Categories
Featured Posts The News And Times Blog

The Gusinsky’s Revenge, Part 2: The Deus ex machina


Selected Posts: Gusinsky, Lesin, and the FBI: The Goose and his Revenge: The Investigation in tweets 

November 15, 2025

The Gusinsky’s Revenge

Part 2   |   Part 1

The Investigation in tweets

 

The Deus ex machina

Gusinsky and Lesin – GS

Vladimir Gusinsky and Mikhail Lesin were two influential Russian media figures involved in the post-Soviet media landscape. Gusinsky, a prominent media mogul and founder of the NTV television network, had a contentious relationship with the Kremlin and ultimately fled Russia. Lesin, a former press minister and media advisor to the Kremlin, was instrumental in shaping the state-controlled media and played a key role in developing the industry. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]

 

Here’s a breakdown of their roles and interactions:

 

Vladimir Gusinsky: [1, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16]
  • Media Mogul: Gusinsky was a highly successful businessman who founded NTV, the first major independent television network in Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
  • Controversial Figure:His media outlets were critical of the government, leading to ongoing conflict with the Kremlin and President Vladimir Putin.
  • Fled Russia: After facing criminal charges and pressure from the government, Gusinsky was forced to flee Russia in 2000.
  • Later Life: He continued to be involved in media, though his influence in Russia diminished.
Mikhail Lesin: [1, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24]
  • Government Official and Advisor:Lesin served as Russia’s Minister of Press, Television, and Radio, and later as an advisor to President Putin.
  • Shaped State Media: He played a significant role in establishing and controlling state-aligned media, often working to consolidate power and promote the Kremlin’s agenda.
  • Controversial Figure: Like Gusinsky, Lesin was a complex and controversial figure, with critics accusing him of suppressing media freedom.
  • Mysterious Death: Lesin died in 2015 under circumstances that remain debated, with some sources attributing his death to natural causes and others suggesting foul play.
Key Interaction: [1, 25]
  • Gusinsky and Lesin’s paths crossed when Lesin was in a position of power within the government and Gusinsky was a target. Lesin was instrumental in the crackdown on independent media, including NTV, and ultimately contributed to the decline of Gusinsky’s media empire.
In essence, Gusinsky represented the struggle for independent media in Russia, while Lesin represented the state’s efforts to control the narrative. [1, 26, 27, 28]



AI responses may include mistakes.


Categories
Featured Posts The News And Times Blog

AI Review: How to measure the efficiency of the Intelligence Agencies? How will the Trump’s cuts affect the CIA?


How to measure the efficiency of the Intelligence Agencies? How will the Trump’s cuts affect the CIA? “In conclusion, while a simple “efficiency score” for an intelligence agency is unrealistic, a comprehensive and thoughtful evaluation framework that considers outcomes, processes, and perceptions, while acknowledging the inherent challenges, can provide valuable insights into how effectively these vital organizations are operating and where improvements can be made.”

1 Share

How to measure the efficiency of the Intelligence Agencies?

Gemini 

Measuring the efficiency of intelligence agencies is a complex endeavor, fraught with unique challenges not typically encountered when evaluating other government organizations or private sector entities. Due to the clandestine nature of their work, the sensitivity of their information, and the long-term and often indirect impact of their efforts, traditional metrics of efficiency, such as cost-benefit analyses or direct output measurements, often fall short.

However, a more nuanced approach can be taken by considering a range of factors and indicators, both qualitative and quantitative:

