Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
US spy chief Clapper defends Prism and phone surveillance
Economic advantage is certainly way 'up there' in the minds behind the electronic spying; but I hardly think it is the ONLY or even the most important objective. Knowing what everyone is doing, thinking, buying, selling, where they are, who they know, what they know, et al. gives those with this information control or potential control over the persons and the societies. That, along with economic advantages through spying and the ability to track and, if they want, compromise or capture anyone almost anywhere [I think you, perhaps, can still speak freely in Butan :Telephone:] is the sum total of what they aim for......omnipotence - which is always corrupt and corrupting.
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Reply
I suspect the very worst thing the government could have done was to have raided the Guardian and destroy it's laptop hard drives, not to mention arresting Greenwald's partner.

The world is changing and the old authoritarian responses are just too clumsy and counterproductive.

Quote:GCHQ accused of monitoring privileged emails between lawyers and clientsAllegation relates to eight Libyan nationals and comes in wake of Guardian's revelations about GCHQ and Tempora programme

Owen Bowcott, legal affairs correspondent
The Guardian, Sunday 13 October 2013 19.17 BST




GCHQ is probably intercepting legally privileged communications between lawyers and their clients, according to a detailed claim filed on behalf of eight Libyans involved in politically sensitive compensation battles with the UK.
The accusation has been lodged with Britain's most secret court, the investigatory powers tribunal (IPT), which examines complaints about the intelligence services and government use of covert surveillance. Most of its hearings are in private.
The allegation has emerged in the wake of the Guardian's revelations about extensive monitoring by GCHQ of the internet and telephone calls, chiefly through its Tempora programme.
The system taps directly into fibre optic cables carrying the bulk of online exchanges transiting the UK and enables intelligence officials to screen vast quantities of data.
The eight Libyans, members of two families now living in the country's capital, Tripoli, say they were victims of rendition. They claim they were kidnapped by MI6 and US intelligence agencies, forcibly returned to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi's regime and tortured. At that time, in 2004, when Gaddafi relinquished his nuclear weapons programme, intelligence relations between Tripoli, London and Washington were close.
A landmark legal action between Abdel Belhaj, 47, and the UK government is due to be heard at the high court shortly to resolve the kidnap and torture allegations.
But lawyers working with the human rights group Reprieve fear their ability to fight the case will be undermined because their legal correspondence may be surreptitiously monitored.
Sami al-Saadi, another Libyan dissident, and his family have already settled their claim against the government for a payment of £2.2m. The Foreign Office did not, however, admit liability.
The "notice of complaint" by solicitors at Leigh Day on behalf of Reprieve and the Libyans has already been made to the IPT. It lists the Security Service (MI5), the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6), the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) in Cheltenham, the home secretary and the foreign secretary as respondents. It calls for the case to be heard in open court.
The claims states: "There is a strong likelihood that the respondents have intercepted and are intercepting the applicants' legally privileged communications in respect of the [cases]." Belhaj and Saadi were prominent military leaders of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) during the Libyan revolution, the document points out, and are therefore "likely to be of interest" to UK intelligence agencies.
Additionally, the complaint maintains, GCHQ's capability has enabled it to engage in "mass scale communication gathering as part of the tempora programme" that "monitors and collates, on a blanket basis, the full range of electronic communications...". Information obtained is routinely stored for three days but held for longer for those "deemed to be of interest".
The complaint quotes as evidence accounts published in the Guardian about the Tempora system based on documents revealed by the US National Security Agency (NSA) whistleblower Edward Snowden as part of his attempt to expose what he has called "the largest programme of suspicionless surveillance in human history".
'Legal professional privilege', as it is formally known, allows legal advice between clients and their lawyers to be kept private. According to the Law Society, which represents solicitors in England and Wales, it ensures that "certain documents and information provided to lawyers cannot be disclosed at all. It recognises the client's fundamental human right to be candid with his legal adviser, without fear of later disclosure to his prejudice. It is an absolute right and cannot be overidden by any other interest."
Reprieve and Leigh Day allege the surveillance breaches the European convention on human rights, which guarantees respect for private and family life and the right to a fair trial.
The only legal exemption for intercepting emails, the submission argues, would be for the prevention of crime a consideration not relevant in this context. It also questions whether the Libyans have been discriminated against by being subjected to surveillance that would not have been imposed on UK nationals.
The Libyans' lawyers are seeking from the government a declaration that intercepting their privileged communications was unlawful, an injunction preventing interception and "just satisfaction" for breach of their human rights.


