DOCSLIB.ORG

Suspect Until Proven Guilty, a Problematization of State Dossier Systems Via Two Case Studies: the United States and China

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Suspect Until Proven Guilty, a Problematization of State Dossier Systems Via Two Case Studies: the United States and China University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations Fall 2009 Suspect Until Proven Guilty, a Problematization of State Dossier Systems via Two Case Studies: The United States and China Kenneth N. Farrall University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the Asian Studies Commons, Communication Technology and New Media Commons, International and Intercultural Communication Commons, and the Social Influence and oliticalP Communication Commons Recommended Citation Farrall, Kenneth N., "Suspect Until Proven Guilty, a Problematization of State Dossier Systems via Two Case Studies: The United States and China" (2009). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 51. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/51 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/51 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Suspect Until Proven Guilty, a Problematization of State Dossier Systems via Two Case Studies: The United States and China Abstract This dissertation problematizes the "state dossier system" (SDS): the production and accumulation of personal information on citizen subjects exceeding the reasonable bounds of risk management. SDS - comprising interconnecting subsystems of records and identification - damage individual autonomy and self-determination, impacting not only human rights, but also the viability of the social system. The research, a hybrid of case-study and cross-national comparison, was guided in part by a theoretical model of four primary SDS driving forces: technology, political economy, law and public sentiment. Data sources included government documents, academic texts, investigative journalism, NGO reports and industry white papers. The primary analytical instrument was the juxtaposition of two individual cases: the U.S. and China. Research found that constraints on the extent of the U.S. SDS today may not be significantly different from China's, a system undergoing significant change amidst growing public interest in privacy and anonymity. Much activity within the U.S., such as the practice of suspicious activity reporting, is taking place outside the domain of federal privacy laws, while ID systems appear to advance and expand despite clear public opposition. Momentum for increasingly comprehensive SDS appears to be growing, in part because the harms may not be immediately evident to the data subjects. The future of SDS globally will depend on an informed and active public; law and policy will need to adjust to better regulate the production and storage of personal information. To that end, the dissertation offers a general model and linguistic toolkit for the further analysis of SDS. Degree Type Dissertation Degree Name Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) Graduate Group Communication First Advisor Michael X. Delli Carpini Second Advisor Oscar Gandy Third Advisor Klaus Krippendorff Keywords surveillance, privacy, law, technology, political economy, dossier Subject Categories Asian Studies | Communication Technology and New Media | International and Intercultural Communication | Social Influence and Political Communication This dissertation is available at ScholarlyCommons: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/51 ii DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to my wife, Dong, whose support and patience gave me the strength, and our three children Myles, Eric and Kathryn, who gave me the inspiration to see this project through to its completion. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thank you, Oscar Gandy, for sparking my interest in privacy and surveillance and continuing to support my work even after your (much too early) retirement. Your support kept me moving forward, especially during the difficult times. I have been truly honored to have you as a friend and mentor. Thank you, Klaus Krippendorff, for introducing me to the power of language and the world of cybernetics, and for opening my mind to ways of thinking that will serve me for the rest of my life. Thank you, Joseph Turow, for instilling in me a much deeper appreciation for the importance of substance over theory. Thank you, Michael Delli Carpini, for your friendship, your guidance, and your inestimable capacity to turn problems into solutions. A special thank you to Monroe Price, for recharging my interest in international communication, and the material support that made it possible for me to pursue that interest. Thank you, to my friends and colleagues at the Annenberg School, some of the finest people I have ever known. Thank you to Josh Lauer, Jennifer Horner, Deb Lubken, Bill Herman, Zhan Li, Chris Finlay, and Lokman Tsui for their advice and friendship over the years. Thank you to Annenberg's wonderful support staff, especially Bev Henry, Deb