The problematic aspects of the apparent psychotic meltdown and reported death of James Yoo, who according to our initial primary source was the reported “former Head of Global Security at the US government’s “Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS),” and the subsequent explosion of Yoo’s Arlington, VA home, distills down to additional Intelligence Community cover-up operations. These operations envelop Chinese infiltration and acquisition of U.S. military and government transatlantic fiber optics communications that draw all of the way down to the targeting of President Trump, other Americans, et al with section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act/Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
It appears as if Intelligence Community cover-up operations are in play and Yoo isn’t the only deceased subject of interest as the IC may be tying-up loose ends.
More on the second death momentarily.
The first article covering Yoo, CFIUS and more is mandatory reading for the necessary contextual backdrop for what follows:
With that under our belts, let’s deconstruct this thing part-by-part.
CFIUS is our central node and because it’s contained within the federal apparatus, our analysis requires identifying things like oversight, jurisdiction, authority, regulation, access, subpoena power, spending, etc., because in a repeated pattern resting on a long timeline, those are effective tools in the Intelligence Community’s tool box.
In order to access that tool box, the Intelligence Community requires an interface with those statutory powers and by law, that becomes the [s]elected political class.
This creates a scenario where the U.S. political class writ large is in service to, manipulated by, influenced by or controlled by the Intelligence Community [and Military Industrial Complex].
If you are a regular Moonshine reader, you may care to skip ahead. If you are newer and the following content is unfamiliar to you, I’d encourage you to carry on and go for the deeper dive.
The foundation for this political dynamic was built by George HW Bush, who was the head of the snake and the Godfather of what I’ve branded ‘Dynastic Bush‘ [emphasis added]:
As CIA director, Bush embraced the power and effectiveness of the PDB and paired it with his demand for a direct interface with then President Ford. This intersection accounts for the intelligence community’s ability to effectively impact the Executive and caused the CIA to become an indelible factor and variable to wield considerable weight and capabilities in the governance of the United States foreign and domestically.
The CIA is not authorized to operate domestically on Americans except where authorized in limited cases. Therefore the CIA’s directives have it operational outside of the U.S. and therefore it becomes a perfectly situated as collaborator with any willing hostile nation seeking to overthrow the U.S., like China.
The presidential/CIA portal that Bush created is responsible for the lion’s share of travesties and abuses coming from the federal apparatus. For one example, consider former Obama CIA Director John Brennan’s ability to launder the fraudulent Steele Dossier into a reliable intelligence product suitable for dissemination simply by including it in the President’s Daily Brief. GHWB created that capability.
Political Moonshine
If that’s new to you, please allow me to remind folks that we didn’t arrive to the nightmarish status quo accidentally; far from it.
So, let’s narrow our focus on interfaces, which in human terms function like “middle men” and grant points of access that often create secondary and tertiary, etc. interfaces, which in reality are the actual tactical objectives in their designs.
The IC doesn’t do much of anything directly rather everything is veiled and obscured throughout complex layers and where long and complex tracks are deliberately left.
By design, those tracks more closely resemble spiderwebs and everywhere one strand of the web connects to another, we have an interface.
If you stacked spider web upon spider web, a more accurate picture arises.
In the simplest terms, if the IC has us going from A to Z, the tactical objective was always Z but the Intelligence Community will have us interface with A through Y so that we never realize the importance and tactical targeting of Z.
By tracking evidence through the diffuse layers to arrive at and examine the interfaces, we can begin to understand why Yoo was dispatched in a house explosion.
The interface between the IC and our political class means that the latter collectively functions as a group of individual proxies for the Intelligence Community.
Understanding this is what made the laser accurate Moonshine projections on House Speakers Kevin McCarthy and Mike Johnson, who are both IC guardrails with gatekeeping functions, so laser accurate.
This dynamic created an interface between the political class and the Intelligence Community where the Intelligence Community hijacked the legislative, spending and war powers of Congress long ago [post WWII and into the era of ‘Dynastic Bush.’]
Another primary interface lies within another longstanding analytical position which holds that the public-private interface is how the Intelligence Community leverages its proxy political class and their Constitutional authority and oversight to outsource the government’s bidding where the U.S. Constitution is an unavoidable impediment.