The complaint includes articles from the Guardian detailing the workings of the Tempora programme and the text of a fax sent by Sir Mark Allen, who was head of counter-terrorism at MI6 in 2004, to Mousa Koussa, then head of the Libyan external security organisation. It was recovered from Koussa's office following the revolution that toppled Gaddaffi.
The message read: "I congratulate you on the safe arrival of [Belhaj].
This was the least we could do for you and for Libya to demonstrate the remarkable relationship we have built up over recent years."
Belhaj was founder and leader of the LIFG which aimed to overthrow Gaddafi. He fled Libya in 1998 following an unsuccessful uprising and moved to China where he met his Moroccan wife, Fatima Boudchar. He was deported from China to Malaysia in 2004. From there he was forcibly transferred to Libya.
Saadi and his Algerian wife, Karima Ait Baaziz, and family had also moved to China where they were eventually detained in Hong Kong.
The CIA and British authorities are alleged to have conspired to return them to Tripoli on a charter flight.
Saadi said he was repeatedly tortured in a Libyan prison, being assaulted with fists, sticks, whips and rubber hosing. He claims he was interrogated by British and Libyan officials. Belhaj, who is now a politician in Libya, also maintains that he was tortured after being returned to Tripoli.
Cori Cryder, who heads Reprieve's legal team on abuses in counter-terroism, said: "It is bad enough that UK security services helped kidnap and render young children and a pregnant woman into the hands of Colonel Gaddafi.
"To add insult to injury, they are now trying to undermine their right to a fair trial by spying on private communications with their lawyers. UK complicity in Gaddafi's torture of his opponents is a shameful incident that needs to be opened up to public scrutiny not subject to more skulduggery from GCHQ." The Home Office declined to comment last night on the grounds that the legal action between Belhaj and the government was continuing.
The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge.
Carl Jung - Aion (1951). CW 9, Part II: P.14
Reply
David Guyatt Wrote:I suspect the very worst thing the government could have done was to have raided the Guardian and destroy it's laptop hard drives, not to mention arresting Greenwald's partner.

The world is changing and the old authoritarian responses are just too clumsy and counterproductive.

I don't suggest holding your breath waiting for a change in 'policy'.....they are authoritarian and clumsy and will STOMP on rights and privacy as they please until they are rendered powerless by the People.
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Reply
Quote:Brazil announces secure email to counter US spying
[Image: 6a0e92b2a140fcbf22278d698a2d70d430f5d72d.jpg]Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff in Brasilia on October 8, 2013


AFP - Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff announced Sunday that her government was creating a secure email system to try and shield official communications from spying by the United States and other countries.
"We need more security on our messages to prevent possible espionage," Rousseff said on Twitter, ordering the Federal Data Processing Service, or SERPRO, to implement a safe email system throughout the federal government.
The agency, which falls under Brazil's Finance Ministry, develops secure systems for online tax returns and also creates new passports.
The move came after Rousseff publicly condemned spying against Brazilian government agencies attributed to the United States and Canada.
"This is the first step toward extending the privacy and inviolability of official posts," Rousseff said.
After bringing her complaints against US intelligence agencies to the United Nations General Assembly last month and canceling a state visit to Washington, Rousseff announced that the country will host an international conference on Internet governance in April.
In recent months, Brazilian media outlets have published documents showing that the US National Security Agency's spied on Rousseff's official communications, her close associates and state-controlled oil giant Petrobras.
The information was revealed by Edward Snowden, a 30-year-old former NSA contractor who has sought refuge in Russia and is wanted by the United States after revealing details of the agency's massive snooping activities.

