind of nastiness that can be done with technology at any levelis absurd. After all, the US (and many other countries), spent untold billions preparing high tech weapons for an expected large conventional/nuclear war, and restricted the sale of, or passing of information about, much of this technology. Then what do we find? It's actually nutbars with explosive belts and cheap guns that are the problem.

I recommend we sanction sanctions, that'll fox em..

New Olympic event

[xs650]

They have been hired as technical advisers for a new Olympic event. Water boarding.

IPv6

[H3g3m0n]

According to Wikipedia china is going to be using the olympics to show off their new internet systems such as IPv6 based security cameras etc...

"China plans to showcase their new CNGI and their new IPv6 networking at the 2008 Olympics in Beijing. Everything from the security cameras to the taxis to the cameras filming the Olympic events will be networked via IPv6; the events will be streamed live over the Internet while the networked cars will be able to grasp the traffic situation more readily."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Next_Generation_Internet

Not just china

[MrKaos]

In Australia a whole package of laws that undermined the average aussie's freedom were passed just before the Olympics. It used to be legal to own semi-automatic rifles and it wasn't legal for our own army to point and fire at our own citizens and more without any sunset clauses.

I just wonder if it has happened anywhere else, china was repressive enough, who knows what else they will enact.