An example of this is how the IC herded the national discourse to social media platforms under its direct control and then violated Americans’ First Amendment rights in the name of enforcing private corporations’ “community standards” to censor off-reservation political speech.
Interfaces like that and for similar evil and ulterior purposes exist ubiquitously in the U.S. governmental landscape.
If you skipped ahead and you’re picking back up, James Yoo is our first interface to examine.
Note that an initial cursory search completed at the time the first article was written; with searches at the Federal Register, CFIUS, Treasury and State, was hampered by apparent online scrubbing of Yoo content and returned no reliable results linked to Yoo.
According to new reporting from Heavy that sources Yoo’s LinkedIn page, Yoo interfaces with CFIUS through ‘Global Crossing,’ making it an interface to examine:
Experienced functional / department head seeks to contribute with a broad background and skill set including direct involvement with the CFIUS (Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States) national security review process where I successfully led and managed Global Crossing’s (GC) technical and security team throughout the CFIUS process resulting in regulatory approval from the United States Government for Singapore Technologies Telemedia’s purchase of GC on or around late September 2003.
James Yoo’s LinkedIn profile sourced at Heavy
Heavy also reports that, “Yoo also wrote on LinkedIn that work he did in the early 1990s for a company in Crystal City, Virginia, supported “U.S. military contracts.””
The founder of Global Crossing was Gary Winnick, “Lauded as a master salesman, Winnick raised more than $20 billion for the immense project, which laid more 100,000 miles of cable connecting countries around the Earth. Global Crossing was worth more than $50 billion in 1999, with Winnick’s stake valued at some $6 billion.”
By the early 2000s, Winnick’s Global Crossing had become the center of national attention for all of the wrong reasons:
For many investors, Global Crossing is memorable as an example of the irrational exuberance that occurred at the height of the dot-com bubble. In this respect, it is often cited alongside the infamous energy company, Enron Corporation.
The comparison between Global Crossing and Enron is not without its merits. In 2001, for instance, the two companies explored a potential transaction in which they would inflate their respective revenues by $650 million despite no actual goods or services changing hands. Although this transaction was never completed, it is a cogent example of the types of aggressive and arguably fraudulent strategies pursued by both companies in their attempts to propel their growth.
In the end, Enron declared bankruptcy in December 2001, with Global Crossing following less than one month afterward. At the time, Global Crossing’s bankruptcy was the fourth-largest in U.S. history. In 2005, it settled with the Securities and Exchange Committee (SEC). Under the terms of this settlement, it was determined that Global Crossing had failed to comply with numerous accounting laws.
Investopedia
Recall that Yoo’s home exploded and reportedly killed him on 05 Dec 23.
Yoo worked for Global Crossing which specialized in global security for CFIUS.
Winnick founded Global Crossing.
Now consider this 07 Nov 23 YahooNews headline and extract: Gary Winnick, Global Crossing founder and once L.A.’s richest man, dies at 76, “Winnick died unexpectedly Saturday at his historic and extravagant Bel-Air home, which he had recently put on the market for $250 million, making it the most expensive residential listing in the United States.”
Read the full obituary: https://www.legacy.com/us/obituaries/latimes/name/gary-winnick-obituary?id=53530437
Continuing, “After the fall of Global Crossing, Winnick maintained a low profile, and his youngest son, Matthew, said his father had been living a more balanced lifestyle, including enjoying time with his grandkids. “My dad had been spending his time in a variety of endeavors. The primary focus has been his family philanthropy, as well as managing his Winnick & Co. and its investments,” he said.”
Thus far, there has been no reported cause for Winnick’s unexpected death.
Winnick died in November and Yoo in December of 2023.
A closer look at Winnick’s Global Crossing overlaid by the Yoo matter threads us to CFIUS, its importance, and all of the way to China and right back to Trump.
2003/GW Bush Administration
In 2003 during the Bush Administration and according to Yoo’s LinkedIn page, Yoo facilitated the CFIUS process respective to the following [emphasis added]:
The Committee for Foreign Investment in the U.S. (CFIUS) has approved a buyout of bankrupt telecommunication company Global Crossing Holdings Ltd. by Singapore Technologies Telemedia Pte. Ltd. (STT), Global Crossing said in a statement Friday.
STT will pay $250 million for a 61.5 percent stake in Global Crossing.