1. Outcome-Based Measures (Effectiveness leading to Efficiency):

  • Prevention of Threats: Arguably the most critical measure. How effective is the agency in preventing terrorist attacks, cyber intrusions, espionage, and other threats to national security? This is difficult to quantify directly but can be assessed through:
    • Number of disrupted plots or attacks: While a significant indicator, it doesn’t capture the full scope of deterrence.
    • Reduced impact of successful attacks: Were the consequences mitigated due to timely warnings or intelligence-led responses?
    • Expert assessments and after-action reviews: Qualitative analyses of how intelligence contributed to averting or minimizing harm.
  • Strategic Warning: How timely and accurate is the intelligence provided to policymakers regarding emerging threats and crises?
    • Accuracy of forecasts and assessments: Evaluating historical intelligence products against actual events.
    • Timeliness of dissemination: Was the information available when needed for decision-making?
    • Impact on policy decisions: Did the intelligence inform and improve the quality of national security strategies?
  • Support to Operations: How effectively does intelligence support military, law enforcement, and diplomatic efforts?
    • Actionable intelligence provided: Did the intelligence lead to successful operations or outcomes?
    • Relevance and accuracy of targeting data: In military contexts, this is a critical measure.
    • Situational awareness enhancement: Did intelligence improve the understanding of the operational environment?

2. Process-Oriented Measures (How efficiently are tasks performed?):

  • Timeliness of Production and Dissemination: How quickly is raw intelligence processed, analyzed, and delivered to the relevant consumers?
    • Mean time to produce finished intelligence products.
    • Speed of dissemination through appropriate channels.
  • Resource Management: How efficiently are financial, human, and technological resources utilized?
    • Cost-effectiveness of collection platforms and operations.
    • Personnel productivity and workload management.
    • Minimization of redundancies and overlaps within and between agencies.
  • Information Management: How effectively is intelligence data stored, retrieved, and shared (appropriately)?
    • Efficiency of data processing and analysis tools.
    • Accessibility of relevant information to authorized users.
    • Security and integrity of data holdings.
  • Accuracy and Reliability: What is the track record of the agency in producing accurate and reliable intelligence?
    • Low rate of errors or retractions.
    • High confidence levels in assessments, clearly communicated.
    • Effective validation and vetting processes for sources and information.

3. Trust and Perception-Based Measures:

  • Public Trust and Confidence: While difficult to directly link to efficiency, public trust can impact an agency’s legitimacy and effectiveness in the long run.
    • Surveys of public opinion (though these can be influenced by many factors).
    • Media coverage and public discourse surrounding the agency.
  • Customer Satisfaction: Feedback from policymakers, military commanders, and other intelligence consumers regarding the utility and quality of intelligence products and services.
    • Formal feedback mechanisms and surveys.
    • Informal communication and engagement.
  • Adherence to Legal and Ethical Standards: Efficient intelligence gathering should not come at the expense of legality and ethics.
    • Number of legal challenges or violations.
    • Oversight body reports and findings.
    • Internal compliance mechanisms and audits.

Challenges in Measuring Efficiency:

  • Secrecy and Classification: The very nature of intelligence work limits transparency and the ability to use open-source data for evaluation.
  • Long-Term Impact: The benefits of intelligence work, such as preventing a future attack, are often intangible and difficult to attribute directly.
  • Complexity of Threats: The evolving nature of threats requires constant adaptation, making it hard to establish consistent benchmarks.
  • Attribution Issues: It can be challenging to definitively prove that an intelligence action directly led to a specific outcome.
  • Politicization: Intelligence assessments can sometimes be influenced by political considerations, complicating objective evaluation.
  • Lack of Standardized Metrics: There is no universally agreed-upon framework for measuring intelligence efficiency across different agencies and countries.

Moving Forward:

Measuring intelligence agency efficiency requires a multi-faceted approach that combines quantitative data where possible with qualitative assessments and expert judgment. Emphasis should be placed on:

  • Developing clear objectives and priorities: This provides a basis for evaluating whether the agency is achieving its intended goals.
  • Establishing robust oversight mechanisms: Independent bodies can provide objective evaluations and identify areas for improvement.
  • Promoting a culture of evaluation: Encouraging internal assessments and lessons learned.
  • Investing in data analytics and technology: To better track processes and outcomes while respecting security constraints.
  • Fostering dialogue between intelligence professionals, policymakers, and oversight bodies: To develop more effective and relevant measures of efficiency.

