148864 stories
·
0 followers

Putin and October 7 2023 attack: his fingerprints all over the place

1 Share

The phrase "Putin's fingerprints are all over the place" regarding the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel originates from geopoliticians, intelligence commentators, and editorial op-eds.

While Western intelligence agencies have not found direct evidence proving Russia planned, knew about, or executed the attack alongside Hamas, multiple circumstantial links and geopolitical benefits tie Moscow closely to the fallout.

⚖️ The Geopolitical Evidence: Direct vs. Circumstantial

Evaluating Russia's connection to the October 7 attacks involves separating clear geopolitical benefits from unverified operational claims:

DimensionClaims of Involvement & ContextContradictions & Missing Evidence
Strategic BenefitsUkraine Distraction: Successfully diverted Western media attention, political focus, and vital military funding away from Ukraine.
Diplomatic Disruption: Permanently stalled the U.S.-brokered normalization talks between Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Lack of Foresight: No proof exists that Russia initiated the timeline, rather than simply exploiting the chaos after it occurred.
Alliances & LogisticsThe Iranian Nexus: Iran is Hamas's primary sponsor and Russia's critical military supplier (e.g., Shahed drones). Experts suggest Russia shared advanced electronic warfare tactics with Iran, which filtered down.
Kremlin Diplomacy: Hamas leaders openly visited Moscow multiple times before and after October 7.
Operational Secrecy: Hamas kept the operational details of the attack incredibly tight—even catching its own political leaders abroad and key Iranian sponsors off guard.
Cyber & Technical SpeculationBlinding the "Iron Wall": Certain security analysts claim Hamas's sophisticated methods to neutralize Israeli border cameras and remote weapons required state-level cyber expertise likely native to Russia.No Hard Proof: Intelligence bodies (including Israel's) have not released forensic digital evidence linking Russian state hacking units directly to the October 7 operational breach.
Symbolism & ResponseThe Birthday Clashing: The attack occurred on October 7—Vladimir Putin’s 71st birthday.
Tepid Reactions: Putin refrained from condemning Hamas directly, blamed U.S. foreign policy failures, and hosted Hamas officials weeks later.
Coincidence: Coinciding dates are frequent in symbolic military strikes; a birthday does not equal a smoking gun.

🚀 Practical Starting Point for Research

If you are investigating this topic deeper, avoid relying purely on op-eds like The Hill or Kyiv Post, which lean heavily on strategic speculation. Instead, look into:

  1. Verified Arms Flows: Track reports from independent conflict research groups examining if any Russian weapons seized in Gaza were supplied post-2022, or if they were older legacy stockpiles.
  2. U.S. Congressional Inquiries: Check recent transcripts from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee regarding the alignment of the Russia-Iran-North Korea axis.

AI can make mistakes, so double-check responses

Copied to clipboardFailed to copy to clipboard. Try again later.

Read the whole story
Michael_Novakhov
1 hour ago
reply
http://michael_novakhov.newsblur.com/
Share this story
Delete

The anti-gay sentiment and violence of October 7 attack reflect the official militant Russian homophobia

1 Share

AI Mode reply for The anti-gay sentiment and violence of October 7 attack reflect the official militant Russian homophobia

While both Hamas and the Russian state exhibit deep institutional hostility and violence toward LGBTQ+ individuals, analysts view them as distinct phenomena rooted in different ideological frameworks, rather than one directly reflecting the other. Both entities utilize anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric to polarize their societies and oppose Western liberal values, but their motivations, methods, and origins differ significantly.

Common Ground: Weaponizing Homophobia Against the West

The primary parallel between the anti-gay sentiment seen in militant groups like Hamas and the official policy of the Russian government is how both weaponize homophobia as an existential geopolitical tool:

  • The "Anti-Western" Narrative: Both regimes position LGBTQ+ rights as a corrupting, neo-colonial export of the Western world.
  • Consolidating Power: Both use the suppression of queer people to rally social and religious conservatives, framing their respective struggles as a defense of moral purity against external degradation.