France24

The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge.
Carl Jung - Aion (1951). CW 9, Part II: P.14
Reply

"Edward Snowden is a Patriot": Ex-NSA CIA, FBI and Justice Whistleblowers Meet Leaker in Moscow




In a Democracy Now! special, we spend the hour with four former U.S. intelligence officials all whistleblowers themselves who have just returned from visiting National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden in Russia. They are former CIA analyst Ray McGovern, former FBI agent Coleen Rowley, former National Security Agency senior executive Thomas Drake, and former U.S. Justice Department ethics adviser Jesselyn Radack, now of the Government Accountability Project. On Wednesday, the group presented Snowden with an award from the Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence. "In our visit, we told Edward Snowden that he had begun the debate by disclosing to American citizens what was going on this massive spying upon American citizens," Rowley says. "We were happy to tell him the debate has begun, but he is very concerned, and this is actually the reason he has sacrificed so much: He wants to see these laws, these secret interpretations of the law, I should say, fixed."


Transcript

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: For more, we're joined by four former U.S. intelligence officials who met with Snowden to give him an award for integrity in intelligence. In Minneapolis, we're joined by Coleen Rowley. She was a special agent for the FBI from 1981 to 2004. She was a division legal counsel for 13 years, taught constitutional rights to FBI agents and police. Rowley also testified before Congress about the FBI's failure to help prevent the 9/11 attacks. She was awarded Time Person of the Year.
In Washington, D.C., we're joined by Ray McGovern, the former senior CIA analyst whose duties included preparing the President's Daily Brief and chairing National Intelligence Estimates. He did that intelligence brief for former President George H.W. Bush.
We're also joined by Thomas Drake, National Security Agency whistleblower. In 2010, the Obama administration charged Drake with violating the Espionage Act after he was accused of leaking classified information to the press about waste and mismanagement at the agency. The charges were later dropped.
We're also joined by Jesselyn Radack, national security and human rights director at the Government Accountability Project, former ethics adviser to the United States Department of Justice.
We welcome you all back from Russia. I want to start with Thomas Drake, you yourself having worked for the National Security Agency. Tell us about this trip that you took to Russia to give Edward Snowden an award.
THOMAS DRAKE: Well, the Integrity in Intelligence Award is given to the recipient, and we make every effort to actually deliver it and present it in person. And given that he was in Russia, we made arrangements to go to Russia and present him with the Sam Adams Integrity in Intelligence Award.
AMY GOODMAN: Who was Sam Adams?
THOMAS DRAKE: I'll let Ray McGovern share the history of that, because Ray really has the background, as well as the personal knowledge, of what Sam Adams did during the Vietnam War era.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, Ray, you're sitting right next to Thomas Drake in the studios in Washington, D.C., just back from Russia. Tell us about this award.
RAY McGOVERN: Well, Amy, Sam Adams was a colleague of mine. He entered the agency under President Kennedy the same day I did. He was given the account to count up how many communist forces were under arms in South Vietnam, and discovered in 1967 that there were twice as many as our generals in Saigon would admit to. They said there could be no more than 299,000 enemy under arms. The precision of that number, sound like 1,429 people gassed to death in Damascus? The specificity of the thing gives it away. In any case, he fought the good fight, but his uppers, the superiors, director helms, caved and would not tell the president the real story. And Sam went to his death with profound regret that he didn't go outside of channels. He stayed inside channels, where he got diddled and diddled and diddled by the inspector general of the Pentagon, of the CIA. And had he spoken out in 1967, halfway through that war, those of you who know what the Vietnam Memorial looks like, the whole left part of that memorial wouldn't be there, because there'd be no names to chisel into that granite. And Sam went to his early death with profound regret that he hadn't spoken out.