In conclusion, while a simple “efficiency score” for an intelligence agency is unrealistic, a comprehensive and thoughtful evaluation framework that considers outcomes, processes, and perceptions, while acknowledging the inherent challenges, can provide valuable insights into how effectively these vital organizations are operating and where improvements can be made.

https://g.co/gemini/share/68a03c21bfc6

Intelligence and Counterintelligence – AI Review

https://www.google.com/collections/s/list/nxTRV_7dRICjjI8L5Iuw3A/If3OWsa6Qb8

Measuring the efficiency of intelligence agency AI systems requires a multi-faceted approach, encompassing quantitative performance metrics, qualitative assessments, and ethical considerations. Key areas to focus on include system performance and outcomes, risk management, ethical implications, social impact, and organizational readiness and adoption. [1, 2]
Key Metrics and Considerations: [3, 3]
  • System Performance and Outcomes: [3, 3]
    • Accuracy: How often the AI system’s predictions match actual outcomes. [3, 3]
    • Speed and Latency: How quickly the AI system can process information and generate results. [4, 4]
    • Efficiency and Scalability: How efficiently the AI system utilizes resources (time, space, energy) and how well it handles increasing workloads. [5, 5, 6, 7]
    • Task Completion Time: How long it takes for the AI to complete assigned tasks. [8, 8]
    • User Satisfaction: How effectively the AI system assists users in their work. [9, 9]
    • Uptime and Error Rate: How consistently the AI system is available and how often it produces errors. [10, 10]
  • Risk Management: [11, 11]
    • Data Privacy and Security: How well the AI system protects sensitive data and prevents unauthorized access. [11, 11, 12, 13, 14]
    • Compliance: Adherence to relevant regulations and ethical guidelines. [1, 1, 15, 16]
  • Ethical Implications: [11, 11, 17, 17]
    • Bias Detection and Mitigation: Identifying and addressing any biases in the AI system’s training data and algorithms. [11, 11, 17, 17, 18]
    • Explainability and Interpretability: Understanding how the AI system arrives at its conclusions and ensuring transparency. [11, 11, 19, 20, 21]
  • Social Impact: [11, 11]
    • Impact on Human Workforce: Assessing how the AI system affects the roles and responsibilities of intelligence personnel. [11, 11, 22]
    • Bias in Algorithms: Ensuring that AI systems do not perpetuate or amplify existing societal biases. [11, 11, 23]
  • Organizational Readiness and Adoption: [1, 1]
    • Training and Support: Providing adequate training and support for personnel to effectively use the AI system. [1, 1, 24, 25]
    • Organizational Culture: Ensuring that the organization is receptive to and able to integrate AI into its workflow. [1, 1, 26, 27]
Beyond the Metrics: [11, 11]
  • Human Oversight: Maintaining human oversight of the AI system to ensure accuracy, fairness, and accountability. [11, 11, 28, 29, 30, 31]
  • Continuous Monitoring and Improvement: Regularly evaluating the AI system’s performance and making adjustments as needed. [1, 1, 32]
  • Collaboration and Knowledge Sharing: Fostering collaboration between intelligence agencies, researchers, and policymakers to develop best practices for using AI in intelligence. [11, 11, 33, 34]
Generative AI is experimental.
AI Review: How to measure the efficiency of the Intelligence Agencies?
Measuring the efficiency of intelligence agencies is a complex endeavor, as their work often involves secrecy and long-term impacts that are difficult to quantify

. 