Key Ideological Differences

To understand why analysts separate these two frameworks, it is necessary to examine their distinct roots:

DimensionHamas & the October 7 ContextOfficial Russian State Policy
Ideological CoreFundamentalist Islamist Governance. Hostility is derived from a strict, extremist interpretation of Islamic law, where homosexuality is criminalized and punishable by death.Nationalist & Orthodox Authoritarianism. Hostility is rooted in state-sponsored "traditional values" used to suppress political dissent and build an anti-Western coalition.
Nature of ViolenceExtrajudicial Execution & Militant Terror. In Gaza, Hamas enforces an environment of absolute terror, torture, and secrecy for queer Palestinians. The October 7 attacks featured widespread, premeditated gender-based and sexual violence as a weapon of war.Systemic Legal & State Repression. Russia uses legislative mechanisms—such as banning "LGBT propaganda" and designating the "international LGBT movement" as extremist—alongside state-sanctioned vigilante violence to institutionalize discrimination.
Targeting ContextBroad Geopolitical Terror. The October 7 attacks targeted Israeli citizens indiscriminately based on nationality, though the victims included members of the LGBTQ+ community and peace advocates.Targeted Internal Cleansing. Repression specifically targets domestic activists, civil society, and minority groups within Russia and its occupied territories to solidify total state control.

The Reality on the Ground

In the aftermath of October 7, the intersection of LGBTQ+ rights and the conflict has become highly contentious. Within Gaza, Hamas has a documented history of severe anti-gay violence. Meanwhile, Russia's state-sponsored homophobia has escalated into total legal erasure of LGBTQ+ life domestically.

Ultimately, while both systems rely on militant homophobia to define themselves against liberal democracies, Hamas’s violence is the product of religious extremism and militant terror, whereas Russia’s is a calculated strategy of state-level authoritarian survival.

  • Russian anti-LGBTQ law - Wikipedia

    The support of the Russian government for the law appealed to social conservatives, religious conservatives, and Russian nationali...

  • Russia, Homophobia and the Battle for ‘Traditional Values’

    May 17, 2023 — And the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, and the Orthodox patriarch, Kirill I, have mobilised the rhetoric of 'traditional value...

  • University College Dublin

    monitoring anti-LGBTQ hate crimes in Russia - UCD Research

    Jan 27, 2026 — The project has affected the way people see hate crimes against LGBTQ people in Russia. It is understood not as a series of isolat...

Read the whole story
Michael_Novakhov
1 hour ago
reply
http://michael_novakhov.newsblur.com/
Share this story
Delete

Wagner Group and October 7: infiltration, participation,and training of Hamas

1 Share

Wagner Group and October 7: infiltration, participation,and training of Hamas

AI Mode reply for Wagner Group and October 7: infiltration, participation,and training of Hamas

The claims regarding the involvement of the Russian Wagner Group in the October 7, 2023 attacks on Israel involve specific accusations of training, but independent intelligence and defense experts note a lack of direct evidence confirming physical infiltration or active participation.

The breakdown of what is known regarding these claims is organized below:

🎓 Training Accusations

The primary allegations connecting the Wagner Group to Hamas originate from Ukrainian intelligence and government officials:

  • Drone Warfare & Tactics: The Ukrainian Center of National Resistance (NRC) reported that Wagner fighters who relocated from Belarus to African nations were involved in training Hamas militants. The training allegedly focused on assault tactics and operating small unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) configured to drop explosives onto targets—a hallmark tactic heavily utilized by Russian forces in Ukraine.
  • Syrian Context: Former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko also publicly alleged that Wagner instructors operating in Syria transferred knowledge or directly trained Hamas militants in Gaza prior to the attack, stating the assault bore Wagner's operational "signature".
  • Lack of Independent Verification: International intelligence agencies and Middle East defense experts have noted that while Hamas's drone drops mimicked tactics seen in Ukraine, there remains no verified, unclassified evidence proving Wagner forces directly trained Hamas personnel for the October 7 assault.

🥷 Infiltration and Physical Participation

  • No Direct Evidence: There is no documented evidence that Wagner Group mercenaries physically infiltrated Israel or actively participated alongside Hamas during the October 7 massacre.
  • Hamas Autonomy: Assessments by international security agencies indicate the ground assault forces consisted of Hamas operatives alongside other local Palestinian militant groups (such as Palestinian Islamic Jihad). These groups historically undergo physical training in regional hubs like Iran, Lebanon, Syria, and Egypt rather than under Russian private military companies.

