2010年12月7日 星期二

101207二:占士邦活在我們中間


原載2010年12月7日《都市日報》《都市博客》專欄

現在網絡無孔不入,最威水的「間諜」不姓邦(Bond)而姓黑(Hack,內地譯作「駭」),而且不打政府工,反與政府作對。

沉寂多時的間諜活動,上周再度成為全球焦點。

冷戰後這20年,真占士邦被迫「降呢」刺探商情、偵姦緝私,銀幕上的更被人打到嘔。唯有俄國同行挾前KGB首腦的威勢,繼續也文也武,除敵的手段更由血滴子進化到放射物。此外是以色列的「魔殺得」(Mossad),近日懷疑聯同美國CIA在伊朗炸死兩個核專家。朝鮮鷹爪本來也愛四出綁架,但現在連中國也卑而遠之,怕不得不收手。當然也有人相信,中國的國安就在我們四周。

但現在網絡無孔不入,最威水的「間諜」不姓邦(Bond)而姓黑(Hack,內地譯作「駭」),而且不打政府工,反與政府作對;最可怕的情報組織不是有形的國家機構,而是無疆界的WikiLeaks.org(譯作維基「洩密」還是「解密」視乎貶還是捧。下文用縮寫WL以示中立)。

以「Keep Governments Open」為己任的WL最近公開十萬計的美國外交密電,令其使節對駐在國的評頭品足、外交官被勒令兼職情報員⋯⋯大白於天下。遭議論的各國政要無地自容;國務卿希拉莉備受抨擊下,說今後不再當官。WL的創辦人Julian Assange(阿桑奇)即時成為頭號全球通緝犯。不知是遭敵對駭客攻擊還是域名遭撤,原網站無法進入,伺服器怕也無人敢收留。今後或須分散資料、不斷轉移,用虛擬的游擊戰來抗衡實體的政府。

說也巧,39歲的澳洲單身男阿桑奇今夏公開密件,觸及阿富汗美軍之痛後,隨即在瑞典被控強姦,活動受限。這次爆大鑊後,被發現藏身英倫。此文見報時,或已遭拘捕,準備遞解。全球大國都想封其口,處境險惡過電影小人物被大組織追殺。哪天若被發現食錯藥、馬上風、觸電、漏煤氣、睡眠窒息,甚至像村上春樹《1Q84》說的那樣倒下……毋須驚訝!

而正當「外交海嘯」衝擊全球,根據美國攻打伊拉克期間小水門案拍攝的《Fair Game》(叛諜反擊),也在全球上映。小布殊在03年3月出兵後,前駐伊大使Wilson撰文稱薩達姆並無大殺傷力武器,指總統為了出兵而作假。白宮盛怒之下,反踢爆Wilson妻的CIA身份以打擊大使的公信力。但洩露本國間諜的身份危及國安,有明文禁止。白宮知法犯法,舉國譁然。只好由副總統幕僚長頂罪了結。

最後一案是連戰長子在台灣五都投票前夜遭槍擊。本來以為不像六年前令陳水扁得以連任的兩槍那樣離奇,但現在愈講愈詭秘。在綠營眼,豈止是藍營的苦肉計,更是「中國」的陰謀。「證據」包括:連勝文康復快得神奇;在瞬間從旁奪下兇槍、避免連勝文捱第二槍的勇士是台灣最大黑幫的副老總;連勝文為競選的友人站台,但競選經理事前多次接到槍手的電話,更在助查期間去上海……怎樣解釋很視乎本身親藍還是親綠。交稿前的說法是:槍手勒索競選者不遂。不論真相如何,只希望不要再像陳水扁那次,關鍵證人逐一暴斃就好。

1 則留言:

sekssdragon 提到...

New York Times, Nov 30, 2010

At a Pentagon briefing on Tuesday, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates, a former director of central intelligence, responded to a question about Wikileaks' disclosure of 250,000 diplomatic cables:

"Let me just offer some perspective as somebody who's been at this a long
time. Every other government in the world knows the United States
government leaks like a sieve, and it has for a long time......

Now, I've heard the impact of these releases on our foreign policy described
as a meltdown, as a game-changer, and so on. I think those descriptions are
fairly significantly overwrought.

The fact is, governments deal with the United
States because it's in their interest, not because they like us, not because they trust us, and not because they believe we can keep secrets.

Many governments - some governments - deal with us because they fear us, some
because they respect us, most because they need us. We are still essentially, as
has been said before, the indispensable nation.

So other nations will continue to deal with us. They will continue to work with us. We will continue to share sensitive information with one another.

Is this embarrassing? Yes. Is it awkward? Yes. Consequences for U.S. foreign policy? I think fairly modest."