Porter, Sharon Black , Rich Cardona, Lizz Cooper, and Joanne Murray. Finally, to my parents, George and Judy Farrall, to whom I will forever be indebted, this would never have been possible without you. iv ABSTRACT SUSPECT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY A PROBLEMATIZATION OF STATE DOSSIER SYSTEMS VIA TWO CASE STUDIES: THE UNITED STATES AND CHINA Kenneth N. Farrall Michael X. Delli Carpini Dissertation Supervisor This dissertation problematizes the “state dossier system” (SDS): the production and accumulation of personal information on citizen subjects exceeding the reasonable bounds of risk management. SDS — comprising interconnecting subsystems of records and identification — damage individual autonomy and self-determination, impacting not only human rights, but also the viability of the social system. The research, a hybrid of case-study and cross-national comparison, was guided in part by a theoretical model of four primary SDS driving forces: technology, political economy, law and public sentiment. Data sources included government documents, academic texts, investigative journalism, NGO reports and industry white papers. The primary analytical instrument was the juxtaposition of two individual cases: the U.S. and China. Research found that constraints on the extent of the U.S. SDS today may not be significantly different from China’s, a system undergoing significant change amidst growing public interest in privacy and anonymity. Much activity within the U.S., such as the practice of suspicious activity reporting, is taking place outside the domain of federal privacy laws, while ID systems appear to advance and expand despite clear public opposition. Momentum for increasingly comprehensive SDS appears to be growing, in part because the harms may not be immediately evident to the data v subjects. The future of SDS globally will depend on an informed and active public; law and policy will need to adjust to better regulate the production and storage of personal information. To that end, the dissertation offers a general model and linguistic toolkit for the further analysis of SDS. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES vii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS viii CHAPTER 1: Surveillance as a Social Problem 1 CHAPTER 2: Problematizing the State Dossier System 26 CHAPTER 3: U.S. Case, historical context 87 CHAPTER 4: U.S. Case 122 CHAPTER 5: Privacy across Cultures 202 CHAPTER 6: China Case 231 CHAPTER 7: Synthesis 286 APPENDIX A: Searching for the Mother of All Databases (research note) 326 APPENDIX B: Document Source Breakdown 334 REFERENCES: 336 vii LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Case Nodes and Data Sources…………………………………………….…85 Table 2. Claims and Data Sources……………………………………………………312 viii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1. Document Retrieval Cycle 77 Figure 2. SIP Snowball, U.S. Case 79 Figure 3. Data Triangulation 82 Figure 4. SAR Information Flow Diagram 176 Figure 5. Linguistic Juxtaposition 202 Figure 6. Privacy 204 Figure 7. Public-Private 215 Figure 8. Anonymity 221 Figure 9. Data Shadows Through Time 245 Figure 10. Information Creation and Available Storage 290 Figure 11. Linguistic Toolkit 299 Figure 12. SDS General Model 300 Figure 13. Production: Site and Logic 301 Figure 14. The Targeted Person 310 Figure 15. Multidimensional Comparison of U.S. and China Surveillance 315 Figure 16. SIP Snowball Detail, U.S. Case 327 1 CHAPTER 1: SURVEILLANCE AS A SOCIAL PROBLEM This dissertation “problematizes” a particular domain of surveillance practice I call the “state dossier system.” This phrase is not intended to be normatively neutral, but to diagnose a social problem. At appropriate times neutral terms such as “information system,” database, and record will be used, but the goal of this work is to illuminate and contribute to the further analysis and regulation of what may be the single most important threat of states to the public interest this century: the unconstrained production and accumulation of personal information on state subjects that exceeds the reasonable bounds of the state’s mandate to manage risk. The concept of problematization, notes Foucault (1985) is “an ‘answer’ to a concrete situation which is real” (p. 115).1 Key to the problematization is the language that is used and developed — specific terms and concepts which help illuminate the relevant elements of the problem. The problematization of madness, for example, was built upon words like “mania” and “melancholia.” A problematization is not a theory per se. It is not intended to create a definitive model with predictive power, but to highlight key aspects of a real world problem, that, once properly identified, may be amenable to management and regulation. As the scope and depth of a state dossier system grows,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2020 Identity Theft Statistics | Consumeraffairs
