Stratfor analysing Germany

John Smith

WL_Logo Water cooking intelligence. They do not knew that they knew nothing: Sophisticated instead of socraticated… from Wikileaks /Stratfor-Files: On Monday February 27th, 2012, WikiLeaks began publishing The Global Intelligence Files, over five million e-mails from the Texas headquartered „global intelligence“ company Stratfor. The e-mails date between July 2004 and late December 2011. They reveal the inner workings of a company that fronts as an intelligence publisher, but provides confidential intelligence services to large corporations, such as Bhopal’s Dow Chemical Co., Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and government agencies, including the US Department of Homeland Security, the US Marines and the US Defence Intelligence Agency. The emails show Stratfor’s web of informers, pay-off structure, payment laundering techniques and psychological methods.

Re: DISCUSSION GERMANY/CT-The Story Behind Germany’s Terror Threat

Released on 2012-08-12 00:00 GMT

Email-ID 1009942
Date 2010-11-22 17:58:26

In the more long-term, I think an analysis of the German intelligence agencies would be good too. They have been pretty decimated by the Cold War and by all the problems associated with running an intelligence agency in a post-Gestapo country. If Germany is ever going to become a world power again, however, they would need to overcome these deamons as well. That is sort of the last straw for Germany, the one that is going to be most sensitive to overcome. But perhaps this case may illustrate how they are already overcoming these issues. On 11/22/10 10:50 AM, Sean Noonan wrote: Main problem is that Der Spiegel is just that good, they’ve at least touched on most of what I would want to say about it. The main thing here is how the politics of a terror threat/alert coincide with the reality of the threat itself. We saw that Germany was fairly relaxed bout the earlier threat in Europe released by the US. I’m not sure if that was the same as the info that the FBI passed over about this shia group, Saif (I don’t know anything about them). But something changed, as we noted last week in their interpretation. That seems to go down to this virtual walk-in. The one thing I was left confused about is whether BKA had ever been in contact with this source before. It sounds like he cold called them. It’s common knowledge that walk-ins, rather than recruits, are nearly always the best sources. But at the same time, they are very suspicious as double agents. If this was a US source they would be freaking the fuck out after having Al-Balawi turn on them. The germans seem to have cooler heads, but they will be working 24/7 to verify the source (let me make another plug for John Lecarre’s A Most Wanted Man here, most of his career was in Germany). They’ve clearly got enough corroborating information that they consider this a real threat. But politically they are faced with the universal ‚damned if you do, damned if you don’t‘ alert problem. If the Interior ministry doesn’t say something, they will be liable if an attack occurs. Look at the constant press over information on the warning intelligence for Mumbai. As we’ve said before, simply issuing the warning may help to deter the attackers. The real important bit here, is that it seems the germans have fairly good intelligence. While this attack is still not happening tomorrow, they have a lot of details about what might be in the works, rather than a single-source intercept that indicates some vague threat. It seems they’ve increased security pretty well at the Bundestag, and want to add to the presence at any possible target. This is where we seem them scrambling, and where their intelligence holes are. The task now for the germans is to verify this source. Maybe even pick him up and put him on ice somewhere (Fred/Stick?), not in GErmany but in Pakistan/Afghanistan. That will require some cooperation with either/both the Americans and Pakistanis. They also need to verify all the bio information they have on these 4-6 guys trying to get into germany and watch travelers very carefully. The germans seem to be very good at surveilling these threats within Germany, so their best luck may come when one of the guys overseas contacts a local already under surveillance. At minimum, this could be a pretty interesting tearline this week. Both the walk-in issues and the CIA/FBI liaison conflicts that I havne’t gotten into here. On 11/22/10 10:34 AM, Marko Papic wrote: Any thoughts on where you guys are thinking of going with this? Der Spiegel article is indeed interesting. On 11/22/10 9:28 AM, Sean Noonan wrote: Great report from Der Spiegel (thanks Mikey). I suggest anyone interested to read the whole thing. They ask the right questions, and while not as much detail as I hoped, give us a much better understanding on the threat in Germany. The BKA (germany’s FBI) must be extremely busy verifying the details of this virtual walk-in. It obviously caused the germans to shit their pants. But the real questions are buried in the article—how real was this plot, how real is the source, is the source just trying to get back to the land of brezeln and bier? Trying to double-cross them somehow? Also note the tip off from the FBI (cue fred), not the usual CIA liaison with BND. For Eurasia, there’s a lot in here on the internal politics of the interior minister position, and the relation between state and federal government. On 11/22/10 8:55 AM, Michael Wilson wrote: ——– Original Message ——– Subject: [OS] GERMANY/CT-The Story Behind Germany’s Terror Threat Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2010 08:38:21 -0600 From: Graham Smith <> Reply-To: The OS List <> To: 11/22/2010 11:38 AM Fears of a Mumbai Redux The Story Behind Germany’s Terror Threat,1518,730377,00.html By Matthias Bartsch, Yassin Musharbash and Holger Stark Germany is currently in a state of high alert. Security officials are warning that they have concrete information pointing to a possible terror attack on the federal parliament building in Berlin, a massively popular tourist attraction. The days of Interior Minister Thomas de Maiziere’s reserved stances in dealing with such warnings appear to be over. The call came from abroad, and the man speaking hurriedly on the other end of the line sounded as if he feared for his life. He wanted out, he told the officers of the German Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) — out of the terrorist scene. He wanted to come back to Germany, back to his family. Then he asked if German officials could help him. Right now, they’re trying to do just that. The BKA is pursuing the case under the codename „Nova.