The deal sees a telecommunication network, which carries some U.S. military and government traffic, pass into the hands of a company majority-owned by the Singapore government. That relationship, according to local media reports, has caused concern over the deal in some areas of the U.S. government, notably the Department of Defense.
Hong Kong-based Hutchison Telecommunications Ltd. was to have combined with STT in the buyout, but pulled out, apparently in anticipation that its links to mainland China would prevent the deal being approved.
The deal still needs approval from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
Both Global Crossing and its former subsidiary Asia Global Crossing Ltd. (AGC) have now passed into Asian hands.
AGC was taken over in March by China Netcom Corp. Ltd., which was formed in 1999 by the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the Chinese State Administration of Radio, Film and Television, the Chinese Ministry of Railways and the Shanghai Municipal Government.
InfoWorld
From the same time frame,
The court overseeing the reorganization of bankrupt telecommunications carrier Global Crossing Holdings Ltd. has approved the takeover of the company by Singapore Technologies Telemedia Pte. Ltd. (ST Telemedia), Global Crossing said in a statement Wednesday.
The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York approved a change in the deal whereby ST Telemedia will pay $250 million for a 61.5% stake in Global Crossing, rather than sharing the acquisition with Hong Kong’s Hutchison Telecommunications Ltd.
Networkworld
Visit Telemedia’s website: https://sttelemedia.com/
Moreover [emphasis added], “Global Crossing maintains an operational headquarters in Bermuda but the holding company is in Los Angeles, and so the deal falls within the U.S.’s jurisdiction. ST Telemedia is part of the Singapore Technologies Group, which is in turn owned by Temasek Holdings Pte. Ltd., the investment arm of the Singapore government.
According to the Singapoian Ministry of Foreign Affairs [emphasis added]:
Singapore enjoys longstanding and substantive relations with the People’s Republic of China (PRC), anchored by frequent high-level exchanges, multifaceted cooperation, growing people-to-people exchanges, and robust economic ties. In 2015, Singapore and China celebrated the 25th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations and released a Joint Statement that characterised bilateral relations as an “All-Round Cooperative Partnership Progressing with the Times”. Singapore and China are celebrating the 30th anniversary of the establishment of our diplomatic relations in 2020.
Since 2013, China has been Singapore’s largest trading partner, and Singapore has been China’s largest foreign investor.
[…]
Singapore and China have established three Government-to-Government projects, namely (a) the China-Singapore Suzhou Industrial Park; (b) the Sino-Singapore Tianjin Eco-City; and (c) the China-Singapore (Chongqing) Demonstration Initiative on Strategic Connectivity.
Singaporian Ministry of Foreign Affairs
According to its website, ST Telemedia is an investor-operator meaning it engages in both functions respective to its domain: “We invest in Communications & Media, Data Centres and Infrastructure Technology businesses globally…Since 1994, ST Telemedia has leveraged our expertise, technology and innovation to create value and drive growth. We have built core platforms comprising distinct yet complementary businesses that facilitate business growth and help societies advance.”
This private equity scenario with ST Telemedia makes it an interface with its ownership [those individuals and entities that own it] and to all of the companies in its portfolio.
That’s an important fact when considering how the CCP maintains strict control of its domestic corporations and they take particular interest in ones that interface with companies like Global Crossing.
This is ST Telemedia’s portfolio of 12 holdings replete with direct and indirect Chinese entanglements:
1-Armor Communications LLC: Armor is a cloud-native cybersecurity company providing cloud security and risk solutions to businesses globally. Its cloud security platform offers comprehensive and scalable security solutions to protect critical data and applications. The company is headquartered in Dallas, Texas, and has offices in the United States, Europe, and Singapore.
2-Bespin Global (Korea): Bespin Global is a leading cloud management company based in Seoul, Beijing and Abu Dhabi. It helps enterprise customers move their legacy IT operations to the cloud and use cloud effectively to power their digital transformation. Bespin Global serves over 190, including some of the world’s largest companies. It is the only company in East Asia to be recognised in Gartner’s 2017 Magic Quadrant for Public Cloud Managed Services Provider (MSP).
3-Datameer: Datameer is a big data analytics company based in San Francisco, California that leverages the power of Hadoop with a spreadsheet interface, enabling business users to easily run analytics against very large data sets with no programming required. Founded since 2009, the company has demonstrated strong customer traction with some of the world’s leading financial institutions, telecommunications carriers and global companies.