    2020 Identity Theft Statistics | ConsumerAffairs Trending Home / Finance / Identity Theft Protection / Identity theft statistics Buyers Guides Last Updated 01/16/2020 News Write a review 2020Write a review Identity theft statistics Trends and statistics about identity theft Learn about identity theft protection by Rob Douglas Identity Theft Protection Contributing Editor In 2018, the Federal Trade Commission processed 1.4 million fraud reports totaling $1.48 billion in losses. According to the FTC’s “Consumer Sentinel Network Data Book,” the most common categories for fraud complaints were imposter scams, debt collection and identity theft. Credit card fraud was most prevalent in identity theft cases — more than 167,000 people reported a fraudulent credit card account was opened with their information. Identity theft trends in 2019 In the next year, the Identity Theft Resource Center (ITRC) predicts identity theft protection services will primarily focus on data breaches, data abuse and data privacy. ITRC also predicts that https://www.consumeraffairs.com/finance/identity-theft-statistics.html 2020 Identity Theft Statistics | ConsumerAffairs consumers will become more knowledgeable about how data breaches work and expect companies to provide more information about the specific types of data breached and demand more transparency in general in data breach reports. Cyber attacks are more ambitious According to a 2019 Internet Security Threat Report by Symantec, cybercriminals are diversifying their targets and using stealthier methods to commit identity theft and fraud. Cybercrime groups like Mealybug, Gallmaker and Necurs are opting for off-the-shelf tools and operating system features such as PowerShell to attack targets. Supply chain attacks are up 78% Malicious PowerShell scripts have increased by 1,000% Microsoft Office files make up 48% of malicious email attachments Internet of Things threats on the rise Cybercriminals attack IoT devices an average of 5,233 times per month.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Bureau of Investigation Hearing
    FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION JULY 26, 2007 Serial No. 110–86 Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://judiciary.house.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 37–010 PDF WASHINGTON : 2007 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:11 Jul 09, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 H:\WORK\FULL\072607\37010.000 HJUD1 PsN: DOUGA COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY JOHN CONYERS, JR., Michigan, Chairman HOWARD L. BERMAN, California LAMAR SMITH, Texas RICK BOUCHER, Virginia F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., JERROLD NADLER, New York Wisconsin ROBERT C. ‘‘BOBBY’’ SCOTT, Virginia HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina ELTON GALLEGLY, California ZOE LOFGREN, California BOB GOODLATTE, Virginia SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas STEVE CHABOT, Ohio MAXINE WATERS, California DANIEL E. LUNGREN, California WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts CHRIS CANNON, Utah ROBERT WEXLER, Florida RIC KELLER, Florida LINDA T. SA´ NCHEZ, California DARRELL ISSA, California STEVE COHEN, Tennessee MIKE PENCE, Indiana HANK JOHNSON, Georgia J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia BETTY SUTTON, Ohio STEVE KING, Iowa LUIS V. GUTIERREZ, Illinois TOM FEENEY, Florida BRAD SHERMAN, California TRENT FRANKS, Arizona
    [Show full text]
  • The Scoring of America: How Secret Consumer Scores Threaten Your Privacy and Your Future
    World Privacy Forum The Scoring of America: How Secret Consumer Scores Threaten Your Privacy and Your Future By Pam Dixon and Robert Gellman April 2, 2014 Brief Summary of Report This report highlights the unexpected problems that arise from new types of predictive consumer scoring, which this report terms consumer scoring. Largely unregulated either by the Fair Credit Reporting Act or the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, new consumer scores use thousands of pieces of information about consumers’ pasts to predict how they will behave in the future. Issues of secrecy, fairness of underlying factors, use of consumer information such as race and ethnicity in predictive scores, accuracy, and the uptake in both use and ubiquity of these scores are key areas of focus. The report includes a roster of the types of consumer data used in predictive consumer scores today, as well as a roster of the consumer scores such as health risk scores, consumer prominence scores, identity and fraud scores, summarized credit statistics, among others. The report reviews the history of the credit score – which was secret for decades until legislation mandated consumer access -- and urges close examination of new consumer scores for fairness and transparency in their factors, methods, and accessibility to consumers. About the Authors Pam Dixon is the founder and Executive Director of the World Privacy Forum. She is the author of eight books, hundreds of articles, and numerous privacy studies, including her landmark Medical Identity Theft study and One Way Mirror Society study. She has testified before Congress on consumer privacy issues as well as before federal agencies.
