Slashdot Mirror
European Firms Assisted Gaddafi's Internet Monitoring Regime
riverat1 writes "The Next Web has a story on Muammar Gaddafi's monitoring of the internet and other telecommunications. As you might expect, the monitoring was intense. The story names companies that supplied the monitoring software, most notably Amesys, a unit of the French company Bull SA. There is a more detailed story behind the paywall at the Wall Street Journal."
Boeing's Narus division may also have been involved (collecting very important Analytics and nothing suspicious of course). Update: 09/01 16:08 GMT by UL :Axure pointed out that VASTech (South Africa), ZTE (China), and the aforementioned Narus (US) also provided assistance, making the title of the article a bit inaccurate. It seems the Libyan Internet monitoring was an international affair (my apologies to Europe).
Every oppressive regime, from Nazi Germany to China, needs unethical companies whose management values money more than human freedom to maintain their power. The only reasonable thing that we as a society are morally obligated to do now is to publish all of the names of those companies for everyone to see, remember and boycott. If you are a consumer, don't buy their products. If you are a business owner, don't cooperate with them. If you are their worker, quit your job. If you are a stock broker, advise everyone to sell their stock. We owe that to people who were and still are being oppressed using tools provided by those companies. The only message that those bastards will understand are lost profits. The boycott is the least that we can do.
Karma: Positive (probably because of superiour intellect)
Six months ago Gaddafi and his government were legitimate. There are export restrictions to many nations (both from the US and Europe), but was there one to Libya? I'd suspect there wasn't. So this becomes a moral issue. Companies should have a "don't sell to dictators" policy. We should isolate them from all trade. No more business with China until they have a freely elected government. No more oil from Saudi Arabia until the kingdom is overthrown. The only viable solution is for "free" governments to allow and encourage anonymous, encrypted communication. Yes, that will make the job of law enforcement harder, people will use it to violate IP laws and traffic in child porn, but it is the only way to enable free exchange of ideas outside government control.
Corporations are "people"... until it is time to prosecute them. Then nothing seems to happen.
Money talks, whats the real story here?
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
More specifically:
"Earlier this year, Libyan officials held talks with Amesys" - France / 'European'
"other companies including Boeing Co.â(TM)s Narus" - USA / 'North American'
"telecom company ZTE Corp. also provided technology " - China / 'Asian'
"VASTech SA Pty Ltd [...] provided" - South Africa / 'African'
So, I guess that leaves South American, Australian and Antarctic as the only continents' possessives that needn't be shamed?
Yeah.. flamebait submission topic.
Companies should have a "don't sell to dictators" policy. We should isolate them from all trade. No more business with China until they have a freely elected government.
So when you deny these countries all trade, who do you think it hurts the most? Do you the dictator and their cronies care? They might care that they don't get their Bentleys and 80 year old scotch but who really gets hurt are the people.
Here's some bedtime reading for your altruistic folks that an Egyptian pointed out to me when I said that US Sanctions are the only ethical way to get dictatorships in line. When we sanctioned Iraq, half a million children died. Now, you might say that it's not your problem that a country of sand can't get an agriculture infrastructure together to save its own children but when we went in there all cavalier like a couple times do you think the people praised our troops for ousting the dictator? Do you think they didn't know that we had imposed sanctions on their country which meant many of them starved?
You can say "no more high end commodities, only food and water" which is slightly better but then those simple commodities just become the prized possessions and dictators/warlords sit on rice and use it to control their starving populace. It's a good thought but you have to be prepared for the reality of what ensues.
My work here is dung.
This is not true. The obligation to shareholders is not that short sighted. If a company can say they thought this could hurt profits if it came out they could avoid doing it. You can be sued by anyone at anytime, for just about any reason. This does not mean the person bringing the lawsuit will get anything.
No they are not. It is perfectly ok to have a policy of not selling stuff to certain customers, for example dictators.
There are four contractors named in the story: Amesys (of Bull SA, France), Narus (of Boeing, USA), VASTech SA (South Africa) and ZTE (China). How on Earth did you come up with the title "European firms ..." ??
I hate to say, but you confirm some ugly stereotypes about Americans' awareness of the world beyond their borders.
(BTW, the WSJ story is a rare free one - no pay wall.)
Sure, it's flamebait. I should point out, however, that Narus (according to a different article on CBS, I couldn't read the WSJ article) rejected the Libyan's deal. The primary contributors were Amyses and ZTE, it looks like. One is Chinese (so you really shouldn't be surprised) and the other is French (which is the 'scandalous' part). So flamebait, maybe. Still true. Also, VAStech provided the tools to monitor international calls, so nothing to do with the Internet monitoring.
So yeah, calling out a French company for selling to Libya is perfectly justified even if very flamebaity.
"None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
This is just a non-issue.
If anything, it is a red-herring that draws attention away from the illegal and morally bankrupt behaviour of G and the gang of monsters he called family and friends. These companies sold equipment and technology within legal boundaries, practices and processes. Absolutely everything we consume today is tied to a moral issue at some degree of separation. Techno-morality cherry picking.
Haul G's ass up onto the docket for prosecution. And reserve a special cell for Hannibal G and his twisted, obscene troll of a wife. Shine the spotlight on Algeria for propping up G with weapons, supplies and mercenaries, and in the final act for providing refuge for the clan.
Go to
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2031390/Aline-Skaf-Gaddafis-daughter-law-threw-boiling-water-nanny-Shweyga-Mullah.html
to see what Aline Skaf (Hannibal's wife) did to their nanny.
There is so much real, solid, evil to latch onto in this conflict, I find this story to be laughable.
I would feel different if the foreign tech companies acted directly in immoral acts. Providing a country with monitoring capability is not even close to being immoral.
If this issue turns your crank, then let's look at some other activities in Libya:
Want a techno issue? How about the hosting providers who give voice to G propaganda outlets like mathaba.net and algathafi.org? Or other sites that the regime used to communicate with terrorist orgs?
There are companies which drilled for oil to feed money into the regime. How did G get $50B / yr to keep Saif, Mutassim, Hannibal etc in their positions of power?
Bankers gave safe harbour for billions embezzled from the country's coffers.
What about the tanks and guns used by G to suppress the population? Where did they come from?
Everybody and his malamute sold them arms. Want a morally corrupt issue? Talk to the Russians about the more than 20,000 SA7s (shoulder launched surface to air) missiles they sold G. Obsolete, next to useless against military aircraft even back when new, and useful mainly against civilian airliners. The CIA provided only 1500 Stingers to the mujahadin in Afghanistan. Expenditure on this one weapon system alone was over $100 million. Frick. Libyans are walking around with diseases caused primarily by neglect and malnutrition while the government is spending huge dollars on weapons useful only to terrorists.
Huawei built the cellular infrastructure and then refused to help the TNC get the system going again in the Eastern part of the country after G chopped off coverage.
How about the GMR and the unknown effect on water resources in Africa. Better haul Brown and Root to the table for a grilling along with Thyssen Krupp, and dozens of other companies.
The list goes on and on, but so what?