Here’s a breakdown of how one might approach measuring their efficiency, with a focus on challenges and potential metrics:
Challenges:
  • Secrecy and Sensitivity: Many operations and results are classified, making public or independent assessment difficult.
  • Attribution and Causality: It can be challenging to directly link specific intelligence activities to positive outcomes or to determine if a particular event would have unfolded differently without the agency’s involvement.
  • Defining Success: What constitutes “success” for an intelligence agency can be multifaceted and subjective, ranging from preventing terrorist attacks to informing policy decisions.
  • Long-Term Impacts: The impact of intelligence work may not be immediately apparent and can unfold over years or decades. 
Potential Metrics & Evaluation Areas:
  • Timeliness and Accuracy of Intelligence:
    • How quickly and reliably does the agency deliver actionable intelligence to decision-makers?
    • How accurate are the agency’s predictions and assessments of threats and opportunities?
  • Effectiveness in Achieving Objectives:
    • Has the agency successfully disrupted terrorist plots, countered foreign espionage, or supported military operations?
    • How effectively does the agency contribute to achieving national security goals as defined in strategic documents like the National Security Strategy?
  • Efficiency of Operations and Resource Utilization:
    • How cost-effective are the agency’s intelligence gathering methods and analysis processes?
    • Are there areas where duplication or inefficiency can be addressed?
  • Responsiveness to Policy Needs:
    • How effectively does the agency anticipate and respond to the evolving intelligence needs of policymakers?
    • Is the agency’s intelligence product tailored to the specific requirements of different customers (e.g., policymakers, military leaders)?
  • Adaptability and Innovation:
    • How effectively does the agency adapt to emerging threats and technological advancements (e.g., AI, cyber)?
    • Does the agency foster a culture of innovation and continuous improvement in its methods and technologies?
  • Compliance and Oversight:
    • Does the agency operate within the bounds of the law and respect civil liberties?
    • How effectively are oversight mechanisms (e.g., legislative committees, inspectors general) functioning? 
Methods for Evaluation:
  • Independent Reviews: Commissions or panels of experts could conduct periodic reviews, accessing classified information and interviewing agency personnel.
  • Performance Audits: Inspectors General within the agencies or parent organizations can assess operational efficiency and compliance.
  • Feedback Mechanisms: Soliciting feedback from policymakers and other users of intelligence products can provide insights into the agency’s effectiveness and responsiveness.
  • Comparative Analysis: Benchmarking the performance of intelligence agencies against those of other countries (where possible) can offer insights into best practices and areas for improvement. 
Important Considerations:
  • Balancing Security and Transparency: Any evaluation framework must carefully balance the need for accountability and transparency with the need to protect sensitive information and sources.
  • Avoiding Unrealistic Expectations: Intelligence agencies operate in a complex and uncertain environment, and not all threats can be anticipated or prevented.
  • Qualitative Insights: Metrics should be complemented by qualitative assessments that consider the broader context and the agency’s contribution to national security. 
AI Mode is experimental and can make mistakes. Learn more

Categories
Security and Intelligence

Today in 1914, Germany outmaneuvers and outfights Imperial Russia at the Battle of Tannenberg. More than 100,000 of the Tsar’s troops are captured after four-days of fighting. The victory makes heroes of Hindenburg and Ludendorff; the Russian commander, Samsonov, kills himself.


Today in 1914, Germany outmaneuvers and outfights Imperial Russia at the Battle of Tannenberg. More than 100,000 of the Tsar’s troops are captured after four-days of fighting. The victory makes heroes of Hindenburg and Ludendorff; the Russian commander, Samsonov, kills himself.

Categories
Security and Intelligence

Russia’s Red Army Choir Performs For First Time Since Air Crash


Russia’s Red Army Choir has given its first performance since the December plane crash that killed most of its singers.
The legendary choir, also known as the Aleksandrov Ensemble, appeared in military and traditional dress on February 16 at Moscow’s Russian Army Theater.
The Defense Ministry’s of

Categories
Michael Novakhov - SharedNewsLinks℠

Russia’s Red Army Choir Performs For First Time Since Air Crash



Michael_Novakhov
shared this story
from Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

Russia’s Red Army Choir has given its first performance since the December plane crash that killed most of its singers.

The legendary choir, also known as the Aleksandrov Ensemble, appeared in military and traditional dress on February 16 at Moscow’s Russian Army Theater.

The Defense Ministry’s official choir, founded in 1928, performed a series of traditional folk songs to an audience of mostly uniformed soldiers.

“The Aleksandrov Ensemble has supported and inspired people in difficult, critical times, and today they themselves need our support,” Deputy Defense Minister Nikolai Pankov said before the show.

Those who died in the plane crash “are with us, and they will always be the heart of the new song and dance troupe,” he said.

The ensemble lost 64 members when a plane en route to a Russian military base in Syria crashed off the coast of Sochi on December 25.