🗺️ The Broader Russia-Hamas Context

While direct military deployment from Wagner has not been validated, the geopolitical relationship between Moscow and Hamas is well-documented:

  • Political Alignment: Following the October 7 attacks, Russia refrained from directly condemning Hamas's actions, hosted high-ranking Hamas delegations in Moscow, and leveraged the conflict in its state-run propaganda to criticize Western foreign policy.
  • Weaponry: Israeli and Ukrainian intelligence officials have noted Hamas's extensive use of Russian-designed small arms and Kalashnikov variants. However, analysts typically attribute this to regional black-market arms proliferation and state sponsorship from Iran rather than direct tactical supply drops from the Wagner Group.

Copied to clipboardFailed to copy to clipboard. Try again later.

  • Russia's Relationship with Hamas and Putin's Global ...

    Nov 6, 2023 — Ukrainian Center of National Resistance said that members of the paramilitary group Wagner allegedly participated in the training ...

  • Essential questions about the Russia-Hamas link

    Nov 28, 2023 — The day after the Oct. 7 attack, an official Ukrainian source claimed, “Some of the fighters of the Wagner [Group] PMC, who left B...

  • Hamas' Tactical Evolution: Lessons From Ukraine in Modern ...

    Jan 5, 2024 — Hamas' approach reflects three key trends identified in Ukrainian drone innovation: spreading technical knowledge, specialized tec...

Read the whole story
Michael_Novakhov
1 hour ago
reply
http://michael_novakhov.newsblur.com/
Share this story
Delete

Putin would rather keep killing than admit he’s lost. As a winter of misery looms in Ukraine, Nato must step in | Simon Tisdall

1 Share

Ukraine’s people face a winter from hell. Thwarted on the battlefield, Russia is stepping up systematic, daily attacks on civilians, their homes, schools, hospitals, workplaces, and the vital infrastructure that sustains human life. Wave after wave of terrifying daytime ballistic missile and jet-drone strikes on Kyiv and other cities are destroying supermarket distribution hubs, pharmaceutical and medical facilities, logistics centres and warehouses. The result is sharply rising civilian casualties and growing shortages of food and other essentials. As a freezing winter approaches, Russia will again try to blow up Ukraine’s water supplies and power grid, cutting off electricity to millions. This is Vladimir Putin’s version of darkness at noon. He’d rather kill everybody than admit he’s lost.

Russia’s leader reportedly told Donald Trump this week that his “special military operation”, now in its fifth year, was going to plan. Trump may believe him. Western analysts certainly don’t. Failing militarily and taking huge casualties, his regime is under growing domestic economic and public pressure to wind down the war. Yet Putin seems to think one last big push can finally break Ukraine’s will. Trump’s renewed meddling – after months of inertia, he sent his patsy envoys, Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff, back to Moscow last weekend (they also visited Kyiv for the first time) – perpetuates Kremlin delusions of victory. Now there’s talk of more talks. And all the while, Putin kills and kills. Each day is a crime against humanity.

This prospect of daily mass killings, rampant war crimes, malnutrition, homelessness and renewed, large-scale displacements of Ukrainian civilians – this intensifying Russian campaign of terror – is intolerable. So why don’t the western allies and Nato intervene to stop it?

The principal reason is chronic US ambivalence and unreliability, which has turned Ukraine into a seemingly irresolvable forever war. Former president Joe Biden tossed lifebelts to the Ukrainians in 2022, then left them to sink or swim. Trump has since tried to drown them. Despite halting the ground invasion and taking the fight to Russia’s heartlands, Ukraine is more vulnerable than ever to air attack. That’s largely because Trump has backtracked on allowing Ukraine to produce Patriot missile interceptors and paused weapons deliveries. Europe has so far failed to fill the gap. Trump’s fawning and feting of Putin, seen at last year’s nauseating Alaska summit, and his bullying of President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, undermine Ukraine’s resistance, European security and hopes of an expedited settlement. Vulnerable civilians pay the price.

Many Ukrainians are weary of war. About 60% oppose ceding Donbas land to Russia but a similar number would support a ceasefire, backed by western security guarantees, that freezes current positions, a recent poll suggests. Most Russians also want it to stop. And like Moscow, Kyiv is feeling the financial pinch, notwithstanding a $100bn EU loan. There’s plainly a deal to be done. But Putin (like Trump over Iran) ignores public opinion. The indifference of authoritarian leaders to the popular will, let alone global opinion, is another reason forever wars proliferate. Whether the conflict is Ukraine, Gaza or Iran, ordinary people, watching from the margins, feel powerless to influence events. Familiarity deadens the senses over time. The horror of it all is scary and upsetting. It’s easier to look away.

Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump meet at the Elmendorf-Richardson military facility in Alaska, 15 August 2025. Photograph: Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP

Efforts to halt the US-Israel war on Iran, which began in February and has now extended to the Red Sea (Trump, remember, said it would only last a few weeks), and relentless post-2023 violence in occupied Palestine, are hampered, as in Ukraine, by the absence of credible, independent peace processes. This is another major factor fuelling the modern forever war phenomenon. Trump clumsily inserted himself into the Kyiv-Moscow argument, blatantly favouring one side. At no point did he trouble himself about the rights and wrongs of Putin’s war of choice. He aimed not to save lives but to win a Nobel peace prize (plus lucrative Russian energy deals).

Self-serving motives have similarly upset hopes of rescuing Gaza’s civilians from the Israeli military and Hamas. Trump’s “board of peace” and 20-point plan are primarily vehicles for his ego and greed, not a plausible route out of a political, military and humanitarian dead-end. As for ending the Iran debacle, the US president has lost interest. His refusal, like Putin, to accept the obvious, admit he failed to achieve his war aims, and seek a compromise with Tehran undercuts regional mediators and Gulf state allies, who rightly fear fighting will drag on indefinitely. Desperately needed: impartial, UN-empowered peace envoys to knock heads together.

Forever wars develop and grow entrenched in the absence of authoritative, universal legal frameworks respected and observed by all. The contempt shown by Trump, Putin and Israel’s leader, Benjamin Netanyahu, for basic principles of the post-1945 world order – rule of law, national sovereignty, oversight and enforcement by the international court of justice and international criminal court – directly contributes to the prolongation of conflict. Once the rules are cast aside, anything goes. That has ineluctably led to war crime atrocities such as those experienced in Gaza since the 7 October massacres; in Bucha, Mariupol and other towns and cities across Ukraine; and in Minab, southern Iran, where a US Tomahawk cruise missile allegedly killed more than 100 schoolgirls in February. Almost invariably, the culprits escape punishment. It’s impunity made law. It’s forever anarchy.

Another increasingly common feature of endless wars is the obstruction of full public scrutiny and accountability through independent media and UN investigations. Since the war with Hamas began, Israel’s army has tightly restricted international journalists’ access to Gaza. Despite the efforts of brave reporters, this policy has inevitably disguised and distorted the true picture of what happens there, not least for Israelis. Likewise, the US defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, releases only limited, selective information about Iran-related operations. This has led, for example, to under-reporting of the extent and cost of successful Iranian strikes on US bases in the Gulf. Russian state media routinely censor news from Ukraine. Most Russians have little idea how badly the war is going. Generally speaking, public ignorance facilitates abuses and prolongs conflict.

Forever wars are ultimately caused by failing, foolish leaders. For sure, generals foul up. In battle, things rarely go as expected. Clever strategies backfire. But the core problem is politicians who promise too much, underestimate their opponents, ignore less macho, peaceful alternatives, think they are above the law, will not admit mistakes – and, without shame or compunction, lie to your face. This is an age-old problem with no quick solution. But Ukraine’s people, facing a season from hell, urgently need additional assistance now.

Western democracies cannot sit on their hands as the civilian toll from Moscow’s barbarous onslaughts mounts daily. Nato must finally switch to the offensive, make clear more war crimes will not be tolerated, threaten to strike Russian drone and missile launch sites from the air (as previously, repeatedly, urged here) – and force Putin to back off before his forever war becomes everybody’s war.

  • Simon Tisdall is a Guardian foreign affairs commentator

  • Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.

Read the whole story
Michael_Novakhov
7 hours ago
reply
http://michael_novakhov.newsblur.com/
Share this story
Delete

9/11 and October 7 attacks: pattern analysis

1 Share

AI Mode Conversation: 9/11 and October 7 attacks: pattern analysis

9/11 and October 7 attacks: pattern analysis

AI Mode reply for 9/11 and October 7 attacks: pattern analysis

An analysis of the September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States and the October 7, 2023 attacks in Israel reveals . While the historical, political, and geographic contexts differ significantly, both events share striking parallels in intelligence failures, tactical execution, and geopolitical aftermath.