    [Show full text]
  • The Internal Effects of the Federal Bureau of Investigation's
    REDACTED AND UNCLASSIFIED The Internal Effects of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Reprioritization U.S. Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General Audit Division Audit Report 04-39 September 2004 REDACTED AND UNCLASSIFIED REDACTED AND UNCLASSIFIED THE INTERNAL EFFECTS OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION’S REPRIORITIZATION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY * In direct response to the September 11, 2001 (9/11), terrorist attacks, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) initiated a transformation that, among other things, established a new ranking of priorities and formally shifted a significant number of agents from traditional criminal investigative work to counterterrorism and counterintelligence matters. According to the Director, each of the changes was designed to reshape the FBI into an organization better able to combat the imminent threat of terrorism and to prevent another large-scale terrorist attack against the United States. Prior to 9/11, the FBI utilized more of its field agent resources to investigate traditional criminal activity than to investigate matters related to terrorism. According to the FBI, since the reprioritization it is striving to incorporate more proactive, intelligence-based tactics and operations into its procedures, particularly in terrorism-related matters. Non-terrorism related crime, however, still occurs, and because the FBI has the broadest jurisdiction of any federal law enforcement agency, it is expected to maintain a response capability for violations of federal criminal law. However, other federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies may be capable of taking on increased responsibilities for certain investigative areas in light of the FBI’s reprioritization. In order for this transition to occur effectively, the specific areas from which the FBI has reduced its involvement must be identified.
    [Show full text]
  • National Programmes for Mass Surveillance of Personal Data in Eu Member States and Their Compatibility with Eu Law
    DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT C: CITIZENS' RIGHTS AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS CIVIL LIBERTIES, JUSTICE AND HOME AFFAIRS NATIONAL PROGRAMMES FOR MASS SURVEILLANCE OF PERSONAL DATA IN EU MEMBER STATES AND THEIR COMPATIBILITY WITH EU LAW STUDY Abstract In the wake of the disclosures surrounding PRISM and other US surveillance programmes, this study makes an assessment of the large-scale surveillance practices by a selection of EU member states: the UK, Sweden, France, Germany and the Netherlands. Given the large-scale nature of surveillance practices at stake, which represent a reconfiguration of traditional intelligence gathering, the study contends that an analysis of European surveillance programmes cannot be reduced to a question of balance between data protection versus national security, but has to be framed in terms of collective freedoms and democracy. It finds that four of the five EU member states selected for in-depth examination are engaging in some form of large-scale interception and surveillance of communication data, and identifies parallels and discrepancies between these programmes and the NSA-run operations. The study argues that these surveillance programmes do not stand outside the realm of EU intervention but can be engaged from an EU law perspective via (i) an understanding of national security in a democratic rule of law framework where fundamental human rights standards and judicial oversight constitute key standards; (ii) the risks presented to the internal security of the Union as a whole as well as the privacy of EU citizens as data owners, and (iii) the potential spillover into the activities and responsibilities of EU agencies.