And so it is incredibly appropriate that this award for integrity in intelligence, given mostly to whistleblowers, but occasionally to people who do the job honestly in placeand that is Tom Fingar, for example, the last awardee last January, who shepherded the estimate in 2007 which said Iran stopped working on a nuclear weapon at the end of 2003my arithmetic is right, that's 10 years agoand has not resumed work on a nuclear weapon. That judgment has been reiterated, revalidated every year since. And in [2007, '08], it played a huge role in preventing Bush and Cheney from starting a war with Iran. And if you don't believe me, just read Bush's memoirs.
AMY GOODMAN: And explain why you compare Edward Snowden to Sam Adams.
RAY McGOVERN: Well, Edward Snowden came by very sensitive information, which he recognized that he had a choice. He could sit around and say, "Well, you know, isn't that funny?" and draw his $100,000 salary, be very, very comfortable in Honolulu, but he decided, "Well, you know, I took aI took a solemn oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. I seelook what Tom Drake has done. I see what happened to Bradley Manning, where Julian Assange is. If I want to get this information into the mainstream, I got to get out of Dodge, OK?" And very cleverly, he got in touch with Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitrus, met them in Hong Kong, gave them all the information that he wanted to get out, and then found himself kind of stranded there. To the rescue? WikiLeaks, in the person of Sarah Harrison, who arranged with the Russian consulate there his onward travel to Latin America. Latin America? Yeah, he was going to transit Moscow so he wouldn't have to go the other way, where he could be stopped.
Now, this thing is full of ironies, OK? Today is Columbus Day. I was thinking on the way in, my favorite history on the discovery of America, it started this way. ColumbusAmerica was discovered by a man who was looking for something else, and the next two centuries were spent trying to find a way around or through it. History is like that, full of ironies, very chancy. Well, here's Edward Snowden. He's in Hong Kong. He wants to get to Latin America to a secure place. He's on his way to Moscow, in transithe was ticketed forward to Latin America. And in the process, the U.S. revokes his passport. He's stranded. He spends the next month in the transit part of Sheremetyevo airport, and he seeks asylum in Russia. What's the end result? He ends up in the place which is by far the most secure place on the globe, because no SEAL Team 6 or fancy drone is going to violate Russian sovereignty by taking a shot at Edward Snowden.
AMY GOODMAN: I'm going to break, and then we're going to come back to this discussion, and want to hear from Jesselyn Radack about this trip that the four of you took to Russia, and hear from Coleen Rowley on what are solutions that Edward Snowden is suggesting, what legislation is there right now to allow the people of the United States to debate the issues of spying and surveillance, what serves national security, and what simply criminalizes whistleblowers and the press. Stay with us.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: We're joined by the four former intelligence officials who went to Russia last week, and we believe they're the first Americans to meet with Edward Snowden who have come from the United States, and they came to give him an award for integrity in intelligence. Our guests are Ray McGovern, a former CIA analyst; Thomas Drake, who worked for the NSA; Coleen Rowley, former FBI agent; and Jesselyn Radack, who we're going to turn to right now.
Jesselyn Radack is national security and human rights director of the Government Accountability Project. She was an attorney in the Justice Department's Professional Responsibility Advisory Office during the Bush administration, during the John Walker Lindh case. You may remember, he was found in Afghanistan. And she raised legal and ethical objections over the questioning of Lindh without his lawyer and revealed misconduct by the Department of Justice. She was eventually forced out.
So, Jesselyn Radack, talk about the actual journey the four of you took. You left from where in the United States? And how did you make your way to Moscow and then to see Edward Snowden?
JESSELYN RADACK: Allwell, three of usRay and Tom and Ilive in the D.C. metropolitan area, so we left from Dulles and took a connecting flight to Moscow. And this was all carefully arranged, as it has to be. It always seems funny to me that people keep asking where he is and who's protecting him, rather than focusing on the underlying reasons of why it would be necessary to be in hiding from your own country.