4-GDS Services: GDS is a leading provider of high performance data centre infrastructure and services in key markets across China. It provides managed IT services, hosting services, and cloud computing infrastructure to customers with business-critical IT operations. GDS serves major national and international financial institutions, large enterprises, government agencies, and top-tier internet companies. The company is listed on NASDAQ and HKEX, and part of the ST Telemedia Global Data Centres platform.
5-Lao Telecom: Lao Telecommunications Company (LTC) is the incumbent telecommunications operator in Laos. LTC offers a full range of domestic and international services including mobile, fixed-line and broadband services, wireless, fibre optic, and satellite access.
6-Ollion: Ollion is a born-in-the-cloud enterprise technology consultancy with a global team of nearly 600 employees. It works together with clients to untangle complex challenges and create elegant, iterative and enduring solutions. Services include Strategy and Transformation, Cloud Migration, Data and AI, Application Modernisation, Cloud Cost Management, Compliance and Governance, and Engineering Services. From Ollion’s website: Ollion, Inc, a company incorporated under the laws of Delaware, formerly known as 2nd Watch, Inc. Ollion Pte Ltd (UEN: 201727153K), a company incorporated under the laws of Singapore, formerly known as ST Telemedia Cloud Pte Ltd. PT Ollion International Indonesia (Principal Business No. 9120401581563), a company incorporated under the laws of the Republic Indonesia, formerly known as PT Cloud Comrade Indonesia. Ollion Sdn Bhd (201801006447 (1268461)), formerly known as Cloud Comrade Sdn Bhd. CloudCover Consultancy Pvt Ltd (CIN: U74900PN2015PTC153774), a company incorporated under the laws of the Republic of India. CloudCover Pte Ltd (UEN 20172789G), a company incorporated under the laws of Singapore. Cloud Comrade Pte Ltd (UEN:201414379M , a company incorporated under the laws of Singapore. Business address in Singapore : 115 Amoy Street, #02-00, Singapore 069935. Business address in India : Office no. 5-122, Survey No. 25, Eleven West, opposite Supreme Amadore, Baner, Pune, Maharashtra 411045.
7-Sky: Sky Cable is the largest cable TV operator and leading broadband service provider in the Philippines. It serves key cities and regions on its own extensive cable network, and offers the fastest nation-wide residential broadband Internet service.
8-Starhub: StarHub is Singapore’s fully-integrated info-communications company, offering a full range of information, communications and entertainment services for both consumer and corporate markets. StarHub is listed on the Singapore Exchange.
9-ST Telemidia Data Centers: Singapore-headquartered ST Telemedia Global Data Centres (STT GDC) is one of the fastest-growing data centre providers with a global platform of data centres in the world’s major business markets across Singapore, China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Philippines, South Korea, Thailand, and the United Kingdom. STT GDC offers a full suite of best-in-class, highly scalable and flexible data centre solutions, connectivity and support services that best meet customers’ current and future colocation needs.
10-TeleChoice: TeleChoice International is a regional provider of information and communications technology solutions and services. Its three business divisions are Personal Communications Solutions, Infocomm Technology and Network Engineering services. TeleChoice is listed on the Singapore Exchange.
11-U Mobile: Launched in 2007, U Mobile is Malaysia’s dynamic and innovative mobile telecommunications services provider. It offers a wide range of mobile services and high-speed mobile broadband solutions for retail and business customers. From U Mobile’s website: U Mobile is a data-centric and multiple award-winning mobile data service company in Malaysia.
12-Virtus Data Centers: VIRTUS Data Centres, the UK’s fastest growing data centre provider, owns, designs, builds and operates the country’s most efficient and flexible data centres. VIRTUS leads the industry with award winning innovation in hyper efficient, ultra-high density and highly interconnected facilities. The data centres are located in and around London’s metro – offering the best of traditional retail and wholesale colocation with low latency and high connectivity to the world’s leading networks. VIRTUS is part of the ST Telemedia Global Data Centres platform.
Through a presidential order and after White House and CIA officials consulted with the NSA director, President Bush expanded the NSA’s legal authority to collect communications inside the United States.
The President’s Surveillance Program was reported to [have] “significantly increased [NSA’s] access to transiting foreign communications.”