The direct comparisons below highlight the recurring patterns across both historic events.


Comparative Pattern Analysis

DimensionThe 9/11 Attacks (2001)The October 7 Attacks (2023)
Perpetrator & IdeologyAl-Qaeda: Global, decentralized Salafi-jihadist network.Hamas: Regional, nationalist Sunni-Islamist group governing an adjacent territory.
Tactical ExecutionAsymmetric High-Tech Exploitation. Hijacked commercial airliners used as guided missiles.Combined Arms Incursion. Simultaneous rocket barrages, drone strikes on automated defenses, and ground/sea/air breaches.
The Intelligence BlindspotFailure of Imagination. US intelligence missed fragmented warnings because they did not conceive of terrorists using planes as weapons.The "Conceptzia" (Preconception). Israeli officials believed Hamas was rational, economically contained, and deterred from full-scale war.
Immediate Impact~2,996 fatalities. Catastrophic economic shock and a profound shift in global security architecture.~1,200 fatalities and 251 hostages. Highest per-capita loss of life in Israel's history, causing deep national trauma.
State ResponseThe War on Terror: Invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, massive intelligence overhauls, and drone warfare.The Gaza Campaign: Complete military mobilization, full-scale ground invasion, and regional confrontation with the "Axis of Resistance".

Core Structural Patterns

1. The Trap of "Status Quo" Thinking

In both cases, the primary failure was not a lack of raw data, but a rigid analytical framework that dismissed warning signs.

  • Before 2001, US intelligence tracked Al-Qaeda closely but assumed threats would manifest as traditional bombings or embassy attacks.
  • Before 2023, Israel possessed detailed blueprints of Hamas's battle plans (such as the "Jericho Wall" document) but dismissed them as aspirational bravado, firmly believing Hamas was focused on governing Gaza rather than launching a catastrophic war.

2. Technological Over-Reliance as a Vulnerability

Advanced states often develop blind spots by relying heavily on technical intelligence.

  • The US relied on sophisticated signals intelligence (SIGINT) but lacked sufficient human intelligence (HUMINT) deep inside Al-Qaeda's core.
  • Israel constructed a multi-billion dollar smart border fence equipped with remote-controlled machine guns, cameras, and sensors. Hamas systematically exploited this by using low-tech commercial drones to drop explosives on cellular towers, blinding the automated system in the opening minutes of the assault.

3. Shaping Public Information Ecosystems

A modern parallel is the speed at which information and alternate narratives emerged.

  • Following 9/11, it took years for an organized "9/11 Truth" movement to form alternative, conspiracy-driven accounts.
  • On October 7, the digital landscape allowed sophisticated denialism, real-time misinformation, and weaponized propaganda to spread on social media platforms while the attacks were still actively occurring.

4. The Geopolitical Echo Effect

The strategic trap laid by perpetrators in both patterns is to provoke a massive, conventional military reaction that forces the target state into protracted conflict. Just as Al-Qaeda aimed to draw the US into exhausting wars in the Islamic world, Hamas's attack effectively disrupted burgeoning regional normalization efforts (such as the Abraham Accords) and refocused global attention entirely on the Palestinian issue, at a massive humanitarian and political cost to all sides.

Copied to clipboardFailed to copy to clipboard. Try again later.

  • International Centre for Counter-Terrorism - ICCT

    Comparing Hamas' attack on Israel and 9/11 - ICCT

    The reaction to the 7th of October is, in strategic terms, very clearly based on hard power, and justified by a self defence argum...

  • Why 10/7 Was Worse for Israel Than 9/11 Was for America | The Washington Institute

    The phrase "Israel's 9/11" is a shorthand reference to the catastrophic shock, horror, surprise, and enormity of the Hamas terrori...

  • Why the Oct. 7 Attack Wasn't Israel's 9/11 | RAND

    Some commentators, scholars, politicians, and Israeli officials have called the terrorist attack on October 7th a "hyper-charged v...

Read the whole story
Michael_Novakhov
8 hours ago
reply
http://michael_novakhov.newsblur.com/
Share this story
Delete

How to recognize a political intelligence operation?

1 Share

AI Mode Conversation: How to recognize a political intelligence operation?