“ The apparently remorseful man could be an important possible whistleblower from a dangerous region of the globe. In fact, he is also the most recent reason why German Interior Minister Thomas de Maiziere put the entire country in a state of fright on Wednesday. During a hastily called press conference that day, de Maiziere stated that Germany faced the threat of terrorist attacks that might be launched against the country at some point in November. As he put it, Germany is „presently dealing with a new situation.“ Just two days earlier, the source had called for the third time in just a short period and provided more information. He told officials that a small group of terrorists wanted to conduct a raid on the Reichstag building in Berlin, which houses the federal parliament, and that that was only one of the targets included in their attack plans. Germany on High Alert Since then, Germany has been in a state of high alert. The Reichstag is surrounded with barricades and its popular cupola tourist attraction temporarily closed to visitors. Police armed with submachine guns are patrolling major railway stations and airports. And vacations have been called off for officials at the country’s security agencies. Wherever they have cause for doing so, the authorities are secretly monitoring communications, conducting surveillance operations and launching undercover investigations. At the moment, investigators seem to be at a loss; their modus operandi: „We’ll prod the shrubs and see if we can flush out any birds.“ „There is cause for worry, but no cause for hysteria,“ de Maiziere assured his listeners. But while he has never been much of an agitator, his colleagues at the state level have described the situation in much more drastic terms. Uwe Schu:nemann, for example, who has been the interior minister of the northwestern state of Lower Saxony since 2003, stated that he had „never experienced a heightened security situation like this one.“ And Berlin Senator for the Interior Ehrhart Ko:rting, whose position is tantamount to that of a government minister in the city-state, has already even gone so far as to call on the inhabitants of the German capital city to report suspicious-looking individuals of Arab origin to the police. „If you suddenly see three somewhat strange-looking men who are new to your neighborhood, who hide their faces and who only speak Arabic,“ Ko:rting said, „you should report them to the authorities.“ Under heightened pressure, officials in Germany’s 16 federal states are now checking to see when and where major events are scheduled to take place this coming week within their boundaries. And nothing suggested as a possible target is being discounted, no matter how unlikely. For example, officials in Rhineland-Palatinate warned the state’s interior minister, Karl Peter Burch, that there was always a lot going on at IKEA stores on Saturdays.[WTF] Serenity, Scaremongering and Strategy Since last week, German politicians at both the state and federal levels have once again had to figure out how they will handle themselves when making warnings about terrorist attacks. They have had to come up with a language that can simultaneously convey both an alert and a sense of calm. This is no easy task. For one thing, this isn’t the first time this has happened. In September 2009, for example, right before federal elections were held, there were concrete threats that resulted in a heightened security situation. But, in the end, nothing happened. This time around, people are wondering whether they are on the precipice of an emergency or whether these are once again empty threats. Still, one thing is certain: For the time being, Germany has become a different country — more nervous, more anxious, more agitated. And Germany’s domestic security policies are being put to the test. When Interior Minister de Maiziere assumed his office in October 2009 in conservative Chancellor Angela Merkel’s government, he aimed to cool down the heated sense of alarm regularly fanned out by his predecessors. What’s more, the man who had served as Merkel’s chief of staff in Chancellery until being moved to the role of interior minister in her new government, was given the task of nurturing a more relaxed relationship between her party, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), and its new coalition partner, the business-friendly Free Democratic Party (FDP). In particular, it was his job to not draw out the long-standing conflict over domestic security policies with the Justice Ministry, which has been led since the 2009 election by Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, a member of the FDP. Indeed, Merkel feared that the quarrelsome FDP might try to capitalize on the issue to win over more voters, so she assigned de Maiziere to prevent that from happening. In fact, the plan was to repeat the same strategy that the CDU and its Bavarian sister party, the Christian Social Union (CSU), had used when they were in the so-called „grand coalition“ with the center-left Social Democratic Party, between 2005 and 2009. At the time, they made a point of undermining the SPD by championing what had traditionally been the latter party’s issues. A Game-Changer But now the game plan has changed. This November will drastically alter de Maiziere’s understanding of his role in office. If he tries to return things to their previous state of calm, he’s going to have a very tough time. In fact, it’s much more likely that he will be a completely different interior minister. For a while now, de Maiziere’s softer stance has prompted opposition by politicians on the right involved with domestic security issues. But they are now calling louder than ever for a tougher course to be followed. Merkel is also adjusting to the new situation and is reportedly happy with the way de Maiziere handled himself last week. Likewise, no one seems to have voiced any criticism last Thursday evening during