These Constitutional violations occurred after consultation between un-elected U.S. officials; and it occurred by edict to be codified into law in the issuance of Bush’s order.
This will become problematic moving into Obama’s two terms.
2013/Obama Administration
In 2013 during the Obama administration, the Intelligence Community mouthpiece the Washington Post, authored a narrative piece to indicate that the U.S. government was experiencing a national security matter along the Hegelian dialectic: Agreements with private companies protect U.S. access to cables’ data for surveillance.
The article bears down directly on Yoo and ST Telemedia.
WaPo [the IC] reported that [emphasis added],
The U.S. government had a problem: Spying in the digital age required access to the fiber-optic cables traversing the world’s oceans, carrying torrents of data at the speed of light. And one of the biggest operators of those cables was being sold to an Asian firm, potentially complicating American surveillance efforts.
Enter “Team Telecom.”
In months of private talks, the team of lawyers from the FBI and the departments of Defense, Justice and Homeland Security demanded that the company maintain what amounted to an internal corporate cell of American citizens with government clearances. Among their jobs, documents show, was ensuring that surveillance requests got fulfilled quickly and confidentially.
This “Network Security Agreement,” signed in September 2003 by Global Crossing, became a model for other deals over the past decade as foreign investors increasingly acquired pieces of the world’s telecommunications infrastructure.
The publicly available agreements offer a window into efforts by U.S. officials to safeguard their ability to conduct surveillance through the fiber-optic networks that carry a huge majority of the world’s voice and Internet traffic.
The agreements, whose main purpose is to secure the U.S. telecommunications networks against foreign spying and other actions that could harm national security, do not authorize surveillance. But they ensure that when U.S. government agencies seek access to the massive amounts of data flowing through their networks, the companies have systems in place to provide it securely, say people familiar with the deals.
[…]
The security agreement for Global Crossing, whose fiber-optic network connected 27 nations and four continents, required the company to have a “Network Operations Center” on U.S. soil that could be visited by government officials with 30 minutes of warning. Surveillance requests, meanwhile, had to be handled by U.S. citizens screened by the government and sworn to secrecy — in many cases prohibiting information from being shared even with the company’s executives and directors.
The Washington Post
Are you seeing the implications of ‘Dynastic Bush’ from GHWB to GWB to BHO?
Are you seeing the public-private interfaces and the obfuscated, complex and layered approach to outsourcing unconstitutional spying to third parties owned and controlled by a network of our enemies and primarily China?
Yoo led the global security effort with U.S. national security implications; as interfaced with CFIUS, where the ST Telecom transaction facilitated the handover to China of surveillance and access to infrastructure of U.S. government and military upstream fiber optics communications.
And… now… he… is… dead.
Let’s go on.
Does this WaPo quote of a former Obama Administration official sound like illegal spying outsourced to the private sector [emphasis added]: ““Our telecommunications companies have no real independence in standing up to the requests of government or in revealing data,” said Susan Crawford, a Yeshiva University law professor and former Obama White House official. “This is yet another example where that’s the case.””
Not surprisingly, the important aspects of illegal spying is classified [emphasis added]: “The full extent of the National Security Agency’s access to fiber-optic cables remains classified. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence issued a statement saying that legally authorized data collection “has been one of our most important tools for the protection of the nation’s — and our allies’ — security. Our use of these authorities has been properly classified to maximize the potential for effective collection against foreign terrorists and other adversaries.””
Understand what they’re saying, which is this: “We won’t tell you how we outsource our illegal spying on you to our allies and enemies like China because it’s for your own good and because terrorists are bad.”
They think you’re that dumb.
The IC leverages its political class proxies for fraudulent reassurance to the public [emphasis added]: “It added, “As always, the Intelligence and law enforcement communities will continue to work with all members of Congress to ensure the proper balance of privacy and protection for American citizens.””
That might be one of the tallest mountains of horse shit you’ll ever encounter.
Here, things become further problematic where “security” and “surveillance” are part and parcel; if not one in the same and seamlessly interchangeable [emphasis added]:
This broad-based surveillance of fiber-optic networks runs parallel to the NSA’s PRISM program, which allows analysts to access data from nine major Internet companies, including Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Yahoo, AOL and Apple, according to classified NSA PowerPoint slides. (The companies have said the collection is legal and limited.)