But all four of us were greatly honored to be able to be the first Americans to see him since Hong Kong and to get over there and be greeted with open arms by the Russian governmentAnatoly Kucherena, in particularand actually be able to see Ed and Sarah Harrison and just give them a hug and let them know that we had complete solidarity with what they were doing. And I know it probably feels very isolating for them, given all the vitriol you hear coming from the U.S. government.
AMY GOODMAN: Where you were in Moscow?
JESSELYN RADACK: Yeah, I don't know the answer to that. You know, I couldn't tell you, even if I did. The security is a huge issue, obviously, especially as we haveyou know, there's a lot of issues with security, especially considering the director ofthe former director of NSA and CIA, Michael Hayden, and the House Intelligence Committee chair, Mike Rogers, joke about putting him on the kill list. And there's been a worldwide manhunt for Mr. Snowdenthat's no secret.
So I think people should really look at the question behind why there wouldhe would be in any kind of hiding or in an undisclosed location, and why someone who tells the truth and blows the whistle on massive illegality by the U.S. governmentwhy they would have to go to another country to do so and then seek asylum from yet another country in order to gain protection.
AMY GOODMAN: Jesselyn Radack, what did Edward Snowden tell you? And what did you tell him as you presented the award?
JESSELYN RADACK: As we presented the award, we each read from various other famous people in history, including Martin Luther King, whopeople who were also smeared as being traitors and turncoats and hurting the country, and later history realized they were heroesother people, like Ben Franklin. We talked about that with him and how he was supported, that despite what the U.S. government is saying about 60 percent of our country is in support of NSA reform.
And I think, despite all that he's dealing with, he is incredibly focused on whistleblower protection, on surveillance reform and on journalist-source confidentiality. So even though he has all of these other things going on, for him, he is incredibly focused on surveillance reform and that it be meaningful. And while there are a number of bills before Congress right now, most of them focus on the PATRIOT Act Section 215 and very little on FISA Section 702.
So he was very well versed, very centered, very balanced and very engaging, and has a wicked sense of humor, which was very, very fun. So I think, you know, we both felt mutually supported, and he knows that he's not alone and that he has a lot of people in the United States and around the world who are supporting his endeavors.
AMY GOODMAN: You mention Benjamin Franklin, and I wanted to turn to Coleen Rowley, a former FBI agent, in Minneapolis, was awarded Time Person of the Year for her work around 9/11. She was a division legal counsel for 13 years and taught constitutional rights to FBI and police, also testified before Congress about the FBI's failure to help prevent the 9/11 attacks. Coleen, what does Ben Franklin have to do with Edward Snowden?
COLEEN ROWLEY: Well, most people would not have any way of knowing that, significantly, that one of the Founding Fathers of our country was vilified exactly the same and for the same reason as Edward Snowden. In 1773 or '74, Ben Franklin was postmaster general, and it came to his attention that there were communications between the British and the colonist overseers that American colonists didwould not be accorded the same civil rights as British citizens, andbecause they thought they had to keep the American colonists, you know, at bay or whatever, so they were not according American colonists the same rights. And Ben Franklin, to his credit, became a whistleblower in 1773, only to be vilified and called every name in the book by the British and by the American governor at the time. He was actually stripped of his postmaster general status. So we can see how history and time changes everything. And in the case of Ben Franklin, it changed rather quickly.
AMY GOODMAN: I want to go to Edward Snowden in his own words, in his interview with Glenn Greenwald and Laura Poitras from June in Hong Kong, when he first revealed who he was. Snowden explained why he made the decision to become a whistleblower.