a meeting of the Coalition Committee, a regular gathering of the parties that are part of the government. The almost complete lack of protest has a lot to do with where the alarming information is coming from. In fact, information regarding the supposedly imminent attacks has come from two independent sources. Shortly before receiving the telephone call about the planned attacks, BKA officials had received a cable from their American counterparts at the FBI, America’s federal police force, warning of possible attacks. Still, what truth is there in these „security-related“ pieces of information coming from both domestic and foreign sources? And, given all the discrepancies in the warning messages, just how much do they deserve to be trusted? Indeed, even among security officials themselves, there is some doubt about how legitimate these statements are — and about just how acute the danger threatening Germany really is. An Attack Modelled after Mumbai[plot details in this section] What the caller reported was undeniably alarming. According to him, al-Qaida and associated groups based in Pakistan were making joint preparations for an attack in Germany. One idea was to remotely detonate a bomb using a mobile phone. Another called for a small group of terrorists to storm the Reichstag with guns blazing, take hostages and end everything in one calamitous bloodbath. Indeed, BKA officials learned that the latter plan had been modeled on the storming of luxury hotels in Mumbai, the Indian capital, almost exactly two years ago, in a massacre that left 175 people dead. According to the caller, the plan called for the terrorists to procure the submachine guns, automatic rifles, explosives and whatever else they would need to storm Germany’s parliament building in the Balkans. He said that two men had already traveled to Germany six to eight weeks earlier, adding that one had the nom de guerre of „Abu Mohammed“ and that the other one was a German of Turkish origin. Both apparently had roots in the Greater Berlin metropolitan area, were currently unemployed and living off of welfare payments and had immersed themselves in the anonymity provided by a major city — until the time should come for their activation. Likewise, there were allegedly four other volunteers — including a German, a Turk, a North African and another jihadist of unknown identity — in the training camps run by al-Qaida and related groups waiting for the signal to travel to Germany. And, according to the telephone source, al-Qaida’s plan was to attack in February or March. The only question now relates to just how credible the caller’s statements are. He is an insider who joined up with armed groups several months ago and has earned a reputation as a fanatic fighter. But could it be that he is only trying to tell German officials the juiciest things possible in order to raise his own market value and thereby prompt them to extract him from the terror scene? Or could it be that al-Qaida is even planning a second spectacular coup like the one in December 2009, when the Americans allowed a supposedly top-level turncoat onto an American military base without any sort of pat-down, who went on to detonate his explosive vest and blow seven CIA officials to bits? A Strange Message A clear picture has yet to emerge. And one reason for this is also the fact that it was only two weeks ago that the FBI first decided to share information about another possible attack with German officials. In this case, even the way contact was made was unusual. Under normal circumstances, liaisons from the CIA station in Germany are the ones to communicate American warnings to their German counterparts. But, this time around, it was an apparently particularly anxious FBI that chose to directly notify the BKA. The FBI told the Germans about an obscure Indian group called „Saif,“ or „sword.“ Despite being a Shiite group, it had allegedly made a pact with al-Qaida, a Sunni organization, and sent five of its men to the Pakistani province of Waziristan for training. According to the FBI, two volunteers — who were already equipped with visas allowing them to travel freely within the 25 European countries belonging to the Schengen zone — were supposedly already en route to Germany and would enter the United Arab Emirates on Monday, Nov. 22. There, they would allegedly be provided with new travel documents before traveling on to Germany. One of the men is supposedly named „Khan,“ which is about as common in that part of the world as „Smith“ is in English-speaking countries. And no firm conclusion had been made about their nationalities. The FBI agents even named the presumed masterminds behind the operation. A certain Mushtaq Altaf Bin-Khadri, who is in charge of finances and training for „Saif,“ allegedly dispatched the terrorist squad. But the FBI was not in a position to comment on the targets of the two men in Germany. One name came up time and again in the communique, and one that pricked the Germans‘ ears: Dawood Ibrahim. The 54-year-old arms trader is „India’s most-wanted man.“ The US government has listed him as a „global terrorist“ and persuaded the United Nations to place his name on a list of supporters of terror. Ibrahim is rumored to be the head of D-Company, a criminal syndicate named after himself, and is believed to be in charge of smuggling the suspected terrorists into Germany. Both the FBI and the BKA are attaching a lot of importance to the information in the FBI communique. But the intelligence services of the two countries — the CIA in the United States and the BND and Office for the Protection of the Constitution in Germany, the country’s foreign and domestic intelligence agencies, respectively — point to internal contradictions as reasons for their skepticism. As they see it, for example, it is highly unlikely that a Shiite group would team up with Sunni terrorists, especially since a good part of al-Qaida propaganda vilifies Shiites. Other reasons for doubt include the facts that none of the intelligence agencies was previously familiar with an organization called „Saif,“ that there have been no previously recorded threats against Germany by Indian extremists, and that the whole scenario seems rather implausible. On the other hand, the FBI information is uncommonly concrete. In addition to