One NSA slide titled, “Two Types of Collection,” shows both PRISM and a separate effort labeled “Upstream” and lists four code names: Fairview, Stormbrew, Blarney and Oakstar. A diagram superimposed on a crude map of undersea cable networks describes the Upstream program as collecting “communications on fiber cables and infrastructure as data flows past.”
The Washington Post
If you’re following, “security” equates to “surveillance” which is illegal due to Constitutional protections.
In the operations of “surveillance,” two programs are running parallel to one another: NSA’s PRISM, which surveils the aggregate of Big Tech/Big Media data and “Upstream” collection identified by four operational code names.
For the latter, there must be a legal predicate to surveil “upstream” fiber optics cables that include U.S. military and government communications.
The legal predicate is an old story that ties back to the genesis of much of the nightmarish status quo: the illegal spying of then candidate and later President Donald J. Trump by illegal use of section 702 of the FISA and the FISC under the authority of SCOTUS Chief Justice John Roberts.
Moreover, we see directions to use the full weight of both PRISM and “upstream” collections [emphasis added]: “The slide has yellow arrows pointing to both Upstream and PRISM and says, “You Should Use Both.” It also has a header saying “FAA 702 Operations,” a reference to a section of the amended Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that governs surveillance of foreign targets related to suspected terrorism and other foreign intelligence.”
Moonshine analysis has arduously covered the FISA abuses of the outgoing Obama Administration in targeting Trump, other Americans, et al.
The analysis included exclusive positions holding that FISA/FISC/702 violations were so pervasive and completely under the IC’s direct/indirect control, that FISA markers were assigned to ongoing criminal operations as a mechanism for cover-up since FISA/FISC supersedes all other applicable judicial authorities and jurisdictions.
The aggregate of the evidence above drags Yoo into the middle of CFIUS outsourcing U.S. government and military fiber optics communications; and the infrastructure access and surveillance and security thereof, to China; and where the Obama Administration used section 702 of FISA to leverage the FISC to illegally spy on a former U.S. president and Americans writ large; and where Yoo facilitated the security and vetting aspects the deal that made it happen.
That also immediately drags Yoo into the center of a fake pandemic and a stolen 2020 election because those two things are inseparable from the rest of it.
Here the Intelligence Community simply rebrands illegal spying as being “incidental” and “inadvertent” [emphasis added]: “When the NSA is collecting the communications of a foreign, overseas target who is speaking or e-mailing with an American, that American’s e-mail or phone call is considered to be “incidentally” collected. It is considered “inadvertently” collected if the target actually turns out to be an American, according to program rules and people familiar with them. The extent of incidental and inadvertent collection has not been disclosed, leading some lawmakers to demand disclosure of estimates of how many Americans’ communications have been gathered. No senior intelligence officials have answered that question publicly.”
The IC even revisits the impetus for it all as derived from ‘Dynastic Bush’ [emphasis added]: “In the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks, the NSA said its collection of communications inside the United States was constrained by statute, according to a draft report by the agency’s inspector general in 2009.”
The IC’s 2013 WaPo piece goes on to envelop Global Crossing and Yoo [emphasis added]:
As these debates were playing out within the government, Team Telecom was making certain that surveillance capacity was not undermined by rising foreign ownership of the fiber-optic cables that the NSA was using.
The Global Crossing deal created particular concerns. The company had laid an extensive network of undersea cables in the world, but it went bankrupt in 2002 after struggling to handle more than $12 billion in debt.
Two companies, one from Singapore and a second from Hong Kong, struck a deal to buy a majority stake in Global Crossing, but U.S. government lawyers immediately objected as part of routine review of foreign investment into critical U.S. infrastructure.
The Washington Post
The IC/WaPo piece ends in remarkable fashion recapitulating important components enveoping Yoo [emphasis added]:
The Hong Kong company soon withdrew from the Global Crossing deal, under pressure from Team Telecom, which was worried that the Chinese government might gain access to U.S. surveillance requests and infrastructure, according to people familiar with the negotiations.
Singapore Technologies Telemedia eventually agreed to a slate of concessions, including allowing half of the board of directors of a new subsidiary managing the undersea cable network to consist of American citizens with security clearances. They would oversee a head of network operations, a head of global security, a general counsel and a human resources officer — all of whom also would be U.S. citizens with security clearances. The FBI and the departments of Defense, Justice and Homeland Security had the power to object to any appointments to those jobs or to the directors who had to be U.S. citizens.