    [Show full text]
  • Using Big Data Analytics to Fight Identity Fraud
    Primary IDA Color Palette Secondary Color Palette - Medium R122 R247 R0 R0 R154 R250 R47 R165 G134 G143 G53 G114 G155 G187 G163 G194 B142 B30 B95 B156 B157 B119 B255 B218 Gray Orange Navy Blue Blue Using Big Data Analytics Gray Orange Navy Blue Blue R106 R84 R102 R191 R42 R147 R165 R216 G154 G148 G49 G191 to Fight Identity Fraud G197 G201 G113 G216 B194 B63 B144 B191 B255 B129 B206 B216 Light Blue Green Purple Light Gray Light Blue Green Purple Light Gray Dr. Stephen Coggeshall Chief Analytics and Science Officer ID Analytics/Lifelock 2nd Workshop of Mission-Critical Big Data Analytics Prairie View, May 16,17 A Symantec Company © 2017 ID Analytics, Inc. Confidential Primary IDA Color Palette Secondary Color Palette - Medium R122 R247 R0 R0 Outline R154 R250 R47 R165 G134 G143 G53 G114 G155 G187 G163 G194 B142 B30 B95 B156 B157 B119 B255 B218 Gray Orange Navy Blue Blue Gray Orange Navy Blue Blue • All about identity fraud R106 R84 R102 R191 – modes R42 R147 R165 R216 G154 G148 G49 G191 G197 G201 G113 G216 B194 B63 B144 B191 B255 B129 B206 B216 – examples Light Blue Green Purple Light Gray Light Blue Green Purple Light Gray • Using big data analytics to catch identity fraud – a look into our technology © 2017 ID Analytics, Inc. Confidential 2 One column Primary IDA Color Palette Secondary Color Palette - Medium ID Analytics Overview R122 R247 R0 R0 R154 R250 R47 R165 G134 G143 G53 G114 G155 G187 G163 G194 B142 B30 B95 B156 ID Analytics applies advanced analytics to a unique sources of U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Original Documents Are Located in Box 4, Folder “COINTELPRO” of the Ron Nessen Papers at the Gerald R
    The original documents are located in Box 4, folder “COINTELPRO” of the Ron Nessen Papers at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Copyright Notice The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Ron Nessen donated to the United States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections. Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Digitized from Box 4 of the Ron Nessen Papers at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL WASHINGTON, D.C. 20!130 November 14, 1974 MEMORANDUM FOR: FROM: SUBJECT: COINTELPRO Attaqhed for your use at your press briefing on Monday, November 18, are the following: A. Proposed questions and answers for your own use. I suggest that you refer all specific inquiries concerning the or1g1n, scope, details etq. of COINTELPRO to the Department of Justice; B. Questions and answers which will be used by the Attorney General in his own press conference on that day; C. The COINTELPRO report to be released in conjunction with the Attorney General's press conference; and D. A memorandum from the Attorney General to the FBI Director which will also be released in conjunction with the Attorney General's press conference.
    [Show full text]
  • The FBI: Protecting the Homeland in the 21St Century
    EMBARGOED until 10 a.m., March 25, 2015 UNCLASSIFIED (U) The FBI: Protecting the Homeland in the 21st Century (U) Report of the Congressionally-directed (U) 9/11 Review Commission To (U) The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation By (U) Commissioners Bruce Hoffman Edwin Meese III Timothy J. Roemer EMBARGOED(U) March 2015 EMBARGOED until 10 a.m., March 25, 2015 UNCLASSIFIED EMBARGOED until 10 a.m., March 25, 2015 UNCLASSIFIED EMBARGOED 1 EMBARGOED until 10 a.m., March 25, 2015 UNCLASSIFIED EMBARGOED until 10 a.m., March 25, 2015 UNCLASSIFIED (U) TABLE OF CONTENTS (U) Introduction: The 9/11 Review Commission…..……….………........ p. 3 (U) Chapter I: Baseline: The FBI Today…………………………….. p. 15 (U) Chapter II: The Sum of Five Cases………………….……………. p. 38 (U) Chapter III: Anticipating New Threats and Missions…………....... p. 53 (U) Chapter IV: Collaboration and Information Sharing………………. p. 73 (U) Chapter V: New Information Related to the 9/11 Attacks………… p. 100 (U) Key Findings and Recommendations…………………………………. p. 108 (U) Conclusion: ………………………………………………………… p. 118 (U) Appendix A: Briefs Provided by FBI Headquarters Divisions.…..… p. 119 (U) Appendix B: Interviews Conducted……… ………………………. p. 121 (U) Appendix C: Select FBI Intelligence Program Developments…….