the names of the suspects, it also provides information about the exact day on which they are supposed to arrive in the United Arab Emirates. Moreover, Ibrahim is believed to be one of the men behind the terror attacks in Mumbai. If he really is involved, that alone would be reason enough for worry. Abnormal Circumstances Under normal circumstances, a message of this kind from the United States would no doubt be cause for serious-minded scrutiny, but it would not be a cause for alarm. For example, the BKA would go through all recent visa applications, and federal police officers would take a closer look at all the people entering Germany from Arab states. And the intelligence services would make the rounds to see if any of its partners had any helpful information on the matter. Indeed, under normal circumstances, there are always a lot of these communiques, most of which turn out to be false alarms. But these are no normal circumstances. Germany is in a state of emergency. Other countries, such as the United States, employ a system of official warning levels based on color codes that change — from yellow to orange, for example — when the danger level is thought to increase. But, in Germany, the interior minister is the barometer: He consults with experts — and then it is he who must call the shots. For the minister, a situation like this presents a dilemma. If he remains silent and something happens, he’s a failure. If he makes loud warning and nothing happens, he’s just a rabble-rouser trying to push through controversial tougher security laws. And, of course, the public never thanks you if everyday life continues in a normal, peaceful way. Absolute Security Remains a Pipe Dream When de Maiziere became Germany’s interior minister, he had planned to lead the ministry in a level-headed way. For example, he prefers to use phrases such as „internal calm“ rather than „internal security.“ And it was only six weeks ago that he uttered the sentence: „There’s no cause for alarm.“ But, since then, the chorus of warning voices has only ballooned in size. This change in course is the combined result of everything that happened beforehand. It might very well turn out that the alleged Indian terror squad stays home and that the raid on the Reichstag never happens. But what will remain is a well-founded supposition that there is a critical mass of terrorists in the border region between Afghanistan and Pakistan that is thinking about launching attacks in Europe — and certainly in Germany, as well. Raw Nerves Given such circumstances, there is a major sense of alarm among German officials. Last Thursday, just a day after de Maiziere’s shocking press conference, the BKA issued a press release „in connection with the current high-risk situation.“ It reported that a piece of suspicious luggage had been discovered a day earlier in Windhoek, the capital of Namibia, before being loaded onto a plane bound for Germany. The laptop bag contained batteries, wires, a detonator and a clock — in other words, all the ingredients you need for a potential airborne catastrophe. It sounded as if another terror plot had been foiled. Had there been a plan to blow up Air Berlin Flight 7377 en route to Munich? And had the authorities, yet again, discovered an explosive device at the last minute? In the end, all the worry was unfounded. As it turned out, the piece of luggage was a test device built by a company that designs „real test“ suitcases to be used to test security measures. It remains unclear who checked the bag in. But the fact that the BKA was so quick to go into alarm mode — and publicly so — has been a communications debacle. Of course, these days, nobody wants to be the one that wasn’t sufficiently circumspect, the one who took too long to speak up. No one wants a replay of situations like the one from the beginning of November, when de Maiziere didn’t know for hours whether the package that had arrived at the Chancellery contained actual explosives or was just a false alarm. Now, the threshold for sounding the alarm is already much lower. Bonded by Fear Of course, you can never be too sure. Over the last 12 months, a series of attacks concocted in the Afghan-Pakistani border region have been foiled in the West. For example, in May, a car bomb set in New York’s Times Square by a man with ties to the Pakistani Taliban failed to properly detonate. In Copenhagen, al-Qaida had made plans to storm the offices of the Jyllands-Posten newspaper as revenge for its 2005 publishing of caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad. In October 2009, David Headley, an American citizen with Pakistani roots, was arrested after having already visited the newspaper’s offices in order to scout them out before the planned attack. Other targets reportedly included the subway systems of New York City and Washington. On the other hand, absolute security is a pipe dream. For example, British authorities had even conducted rehearsals for how to respond to possible attacks. But, even so, when attacks claiming 56 lives (including those of four attackers) did strike London, on July 7, 2005, they were unable to prevent them. Likewise, US intelligence services had warned India a number of times that terrorists were planning attacks in Mumbai. The new situation in Germany has at least had one positive side effect: For the time being, the traditionally quarrelsome interior ministers from both the state and the federal levels have refrained from their usual bickering. Following informal talks held last Thursday in Hamburg, Minister Bruch of Rhineland-Palatinate noted that he had „never experienced such harmony within this group“ that has apparently been bonded together by their shared fear. Translated from the German by Josh Ward — Sean Noonan Tactical Analyst Office: +1 512-279-9479 Mobile: +1 512-758-5967 Strategic Forecasting, Inc. — – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – Marko Papic Geopol Analyst – Eurasia STRATFOR 700 Lavaca Street – 900 Austin, Texas 78701 USA P: + 1-512-744-4094 — Sean Noonan Tactical Analyst Office: +1 512-279-9479 Mobile: +1 512-758-5967 Strategic Forecasting, Inc. — – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – Marko Papic Geopol Analyst – Eurasia STRATFOR 700 Lavaca Street – 900 Austin, Texas 78701 USA P: + 1-512-744-4094

