Home » Other » After the war against terrorism naivety have prevailed, the authorities have not kept up with technological developments and computers are built incorrectly

After the war against terrorism naivety have prevailed, the authorities have not kept up with technological developments and computers are built incorrectly

(Revised on 30.11.2017, 20:01)

Who is responsible when a serious event happens because the authorities can’t keep up with technological developments, and have problems in detecting and preventing dangerous situations before they occur?

The reason for some of the acts of terrorism in recent years might be complex, but I believe that one of the motives for many of the events might be a sports project that I have been working on. Another, and perhaps, more important motive is that intelligence agencies and environments in the countries affected by the war against terrorism have simply operated boundlessly in some type of revenge (IS, Al-Qaeda, Taliban?), in co-operation with vulnerable or boundless environments in Western countries perhaps not fully understanding that they are part of the game or war. I wonder whether the people connected to the Pakistani company that programmed the prototype for my sports project have considered it a game of boundless chess from the onset in mid-2005, by using spyware to steal my personal data.

To accuse a founder, who is an involuntary and non-participating player in someone else’s game in such a way is unjustifiable. I will explain this further:

Firstly, some people might have underestimated the dangers linked to participation in the war against terrorism. In 2005, I contacted a Norwegian company that had connections with a company in Pakistan for the programming of a sports project. I asked a checklist question at the start of the project, and one later, and it was apparent that the founder of the company had never been in contact with the police or intelligence agencies about associated risks. If I had been entering into such collaboration, I would certainly have contacted the police or a National intelligence agency myself. On the other hand, I have never seen any warnings against collaboration with companies or individuals in countries that have opposed the West in its war on terror. Therefore, perhaps the person concerned to some extent can be excused for not doing so. Nonetheless, it’s quite strange.

Because there was no response to my few but relevant questions and the authorities didn’t say there were risks, I also assumed there was nothing to worry about. For those who are wondering: One of my questions was, “Is it safe to use a company in Pakistan?” This question was put to the Norwegian person that outsourced the programming assignment to Pakistan (I can’t quite remember how I actually formulated the question, but I do remember bringing up the matter on one occasion without it be further discussed). I asked if it was safe to let the Pakistani company demonstrate its work on my computer by remote control, when they initially asked to do so (I relied on the Norwegian woman as she then was the expert), and I phoned the police to ask if there was anything in particular io should be aware of in connection with one of the company’s employees coming to Norway in the later stages of the project. No response to my questions was received which basically means no one thought there were any risks attached to the situation.

Perhaps intelligence agencies in some countries and technology providers until some years ago have also been responsible for the lack of sharing information about the dangers of using computers and the Internet. Maybe they didn’t have enough knowledge of risks and perhaps naivety prevailed? Do manufacturers of computers, laptops, cell phones and software, etc., provide enough information about the pitfalls of such products? If they do not, are there any consequences? Are there any laws to cover this? Does a specific supervisory agency approve software/hardware prior to selling it on the market?

As long as it is possible to hack private harddrives, it will be possible for third parties to add spyware. It should be physically impossible for strangers to capture someone’s personal keystrokes, as I have discussed in some of the videos on my blog. Therefore, computers have been built wrong. They should have a separate HD that is physically impossible to connect to the Internet. This modification to computers should have been done upon the arrival of the Internet, but the need for it probably wasn’t seen then. It ‘s obvious that problems will arise when billions of people are at risk of losing data. 

Since people are exposed to spyware, there should be warnings about what one should not do on a personal computer. There could be laws stating that everything to do with civil protection in Norway and its allied countries, sensitive information related to work, and perhaps certain types of information from or about individuals one is communicating with, etc., and other types of sensitive information, cannot be typed privately. As long there were no such laws 2011, I cannot be held responsible for what I typed privately, which certainly did not involve the planning of crimes or acts of terrorism, because someone purposefully tried to obtain and misuse my private data to frame and defame me. There such laws exist. Data security is too important for it to be left in the hands of, for example, computer suppliers.