… p. 122 (U) Appendix D: Acronyms……………… …………………………… p. 124 EMBARGOED 2 EMBARGOED until 10 a.m., March 25, 2015 UNCLASSIFIED EMBARGOED until 10 a.m., March 25, 2015 UNCLASSIFIED (U) INTRODUCTION THE FBI 9/11 REVIEW COMMISSION (U) The FBI 9/11 Review Commission was established in January 2014 pursuant to a congressional mandate.1 The United States Congress directed the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI, or the “Bureau”) to create a commission with the expertise and scope to conduct a “comprehensive external review of the implementation of the recommendations related to the FBI that were proposed by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (commonly known as the 9/11 Commission).”2 The Review Commission was tasked specifically to report on: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • COINTELPRO - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia Page 1 of 8
    COINTELPRO - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page 1 of 8 COINTELPRO From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia COINTELPRO (Counter Intelligence Program) was a program of the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation aimed at investigating and disrupting dissident political organizations within the United States. Although covert operations have been employed throughout FBI history, the formal COINTELPRO operations of 1956-1971 were broadly targeted against organizations that were (at the time) considered to have politically radical elements, ranging from those whose stated goal was the violent overthrow of the U.S. government (such as the Weathermen) to non-violent civil rights groups such as Martin Luther King Jr.'s Southern Christian Leadership Conference to violent racist and segregationist groups like the Ku Klux Klan and the American Nazi Party. The founding document of COINTELPRO directed FBI agents to "expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit, or otherwise neutralize" the activities of these movements and their leaders. Federal Bureau of Investigation Contents 1 History 2 Methods 3 Illegal surveillance 4 Further reading 4.1 Books 4.2 Articles Fidelity, Bravery, Integrity 4.3 U.S. Government reports Director: Robert Mueller 5 See also Department: Justice 6 Endnotes 7 External links Divisions: 7.1 Documentary FBI Academy 7.2 Websites FBI Laboratory Criminal Justice Information Services 7.3 Articles 7.4 U.S. Government reports Major units: Behavioral Analysis Unit (BAU) Critical Incident Response Group (CIRG) History Counterterrorism Division (CTD) Law Enforcement Bulletin Unit (LEBU) Hostage Rescue Team (HRT) COINTELPRO began in 1956 and was designed to "increase Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) factionalism, cause disruption and win defections" inside the National Security Service (NSS) Communist Party U.S.A.
    [Show full text]
  • İSTİHBARATIN TEŞKİLATLANMA Ve YÖNETİM SORUNSALI: A.B.D. ÖRNEĞİ
    T.C. İSTANBUL ÜNİVERSİTESİ SOSYAL BİLİMLER ENSTİTÜSÜ SİYASET BİLİMİ VE KAMU YÖNETİMİ ANABİLİM DALI YÜKSEK LİSANS TEZİ İSTİHBARATIN TEŞKİLATLANMA ve YÖNETİM SORUNSALI: A.B.D. ÖRNEĞİ Fatih TÜRK 2501110836 TEZ DANIŞMANI DOÇ. DR Pelin Pınar GİRİTLİOĞLU İSTANBUL - 2019 ÖZ İSTİHBARATIN TEŞKİLATLANMA ve YÖNETİM SORUNSALI: A.B.D. ÖRNEĞİ Fatih TÜRK Günümüzde teknolojinin gelişimi ve küreselleşme dünyayı uçtan uca değiştirdi. Toplumlar ve ülkeler birbiri ile etkileşime geçtikçe bireysel özgürlükler ve demokrasi konusunda hassas alanlar giderek artmaktadır. Bu etkileşim ülkelerin güvenliğini ve bireysel özgürlük alanlarınıda etkilemektedir. Bu hızlı değişime karşın ülkeler geçmişin soğuk savaş anlayışı ve güvenlik hassasiyetlerini de aynı zamanda taşımaya devam etmektedirler. Gelişmiş demokrasilere sahip ülkelerin başında gelen Amerika Birleşik Devletleri’nde (ABD) mevcut güvenlik ve istihbarat anlayışı, faaliyetleri ve denetimi işte bu çatışmanın uzun sürede meydana geldiği denge üzerine kuruludur. ABD açısından istihbarat teşkilatlanma süreci yeni problemler, hak arayışları, çatışma ve çözümler doğurmaktadır. Tüm bunların ışığında bu tezin temel amacı istihbarat problemlerini ABD istihbarat teşkilatlanma süreci üzerinden analiz edip karşılaşılan problemleri neden sonuç ilişkisi içerisinde tespit etmektir. Bu çalışmada Amerika Birleşik Devletleri’nde istihbaratın yönetim modeli, teşkilatlanması ve hukuki alt yapısı incelenmiştir. Birinci bölümde kavramsal anlamda istihbarat incelemesi literatüre önemli bir katkı olarak görülebilir. İkinci bölümde