Union/FDP: Abmahnindustrie jubelt über neue Lex Google

Gerd R. Rueger 02.03.2013

In der gestrigen Redeschlacht zur Netzpolitik erlebte der Bundestag einmal mehr den Sieg der Industrie-Lobbyisten. Diesmal fielen Union und FDP vor der Abmahnindustrie auf die Knie. Anwälte und Medienkonzerne jubilieren, das Netz grummelt gegen die Gier der schwarzgelben Parteispenden-Kassierer. Die rotrotgrüne Opposition blamierte sich durch mangelhafte Netzkenntnis, die Piraten wurden von der Medienmafia termingenau kleingeschrieben. Aus Google-Sicht wurde das Gesetz nach Druck aus Kreisen der US-Medienindustrie in letzter Sekunde noch entschärft.

„Die Linke“ vergaß Bertelsmann

Hat Möwenpick denn jetzt auch eine Abmahn-Anwaltskanzlei? So fragte sich erstaunt mancher FDP-Wähler gestern in Erinnerung an die fette Spende der Firma, die eine dreist begünstigende Lex Möwenpick nach sich zog. Die jetzige Lex Google ist dagegen nicht nach dem Nutznießer benannt: Google soll gerade zu Zahlungen verdonnert werden, an die deutschen Medienkonzerne. Der kleine Blogger und Website-Betreiber werden es ausbaden müssen: Sie werden der Abmahnindustrie ans Messer geliefert, jenen Anwaltskanzleien, die mit sittenwidrigen Serienbriefen Multimillionen-Gebühren aus der Netzkultur herausschinden werden.