The choir was to perform a New Year’s concert for Russian troops serving in Syria.

All 92 people on the plane were killed, including military officers and journalists, along with the choir members.

Based on reporting by AFP
This item is part of

Categories
Michael Novakhov - SharedNewsLinks℠

Russia threatens attacks inside Britain over weapons supplied to Ukraine



Michael_Novakhov
shared this story
.

A senior adviser to Russian President Vladimir Putin has issued another threat against Britain, claiming Moscow is prepared to target sites in the country and that senior Russian officials are considering sabotage or arson rather than a direct military attack.

Andrey Fedorov, a former Russian deputy foreign minister, told the Daily Mail that Moscow now regards a missile company and a factory operated by Ukrainian drone manufacturer Ukrspecsystems as “legitimate targets.” The factory, which has British-Ukrainian ownership, is located near RAF Mildenhall.

Gallery

(Photo: Sirena Telegram channel via AP, Diego Fedele/Getty Images)

Fedorov said “the highest levels of the Russian government are considering a combined attack such as sabotage or arson,” arguing that such operations were more likely than an overt military strike because Britain is a NATO member and a direct attack could trigger a wider response by the alliance.

MAKE ynetGlobal MY TRUSTED SOURCE

“Britain is evil No. 1,” he said, linking Moscow’s anger to reports that British-made drones had been used against Russian oil refineries. “This has become a focus of great anger in Russia. Various experts are calling for Britain to be punished through an attack, and this would receive the support of most Russian citizens.”

The warning comes amid an increasingly heated confrontation between Moscow and London over Britain’s military support for Ukraine. Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s government has reaffirmed its backing for Kyiv, while Russia has repeatedly accused Britain of enabling Ukrainian strikes inside Russian territory. Burnham hosted Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy aboard HMS Queen Elizabeth in Portsmouth in July and pledged continued British military support.

Britain’s ambassador to Russia, Nigel Casey, has instructed officials not to confirm whether British weapons are being transferred to Ukraine, according to the report, in an effort to avoid further escalation. Fedorov claimed Putin and those around him were particularly angered by Burnham’s decision to provide Ukraine with plans for producing long-range missiles that could be used against targets inside Russia.

Elisabeth Braw, a security expert at the Atlantic Council, told the Daily Mail that such hybrid attacks deliberately put countries like Britain in a difficult position over how to respond. She calls it a “defender’s dilemma.”

“How exactly is the country supposed to retaliate?” she said. “Because if it uses military means, it could really lead to World War III.”

British Defence Secretary Wes Streeting rejected Moscow’s threats on Saturday night, saying the Kremlin’s “reckless rhetoric and attempts at intimidation” reflected weakness rather than strength and insisting Britain would not be deterred. Streeting has repeatedly said the UK intends to maintain its support for Ukraine despite Russian pressure.

Russia has previously been accused of conducting or directing covert operations inside Britain since the start of its war against Ukraine.

In March 2024, a warehouse in east London storing aid destined for Ukraine was set on fire in an attack British prosecutors linked to Russia’s Wagner mercenary network. More recently, British authorities have prosecuted suspects over arson attacks against property connected to prominent political figures.

The concern extends well beyond Britain. Western governments and intelligence agencies have increasingly warned of Russian “gray zone” activity across Europe, including sabotage, cyberattacks, drone incursions and the recruitment of local operatives to carry out attacks. Such operations are designed to remain below the threshold of conventional warfare while testing how NATO governments will respond.

27 ביולי ראש ממשלת בריטניה אנדי ברנהאם עם נשיא אוקראינה זלנסקי באירוע על נושא המטוסים הבריטית HMS Queen Elizabeth  בפורטסמות'

27 ביולי ראש ממשלת בריטניה אנדי ברנהאם עם נשיא אוקראינה זלנסקי באירוע על נושא המטוסים הבריטית HMS Queen Elizabeth  בפורטסמות'

British Prime Minister Andy Burnham with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy aboard HMS Queen Elizabeth in Portsmouth

(Photo: Simon Jones / POOL / AFP)

Finland, however, has played down the likelihood of a direct Russian attack on NATO territory. Finnish President Alexander Stubb told Germany’s Bild that he did not believe Moscow would risk testing the alliance militarily.