U.S. law already required that telecommunications companies doing business in the United States comply with surveillance requests, both domestic and international. But the security agreement established the systems to ensure that compliance and to make sure foreign governments would not gain visibility into the working of American telecommunications systems — or surveillance systems, said Andrew D. Lipman, a telecommunications lawyer who has represented Global Crossing and other firms in negotiating such deals.
Singapore Technologies Telemedia sold Global Crossing in 2011 to Level 3 Communications, a company based in Colorado. But the Singaporean company maintained a minority ownership stake, helping trigger a new round of review by Team Telecom and a new Network Security Agreement that added several new conditions.
A spokesman for Level 3 Communications declined to comment for this article.
A summary of that remarkable conclusion from 2013 speaks to the evidence of China’s access to the fiber optics communications of the U.S. government and military, its communications infrastructure and its security and surveillance thereof.
It verifies the outsourcing of illegal surveillance to third parties by leveraging the public-private interface.
It verifies the involvement of known domestic hostiles to the American people: NSA, DOJ, FBI, DOD, DHS, etal.
It also verifies how James Yoo occupied the position of “head of global security” at Global Crossing when he interfaced with CFIUS to facilitate the ST Telemedia deal comprising the handover to China in 2003.
Do you now see why Yoo’s house and all of the evidence likely stored inside of it blew-up?
Let’s continue.
2023/Biden Administration
Joe Biden’s massive amounts of corruption, criminality and outright treason come at the hands of the criminal enterprise branded call The Biden Crime Family.
The Biden Crime Family is fully enveloped by CFIUS, Global Crossing and its transatlantic fiber optic cables carrying U.S. government and military communications compromised by Biden’s principal, China.
The FISA/FISC/702 components are remarkable given how they thread through and underpin the lion’s share of crimninality and treason derived from ‘Dynastic Bush,’ including GWB, BHO and JRB.
Do you remember the 05 Jan 17 “by the book” holdover meeting in Obama’s Oval Office where Joe Biden conspired to move forward with the plan to target Trump with “Russian collusion” and where FISA/FISC/702 created the authority to build that fraudulent narrative?
All of that also threads through the inseparable fake pandemic and stolen 2020 election.
Yoo “successfully led and managed Global Crossing’s (GC) technical and security team throughout the CFIUS process resulting in regulatory approval from the United States Government for Singapore Technologies Telemedia’s purchase of GC on or around late September 2003.“
Yoo therefore facilitated the outsourcing of U.S. goverment and military fiber optics access to infracture and surveillance to third parties, supposed allies and hostiles; primarily China.
Yoo possessed appropriate security clearances for the domain[s] of his work at Global Crossing – a private-public interface – and so he had direct knowledge of secret and compartmentalized information about U.S. government and military communications that were permitted by CFIUSvis-a-vis his vetting to come under China’s ownership where he facilitated the deal relative to national security.
Yoo also reasonably had deep knowledge of widespread FISA/FISC/702 abuses that drag the last eight years of “orange man bad” and all of those crimes; including treason and COVID crimes against humanity, into the mix.
Now factor in the Intelligence Community’s resetting of the 2024 ballot to exclude both Trump and Biden as I’ve been reporting on for the better part of a year.
That effort requires IC operations that I have analyzed extensively.
One aspect of those operations is the pending late impeachment of Joe Biden to ensure his removal from the 2024 ballot [not technically, but in the eyes of his base of already dismayed and exasperated “voters”].
During the Biden Administration and once these matters coalesced to become incinderary and requiring tidying-up, Yoo’s house blew-up with him and all of his ecidence inside it.
Final Remarks
When the timing of the 2024 election is overlaid with Biden’s pending impeachment and the need for further IC clean-up operations, the aggregate Yoo fact set and the timing of that fact set indicate that James Yoo’s explosive demise bears all of the hallmarks of an Intelligence Community cover-up operation to help Joe Biden tidy things up before his forced exit and exclusion from the 2024 ballot.
I wonder what James Yoo knew about Ukraine?
If Yoo thought there was more to James Yoo’s exploding house, Yoo were right.
-End-
Leave a ReplyCancel reply