Mit den Piraten im Bundestag wäre das wohl nicht passiert, Grüne und Linke krampften sich ehrenvoll etwas Verteidigung der kleinen Leute im Netz ab. Die Opposition wetterte in Gestalt der Medienexpertin der Linken, Petra Sitte, sogar tapfer gegen die große Medienmafia, vergaß in ihrer Aufzählung des Big Biz neben Springer und Burda aber ausgerechnet den dominierenden Megakonzern Bertelsmann mit der Lobby-Großagentur Bertelsmann-Stiftung, die alle etablierten Parteien bearbeitet.

Piraten gegen „Leistungsschutz“-Abmahnförderung

Das zur Debatte stehende Gesetz lässt sich auch als Leistungsschutzrecht gegen Suchmaschinen begreifen, so der Pirat Michael Renner, die zukünftig dafür zahlen sollen, Artikel der Medienmafia auffindbar zu machen: Auf jeden Fall steht ein Gesetz zur Abstimmung dem nachgesagt wird, dass es im Springer-Verlagshaus geschrieben wurde. Der Springer-Verlag ist wiederum der Verlag, dem nachgesagt wird, dass niemand Kanzler werden kann, der von dort nicht die Zustimmung erhält. 

Im Netz gibt es viel Protest gegen das Gesetz, auch Experten sowie die Jugendorganisationen der Parteien (sogar der Regierungsparteien!) waren gegen die Änderungen, aber wen kratzt schon Jugend oder Weisheit, wenn Lobbyisten mit Schmiergeld und Parteispenden winken? Bei CDU, CSU und FDP wohl keinen.

BILD lässt grüßen: „Google kämpft für Dich“

Die Lex Google hat natürlich auch Google auf den Plan gerufen,  wo man sich als Stellvertreter für die Netzkultur sieht (was angesichts der Datensammelwut und Profil-Überwachung der Nutzer jedoch zweifelhaft scheint). Google meint dessen ungeachtet in seiner Web-Ini „Verteidige Dein Netz“:

Das Leistungsschutzrecht trifft jeden deutschen Internetnutzer. Wenn Suchmaschinen und ähnliche Dienste Suchergebnisse freiwillig ins Netz gestellter Artikel nicht mehr verwenden dürfen, wird das Suchen und Finden von Informationen im Internet massiv gestört. Dieser Eingriff ist systemfremd und weltweit ohne Beispiel. Er bedeutet höhere Kosten, weniger Informationen und massive Rechtsunsicherheit. Blogger, Netzpolitiker, die deutsche Wirtschaft und führende Wissenschaftler lehnen dieses Unterfangen ab.

Google ist allerdings Partei in dieser Sache, dazu noch eine Partei, die sich eine große Rechtsabteilung leisten kann -im Gegensatz zu kleinen Netz-Kreativen mit ihren Blogs und Startups. Sie müssen sich jetzt mit juristischem Fachchinesisch befassen. Die entscheidende Änderung im neuen § 87 f Abs. 1 UrhG dürfte gegenüber der alten Fassung folgende sein:

(1) Der Hersteller eines Presseerzeugnisses (Presseverleger) hat das ausschließliche Recht, das Presseerzeugnis oder Teile hiervon zu gewerblichen Zwecken öffentlich zugänglich zu machen, es sei denn, es handelt sich um einzelne Wörter oder kleinste Textausschnitte. Ist das Presseerzeugnis in einem Unternehmen hergestellt worden, so gilt der Inhaber des Unternehmens als Hersteller.

Somit sollen Snippets (Text-Schnippsel) ausdrücklich ausgenommen werden. Schwarzgelb hat aber den Terminus „kleinste Textausschnitte“ nicht genau definiert und damit gigantischen Abmahnwellen seitens profitgieriger Anwälte Tür und Tor geöffnet. Google wird das weniger kratzen, man ist ja groß und die Suchmaschinen-Snippets sind klein -außer in newfeeds etc. bei google+ vielleicht. Kleinere Anbieter stehen dagegen dem Medien-Big Biz schutzloser gegenüber: Das Perlentaucher-Urteil hat es gezeigt.

Alle dagegen: Von Perlentaucher bis Facebook

News-Aggregatoren könnten aber, je nach Länge des gezeigtenTextteils, betroffen sein. Aber schon nach geltendem Urheberrecht ist die Übernahme längerer Textpassagen eigentlich unzulässig. Die Verlage sind auch schon erfolgreich gegen die  wörtliche Übernahme von Textpassagen vorgegangen, wie die Entscheidung “Perlentaucher” des BGH belegt. Experten halten das gestern verabschiedete Gesetz wenigstens für eine abgeschwächte Version, dank mit heißer Nadel zuletzt noch gestrickter Änderungen -wohl wegen einer Intervention der US-Industrie.