How to recognize a political intelligence operation?

AI Mode reply for How to recognize a political intelligence operation?

Recognizing a political intelligence operation requires understanding that modern campaigns rarely rely on a single spy; instead, they are highly coordinated, decentralized blends of human influence, cyber activities, and information warfare. Whether orchestrated by foreign nation-states or domestic political factions, these operations are designed to subtly alter public perception, shift policy, or gather leverage.

You can spot a political intelligence or influence operation by looking for key indicators across three distinct categories:

1. Information & Media Anomalies (The Signal)

  • Astroturfing: The sudden, artificial appearance of a "grassroots" movement. If thousands of social media accounts or new local advocacy groups echo the exact same phrasing, graphics, or policy demands overnight, it is likely a coordinated campaign.
  • Wedge-Issue Amplification: Operations rarely create new controversies; they exploit existing domestic fault lines (e.g., racial, economic, or cultural tensions). Look for sudden spikes in sensationalized, highly divisive content that aims to paralyze political decision-making rather than solve problems.
  • Controlled Leaks: The strategic, well-timed release of sensitive or classified information to the press. If a leak perfectly coincides with an upcoming vote, an election, or a diplomatic summit to discredit a specific politician, it is a targeted intelligence play.

2. Behavioral Patterns (The Human Element)

  • Asymmetric Conversations: In professional, academic, or political networking circles, intelligence operators (or their co-opted cut-outs) often display specific conversational styles. A classic indicator is an individual who is deeply eager to listen but volunteers very little personal commentary, guiding conversations so that their target talks 75% of the time.
  • Transactional "Friendships" and Flattery: Cultivation begins under the guise of shared professional interests, think-tank research, or commercial consulting opportunities. Be wary of individuals offering disproportionate praise, access, financial stipends, or gifts for seemingly mundane, open-source political analysis.
  • Over-Interest in Soft Signals: Operators look for "soft signals" that shape policy framing—such as an official's personal vulnerabilities, internal rivalries within a ministry, or the private positions of key committee members.

3. Structural & Digital Indicators (The Logistics)

  • The "Blended" Campaign: Modern operations combine tools. For example, a target might experience a subtle cyber phishing attempt; weeks later, an seemingly unrelated commercial contractor or think-tank representative will approach them using insights stolen from that cyber breach.
  • Front Organizations: Operations heavily mask themselves using legitimate-looking entities, such as newly minted trade associations, overseas educational foundations, or commercial consulting firms that do not have a transparent history of operation.
  • Transnational Repression & Harassment: If an operation cannot co-opt an individual or a diaspora group, it shifts to intimidation. Digital doxxing, coordinated smear campaigns, or indirect threats to family members are used to silence political opposition or enforce self-censorship.

Summary of Tactical Types

Political intelligence spans several operational styles, depending on the perpetrator's goals:

Operation TypePrimary ObjectiveCommon Sign
Foreign Influence (Covert)Shift state policy or weaken an adversary nation.Amplification of polarizing narratives; state-backed media alignment.
Commercial Political IntelligenceGather nonpublic government data to trade or game financial markets.Aggressive networking around legislative committees and regulatory agencies.
Domestic Subversion / "Red Squads"Spy on, disrupt, or discredit local political activists and civil groups.Unexplained surveillance, internal subversion, or detailed dossiers on peaceful groups.

AI can make mistakes, so double-check responses

Copied to clipboardFailed to copy to clipboard. Try again later.

  • The Diplomat – Asia-Pacific Current Affairs Magazine

    Understanding China’s Party-State Intelligence System - The Diplomat

    Jul 3, 2026 — This serves two purposes: it tells a hitherto underinformed and often naive citizenry what are their obligations to state security...

  • Strategic-Political Intelligence - Silobreaker

    Examples of this include intelligence on an industry and key like information about market trends, product launches, C-Level leade...

  • U.S. Government Accountability Office (.gov)

    Political Intelligence: Financial Market Value of Government Information Hinges on Materiality and Timing | U.S. GAO

    Apr 4, 2013 — The GAO reviewed: * Legal and ethical issues * The sale of public and nonpublic political intelligence * The extent to which inves...

Read the whole story
Michael_Novakhov
8 hours ago
reply
http://michael_novakhov.newsblur.com/
Share this story
Delete
Next Page of Stories