    [Show full text]
  • The First Paper Presents the Results of a Joint Study Undertaken by Staff At
    NONBANKS IN THE PAYMENTS SYSTEM: INNOVATION, COMPETITION, AND RISK— A Conference Summary By Richard J. Sullivan and Zhu Wang∗ From the early days of automated card sorting to the more recent times of the Internet and check imaging, payments and payments processing have continually embraced new technology. At the same time, the industry has been shaped by its share of entry and exit, through startups, mergers, and the reorganization of businesses seeking the proper scope of horizontal and vertical integration. Many of these changes have introduced new risks to payments. In response, public policy has evolved to help manage these risks. These changes have enabled nonbank organizations to play a larger role in the payments system. Nonbanks have followed a number of pathways to more prominence: purchasing bank payment processing subsidiaries, carving out niches in the payments market through innovation, and taking advantage of economies of scale made possible by shifting to electronic forms of payment. The contributions of nonbanks are undeniable. They have introduced some of the most far-reaching innovations to the payments system in recent years, leading to greater efficiencies in payments processing. At the same time, nonbanks have changed the dynamics of competition in payments, leading to a significant change in the system’s risk profile. The Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City sponsored a conference on nonbanks in the payments system in Santa Fe, N.M., on May 2-4, 2007. The conference addressed many of the key questions raised by the growing presence of nonbanks in payments. Have recent payments innovations been more likely to come from nonbanks? Have nonbanks improved or harmed competition in payments? Have nonbanks increased risk or helped to develop tools to manage it? ∗ Richard J.
    [Show full text]
  • Espionage and Intelligence Gathering Other Books in the Current Controversies Series
    Espionage and Intelligence Gathering Other books in the Current Controversies series: The Abortion Controversy Issues in Adoption Alcoholism Marriage and Divorce Assisted Suicide Medical Ethics Biodiversity Mental Health Capital Punishment The Middle East Censorship Minorities Child Abuse Nationalism and Ethnic Civil Liberties Conflict Computers and Society Native American Rights Conserving the Environment Police Brutality Crime Politicians and Ethics Developing Nations Pollution The Disabled Prisons Drug Abuse Racism Drug Legalization The Rights of Animals Drug Trafficking Sexual Harassment Ethics Sexually Transmitted Diseases Family Violence Smoking Free Speech Suicide Garbage and Waste Teen Addiction Gay Rights Teen Pregnancy and Parenting Genetic Engineering Teens and Alcohol Guns and Violence The Terrorist Attack on Hate Crimes America Homosexuality Urban Terrorism Illegal Drugs Violence Against Women Illegal Immigration Violence in the Media The Information Age Women in the Military Interventionism Youth Violence Espionage and Intelligence Gathering Louise I. Gerdes, Book Editor Daniel Leone,President Bonnie Szumski, Publisher Scott Barbour, Managing Editor Helen Cothran, Senior Editor CURRENT CONTROVERSIES San Diego • Detroit • New York • San Francisco • Cleveland New Haven, Conn. • Waterville, Maine • London • Munich © 2004 by Greenhaven Press. Greenhaven Press is an imprint of The Gale Group, Inc., a division of Thomson Learning, Inc. Greenhaven® and Thomson Learning™ are trademarks used herein under license. For more information, contact Greenhaven Press 27500 Drake Rd. Farmington Hills, MI 48331-3535 Or you can visit our Internet site at http://www.gale.com ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this work covered by the copyright hereon may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means—graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping, Web distribution or information storage retrieval systems—without the written permission of the publisher.
    [Show full text]