Denn es gab im Vorfeld eine Verstoßanzeige der Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA), einer Lobby großer IT-Firmen wie Microsoft, Facebook, eBay, Yahoo und Google. In der offiziellen Beschwerde legt die CCIA ausführlich dar, warum sie das von der deutschen Bundesregierung beschlossene neue „Leistungsschutzrecht“, also das Monopolrecht für (deutsche) Presseverlage stören würde. Das Recht von Verbrauchern und Unternehmen an Netz-Inhalten würde unangemessen stark einschränkt. Netzaktivisten wie Anonymous sind vom Urheberrecht derzeit nicht begeistert, protestierten jüngst gegen die Verwerteragentur GEMA, die Piraten arbeiten sowieso an einer neuen netzfreundlichen Konzeption.

Es ist aber ohnehin fraglich, ob noch in dieser Legislatur viel aus dem Gesetz gemacht werden kann: Zunächst muss Schwarzgelb es noch durch den Bundesrat bringen, der jetzt bekanntlich der Opposition gehört. Blockieren kann der Bundesrat das Leistungsschutzrecht jedoch nicht, da es sich nur um ein sog. Einspruchsgesetz handelt -wohl aber verzögern. Das Gesetz müsste nach einem Einspruch in den Vermittlungsausschuss, wo eine zeitliche Verzögerung zu erwarten ist -und die Bundestagswahl gibt uns Netzusern dann die Gelegenheit die Neoliberalisten der CDUCSUFDP GmbH & Co KG abzuwählen.

Liberalismus ist, wenn der Arme wie der Reiche die Freiheit haben, unter einer Brücke zu schlafen. Neoliberalismus ist, wenn die Brücke privatisiert wird und der Arme selbst dafür noch an den Reichen zahlen soll. Theodor Marloth

USA pleite -Milliardäre untergetaucht

Prometheus und Theodor Marloth 2.3.2013 USAflag.svg

Zwei Meldungen geistern scheinbar ohne Beziehung durch die Medien: Die USA haben den Schuldenabgrund erreicht -und China veröffentlicht eine globale Milliardärsliste, auf der aber ca. 2600 Milliardäre fehlen! Nur 1400 von geschätzt 4000 Milliardären weltweit ließen sich identifizieren. Dies lässt erahnen, warum sogar im Land der meisten (bekannten) Superreichen, in den USA, der Staat vor der Pleite steht -denn dort dürften auch die meisten Schatten-Milliardäre zu finden sein, die sich und ihren Reichtum verbergen.

Global Richlist aus China

Der Hurun-Report Global Rich List 2013 habe sich in der Vergangenheit lediglich auf die Volksrepublik China konzentriert, so die SZ. Dies ist die erste umfassende internationale Statistik des seit sechs Jahren die chinesische Geldelite begleitenden Macht sich China Sorgen über die Dollarflut der US-Zentralbank, dann ist ein Blick auf den Verbleib des Geldes verständlich.

Rich ListDie Statistik über die Verteilung der Milliarden weltweit sieht viele Superreiche in der Volksrepublik China, Hongkong und Macau. Aber in den USA leben mit 409 Milliardären weltweit die meisten der identifizierbaren Milliardäre. Atypisch ist der Mexikaner Carlos Slim, der mit 66 Milliarden Dollar Privatvermögen aus der Telekommunikationsbranche die Liste anführt, gefolgt von US-Investor Warren Buffett mit 58 Milliarden Dollar, Amancio Ortega mit 55 Milliarden aus der spanischen Modekette Zara und natürlich Microsoft-Gründer Bill Gates mit 54 Milliarden.

Die meisten Milliardäre untergetaucht

Hurun-Chef Rupert Hoogewerf warnt, die Liste sei unvollständig: „Auf jeden Milliardär, den wir auflisten, kommen schätzungsweise zwei, die wir nicht gefunden haben.“ Das bedeutet, dass die Liste mehr als 4000 Namen enthalten müsste, also 2600 Superreiche untergetaucht sind. Auch Forbes könne bei seinem Jahres-Rating nur einen Teil der Namen angeben. Darin kann man nicht nur die Flucht vor den Steuerbehörden sehen, sondern auch eine Ablehnung von sozialer Verantwortung. Man scheut die Augen der Öffentlichkeit ebenso wie die Prüfer des Finanzamtes. Die 1453 Milliardäre, die Hurun ermittelt hat, besitzen zusammen immerhin 5,5 Billionen US-Dollar.