What happened over the course of a few years, especially prior to 2011, but later as well, is is difficult for an ordinary person to relate to if the authorities don’t even understand the dangers and risks at large either. If anyone is responsible for the lack of focus on the matter being discussed here, it’s the highest authorities and, possibly, technology providers who have been oblivious to the dangers.

Having said that, it might be difficult for them to see all the dangers, to understand risks attached to computer technology, the Internet, terrorism and some types of crime. Perhaps, this could not be expected. Often it’s the case that experience makes one wiser and this could also apply to Authorities and technology providers.

In hindsight, it’s possible to think that one should just accept that decision makers have acted the best they could based on their understanding.

A war didn’t break out after 2011, but because of the experiences I endured for a few years after 2011, I question what has happened. In a war, people can make wrong decisions, but there is a price to pay. The question is whether this can explain the mistakes that have been made or whether there are financial motives attached to my project. If it’s the latter, the situation will be slightly different.

Incorrect thoughts and actions of others have had consequences both to me and others. If anyone has tried to make what has been going on about me, they are just crazy and blind.

Had I known that someone would be capable of stealing and then abusing my private data, I would have been far more conscious about what I was typing.
I have no problem today saying that had I published some private keystrokes (which I have never shared with anyone and neither intended to share with anyone – sometimes more or less meaningless private data) one could question if I was a nice man if interpreting it in a wrong way, but it’s not about that.  

This is about other people who have broken laws against me and others, and societies faililing to understand risks I have already mentioned. If other peple were insulted by stolen private data I also believe people who stole and abused my data also broke laws against them.

The situation can be compared to a driver on a road with no speed or give way signs – the authorities are at fault if things go wrong if the driver is otherwise abiding by the law. In terms of the events concerned, I was law-abiding, but the people who stole and abused my data were not.

Anyone who have accused me of being a threat to the security of the Realm (or to anyone) have been wrong. Those who witheld information in 2011 and before, many of whom were probably aware that my private data had been stolen over a period of many years, were wrong to do so. Some probably also knew who was responsible for the problems in 2011.

When thinking about the war against terrorism, it surprises me that the people who knew about the theft of data from me, were not more alert and didn’t say something  years before 2011, exactly because of the danger of terrorism. It’s horryfying.

Do the Norwegian authorities give foreign intelligence agencies too much free rein? Is that a problem too? I wonder. And that ordinary police simply do not have the same capacity as foreign intelligence agencies and are unable to detect such matters when foreign intelligence agencies are involved?

Someone might have started playing chess in the above sense for financial gain – to defend themselves, their own lives or position. Nonetheless, one does not play chess when searching for the truth in such grave matters. The truth is sought by communicating with people, etc.

Matters I address here have never been my responsibility but are responsibilities of Authorities and technology providers. I’m not saying that I deserve a medal, but I and possibly also some others should be compensated for what has been going on since 2011 – and for the theft of my data from before and after 2011.

I believe that some of the acts of terrorism after 2011 are primarily due to the authorities’ underestimation of the dangers linked to participation in the war against terrorism, in addition to the inability of the authorities to keep up with technological developments; computers not being built in a way to sufficiently protect the private data of ordinary users after the arrival of the Internet; and financial motives attached to my project.

Having said that, these are assumptions and I do not ignore the fact that someone may possess supplementary information to that stated here, and of which could also take its place. It’s possible that I may be mistaken on some points. If so, I apologize to those who might feel unfairly attacked. For example, I assume that the case between Cappelen and Jensen could be linked to this in some way, but I am uncertain as to how. What I have typed privately and the case between Cappelen and Jensen are mutually exclusive, as no one has conveyed any information about the case to me beyond information publicly known from news broadcasters. In addition, I do not know who received my private data or whether the data was manipulated, etc. I did not break any laws prior to July 22nd and I had no idea what was going to happen that day. Stalking and special circumstances caused my fear and anxiety in 2011, which I believe was a real threat then that i did not fully understand at the time. Later it has become apparent to me that it is very likely it was linked to my sports project.

Translated by a professional translation agancy and later revised by me

Copyright 2017 Christian Morten Borge, All rights reserved

By | 30 November, 2017 |