WHO WATCHES THE WATCHERS? CHINA, ET AL.
I have to admit than when I read the following story submitted by F.B.S., I had to laugh, for it gives an entirely new and humorous perspective on the old expression, "who watches the watchers"? (our thanks to F.B.S. for bringing this to our attention):
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/next-level-spying-how-china-read-wests-wiretaps-years
So get out your popcorn, your favorite beverage, sit back, and have a good laugh at the latest in Our Fearless Leaders' technoratic incompetence:
The four trillion dollars in institutional capital positioned for stable UK-China relations rests on an assumption that died in a Chengdu server room sometime around 2019. The assumption is that espionage between major powers operates within understood boundaries, that telecommunications infrastructure is contested but not compromised, that the surveillance systems Western governments built to watch their citizens cannot be turned around to watch them. The assumption has been falsified. What follows is the complete mechanism of how China’s Ministry of State Security achieved persistent access to the private communications of three British Prime Ministers’ closest advisers, the phones of a US President-elect, and the wiretap systems that were supposed to catch them doing it. The positioning implications are immediate. The framework is permanent.
On January 26, 2026, The Telegraph disclosed that Chinese hackers had penetrated right into the heart of Downing Street, compromising mobile communications of senior officials across the Johnson, Truss, and Sunak administrations. The story was buried on page seven, treated as a technology curiosity. It was, in fact, a solvency event for the Western intelligence alliance. Not because phones were hacked, which happens, but because of how they were hacked: by weaponizing the very surveillance infrastructure that Western governments mandated for their own intelligence agencies. The Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act in the United States and the Investigatory Powers Act in the United Kingdom require telecommunications carriers to build backdoors into their networks for court-ordered wiretapping. Chinese state hackers found those backdoors. And walked through them.
...
The story of Salt Typhoon is not fundamentally a story about hacking. It is a story about architecture. Specifically, it is a story about what happens when governments mandate that their surveillance systems include single points of failure, then assume those points will only fail in their favor.
...
The vulnerability was not a bug in the architecture. It was the architecture. (Boldface emphasis in the original article, italicized emphasis added by me.)
And there you have it: China piggybacked onto the west's own surveillance architecture to spy on the spies spying on the rest of us, which means that the whole technocratic cyber-game is (a) not secure at all, and (b) dead before it is even off the ground, because (c) cyber surveillance piggy-backing is a game that more than one player can play. Indeed, I suspect that, in addition to any country able to access large amounts of computing power being able to piggy-back onto any other countries cyber-surveillance system, that anyone, including non-state actors, able to network computers into such a network - as has been done by private individuals in crypto-currency mining operations - will be able to do this. It requires nothing but computing power, and patience and time, to do find those backdoors. Just because we're hearing about it in the West's case does not mean it can't be done in other cases, and might already have been done. After all, suddenly Iran's internet is "back on" by some 0bscure means, even though its regime turned it off. And in China, something very much like a coup d'etat and purge appears to be going on, one that Mr. Xi might have narrowly escaped. What happens when his computer experts turn against him? Sleep well, Mr. Xi.
But that's not even the high octane speculation of the day, because what happens if, let us say, the Chinless Wonder at the Bank of International Swindles Settlements, Mr. Cartsens, gets his way and puts the world on to a digital "currency", and then someone uses that "hackproof" blockchain apparatus to piggyback a surveillance operation onto the banksters' own surveillance operation? At that point, their two way mirror becomes opaque to the banksters, and they're on the other side of it with the rest of us... and with that, the stability of their stable coins is more liquid, volatile , and unpredictable than mercury on a hot skillet. Why? because it's a variation of the Prisoner's dilemma: everyone can sign treaties and pacts not to do that, but the odds are that someone will, in order to gain an advantage. And once done, everyone will do it. And when everyone does it, not only is there no advantage to doing it, but there is no advantage to maintaining such an expensive and unstable system.
See you on the flip side... and........ pass the popcorn....
(If you enjoyed today's blog, please share it with your friends.)
No Comments
Help the Community Grow
Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.
The destructive side of me wishes that some force could bring down every computer system upon the Earth. Fry every damn one of them LOL. ALL of them… even mine! We’ll see whose skills and knowledge are truly valuable after that.
The Irish are WATCHING, and rolling eyes, at emperor Trumpy! There is a drunken bard meme factory, in Dublin:
https://youtu.be/zzSPvOdNSIs
When will they ever learn that AI will never be a safe means of storing information? Pen and pencil beat computer storage it may be old tech but it works.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_the_United_Nations It’s all a show– in plain site. The watchers are zoo keepers
The Buddhist ‘Nirvana’ is C. S. Lewis’ epistemology – which is the quantum mechanical world-in-between, in ‘The Magician’s Nephew’!
1. In a British spy-fi TV-series, ‘The Prisoner’ [1967], the leading actor, Patrick McGoohan, discovers, that the ‘Number One’ is a mirroring monkey – which leads, to the necessity, of a foolproof litmus test, to prevent a stampede, at the zoo.
2. Such a means was created, in the 9th century BC, when Elijah [later Odin] began using the 32-point compass, as a moot point template – for extrapolation of wits – to examine the intellectual capacity, of potential candidates for leadership.
3. The Chalcolithic Cucuteni-Trypillian Yin-Yang is but a forerunner, to the Taoist Yin-Yang, brought to Asia, by the Indo-Scythians, whose Yahweh-Elohim is a mere Bronze Age snapshot, of a quantum mechanical technology, that lingers on, since high antiquity.
4. Culturally, the monkey king is always seeking, and looking, for every possible backdoor, into the Buddha’s mind, that is empty – which is a quantum state, known, as the superposition – which is Odin, hanging, whilst wounded, by spear [of gravity].
5. Culturally, figuring out puzzles, that intrigue the mind, is, what drives the eastern thinkers, to figure out the western thinkers – because Yin-Yang has a Chalcolithic Cucuteni-Trypillian origin – which echoes, in the sci-fi fantasy theme, of the monkey king going to India.
6. Presently, the western mind is a frog, swimming, in a deep well, with a narrow outlook, that, gradually, is morphing, into a multipolar frog, sitting, on the edge of the well, with a kaleidoscopic outlook, upon the seven celestials – once known – as the Elohim.
7. Before Yahweh-Elohim became falsified, into Adonai-Elohim – and later co-opted, by Flavius Josephus, into an imperial idolatry – the original meaning was the SCALES OF LAW, in Jacob’s twelve-membered council, the FIRST REPUBLIC, that remedied the hazard of primogeniture.
Today, when Taoists are testing the wits of western leadership, then, that is a direct consequence, of the 6th-century Scythian influence, in Asia – which, today, is an echoing blast from the past.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/0nn0a6rz2265z72/patristic-exegesis.pdf