Das Durchschnittsalter auf der Hurun-Liste ist mit 63 Jahre angegeben und rund zehn Prozent der Superreichen sind Frauen. Hinter den USA, China und Russland  belegt Deutschland mit 61 Dollar-Milliardären den vierten Platz in der Länderwertung. Der erste Deutsche ist auf Rang 16 Karl Albrecht (Aldi Süd), auf Platz 36 folgen Michael Otto (Otto-Versand) und die Aldi-Nord-Erben mit jeweils 18 Milliarden US-Dollar. Dieter Schwarz (Lidl, Kaufland) besitzt  16 Milliarden und das Vermögen der BMW-Großaktionärin Susanne Klatten wird laut Hurun auf 13 Milliarden US-Dollar geschätzt.

USA: Tea Party und Neoliberalismus

Die USA haben unter Obama den selbst geschaufelten Schuldenabgrund erreicht, weil die rechtradikalen Republikaner und ihre sich „Tea Party“ nennenden Rechtsextremen das Land unbedingt blockieren wollen. Hinter ihrer fanatischen Ablehnung stecken verschiedene ideologische Gründe, aber ihr plakativer Patriotismus hat sie nicht gehindert, eine schwere fiskalische Krise zu provozieren, die in eine Wirtschaftskrise der US-Ökonomie münden könnte. Ihr ganzer Hass ist auf minimale soziale Verbesserungen gerichtet, die Obama angeschoben hat, etwa eine kleine Öffnung der Gesundheitsversorgung auch für arme US-Bürger, die das reichste Land der Welt bislang in den Slums elend verrecken lässt. Für die Republikaner ist dies schon Sozialismus und ihr antikommunistischer Freiheitsbegriff pocht auf das Recht der darwinistischen Gesellschaft, Menschen krepieren zu lassen.

Die Freiheit der Reichen, keine Steuern zahlen zu müssen geht den US-Republikanern allemal vor Menschenrechten. Klar, dass Superreiche, die keinen Cent für soziale Belange herausrücken wollen, sich dort am wohlsten fühlen, wo Tea Party-Politik dominiert. Außerdem kann man auch dumpfe rassistische Ressentiments der Tea Party gegen den ersten schwarzen US-Präsidenten hinter dem Manöver vermuten. Unter „Tea Party“ versteht man einen Angriff von US-Rebellen auf ein Tee-Schiff der Britischen Kolonialherren: Weiße hatten sich im Jahr 1773 als Indigene verkleidet, um den „Indianern“ den Anschlag in die Schuhe zu schieben. (Am 9.11.2001 schlugen angebliche Al Qaida-Moslems erneut in den USA zu -oder trug die „Tea Party“ diesmal Turban?)

Subprime-Finanzkrise machte Milliardäre reicher

Die derzeitige Finanzkrise begann mit großflächigen Finanzbetrügereien im US-Immobiliensektor, von wo aus mit sog. Subprime-Papieren die globale Bankenwelt überschwemmt wurde. Auch deutsche Banken versenkten dort Milliarden. Es verwundert daher kaum, wenn sich als lukrativste Branche laut Hurun-Report der Immobilienmarkt erweist, denn die meisten Milliardäre haben dort ihr Geld verdient. Die Ärmsten der Armen sollen nun die Zeche dafür zahlen -in den USA wie vor allem auch in Europa.

Und wie die Armen im sozialdarwinistischen US-Slum von Rechtspopulisten der Tea Patry, so werden auch die Griechen, Spanier und Italiener von unseren Medien dafür beschimpft, „versagt“ zu haben. Doch die Kriegsgewinnler des globalen Weltkriegs um die Milliarden tragen in Wahrheit die Verantwortung -denn sie haben mit ihren gekauften Medien und Regierungen ihre Machenschaften legalisiert und alle Welt belogen. Unter dem Begriff Neoliberalismus haben sie die Ausbeutung modernisiert und mittels ihrer Medienkartelle und Korruption durchgesetzt. Fordern wir von ihnen unser Geld zurück!