“If someone has a crystal ball, great, but I don’t see evidence or facts supporting that,” he said. “It makes no sense that any power would want to test the most powerful military alliance in the world.”

Stubb, whose country joined NATO in 2023, argued that Ukraine itself remains one of Europe’s most important lines of defence against Russia. “We have to understand, you in Germany and we in Finland, that Ukraine is the best security guarantee we have against Russia. If Ukraine loses, we lose.”

Western officials have nevertheless warned that Russian hybrid operations against European states, including cyberattacks and sabotage, could eventually trigger a direct confrontation with NATO. German officials have also warned that Russia could develop the military capacity to attack a NATO member before the end of the decade.

Fedorov’s comments follow a string of Russian warnings directed at Britain over the past week.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said Moscow could strike British military targets in response to Ukraine’s use of British-made weapons and accused London of maintaining a “hostile position” toward Russia. She also said Britain and France were “playing with fire” by giving Ukraine access to missile technology.

ג'ון רטקליף

ג'ון רטקליף

CIA Director John Ratcliffe

(Photo: REUTERS/Evan Vucci)

The Washington Post reported that Ratcliffe’s trip followed U.S. intelligence indicating that the Kremlin increasingly viewed Washington as weakened by its war with Iran. His unusually visible visit was intended in part to reinforce Washington’s commitment to NATO and warn Moscow against crossing the alliance’s red lines.

For now, Western assessments continue to distinguish between a conventional Russian attack on NATO and the lower-level campaign already playing out across Europe. A direct strike on Britain could bring the alliance into war with Moscow. Sabotage, cyberattacks and other covert operations present a more difficult question: how far Russia can go without provoking exactly the confrontation it appears determined to avoid.


Categories
OSINT

Curated Codes Technologies: Too much data. Not enough hours. That’s where the real bottleneck usually is. #OSINT #NationalSecurity #CriminalInvestigation #investigation #GovTech #technicalanalysis


Too much data. Not enough hours. That’s where the real bottleneck usually is.
#OSINT  #NationalSecurity  #CriminalInvestigation  #investigation  #GovTech   #technicalanalysis

Categories
Operation "Doppelganger"

Google


Search the world’s information, including webpages, images, videos and more. Google has many special features to help you find exactly what you’re looking for.

Categories
OSINT

ZeroHourOSINT: Icelanders head to polls for referendum on whether to resume talks to join EU #OSINT #BreakingNews


Icelanders head to polls for referendum on whether to resume talks to join EU

https://t.co/MHMpx6zJ35 
#OSINT  #BreakingNews


Categories
Security and Intelligence

YouTube


Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

Categories
OSINT

OSN – Observer Security Network: 🔴 GREECE AND ISRAEL SEAL RECORD $3.6B AIR DEFENSE DEAL 🇬🇷🇮🇱 ATHENS initiates the ACHILLES SHIELD project to acquire advanced GREEK air defense systems from TEL AVIV. This record-breaking deal bolsters regional security infrastructure. 🛡️📡 #OSINT #Defense


🔴 GREECE AND ISRAEL SEAL RECORD $3.6B AIR DEFENSE DEAL 🇬🇷🇮🇱

ATHENS initiates the ACHILLES SHIELD project to acquire advanced GREEK air defense systems from TEL AVIV. This record-breaking deal bolsters regional security infrastructure. 🛡️📡

#OSINT  #Defense


Categories
OSINT

War Watch Intel: 📡 HOURLY UPDATE North Korea has replaced its defense minister in a significant military leadership reshuffle, according to state media reports. War Watch Intel — Live 24/7 on #OSINT #WarWatchIntel


📡 HOURLY UPDATE
North Korea has replaced its defense minister in a significant military leadership reshuffle, according to state media reports.
War Watch Intel — Live 24/7 on  https://t.co/jrSdyYecEs
#OSINT  #WarWatchIntel