EDWARD SNOWDEN: When your in positions of privileged access, like a systems administrator for these sort of the intelligence community agencies, you're exposed to a lot more information on a broader scale than the average employee, and because of that, you see things that may be disturbing. But over the course of a normal person's career, you'd only see one or two of these instances. When you see everything, you see them on a more frequent basis, and you recognize that some of these things are actually abuses. And when you talk to people about them in a place like this, where this is the normal state of business, people tend not to take them very seriously and, you know, move on from them. But over time that awareness of wrongdoing sort of builds up, and you feel compelled to talk about it. And the more you talk about it, the more you're ignored, the more you're told it's not a problem, until eventually you realize that these things need to be determined by the public, not by somebody who was simply hired by the government.
AMY GOODMAN: That was Edward Snowden when he first came to Hong Kong, interviewed by journalists Laura Poitras and Glenn Greenwald. I want to turn back to Thomas Drake, who, you, yourself, worked for the National Security Agency for many years. Can you talk about which of Snowden's disclosures, of the many documents he leakedwhich of his disclosures about the NSA were most important?
THOMAS DRAKE: Well, the first one is, no doubt, thatit was the dash-80 order, compelling Verizon, through, you know, a secret FISA court order, submitted by the FBI, to turn over every phone record that it has each and every day to NSA. That's the first one, on awe're talking about a truly vast scale, well over 100 million phone numbers, without suspicion, without anyany probable cause, not tied to any kind of investigation of any sort, just simply being turned over to add to the haystack.
The second one that comes to mind would be the PRISM disclosures. This goes beyond just the metadata, which in itself is quite extraordinary, but gets to the heart of content of subscribers of U.S.-based Internet service providers hosting servers on which millions and millions of subscribers were determined, in terms of the definition of their foreignness, giving NSA extraordinary and unprecedented access to those accounts on a routine basis through various technical means, either direct access or being afforded access by these same providers.
And I think the third mechanism, actually, is beyond just the vast violations of the sovereignty of U.S. citizens, but also now the surveillance state going well beyond the borders and the boundaries of the United States and violating the sovereignty and integrity of nations, as well as individual citizens in other countries, through various arrangements, through telecommunication providers, as well as the internal secret services of respective host nations. I mean, this isthis is truly unprecedented in history. And what we're seeing is secrecy and surveillance are completely subverting security and liberty, not just in the United States, but for many, many citizens around the world.
Those are the three that stand out for me, although there are any number of other disclosures that were made that also talkspeak to economic espionage, you know, financial espionage, as well as other forms of misuse and abuse of access for the purpose of the United States gaining upper hand across any number of areas.
AMY GOODMAN: Ray McGovern, you said over the weekend, as you visited with Edward Snowden, that he had no top-secret information, as you were questioned about whether the information that Edward Snowden brought with him from the United States was turned over to Russian authorities, where he is now, or Chinese authorities when he was in Hong Kong.
RAY McGOVERN: Well, Amy, it had to do with this red herring about the four laptops that he took with him to Hong Kong. You don't store a lot of information on laptops. You store information on other media. So, in a way, when I was asked that question by Mark Hosenball from Reuters, "What about the laptops?" I probably should have said, "What about the laptops?" Instead, I said, "You don't store information on laptops." Laptops were, in a sense, a diversion. What he gave to Glenn Greenwald and Laura Poitras in Hong Kong was a different matter altogether. The laptops were incidental to that. So, that was the only point that I made on that, and it seemed to be a sort of ancillary point that didn't make much significance. I noticed it's in the New York Daily News today.
AMY GOODMAN: Yeah. The secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court has approved a request by the National Security Agency to extend its dragnet collection of U.S. phone records. The Office of Director of National Intelligence James Clapper disclosed the court's approval on Friday. Clapper has previously denied before Congress that the NSA collects such data, but the Obama administration has touted a policy of declassifying select information following leaks by NSA whistleblower Ed Snowden. I want to turn to that now-famous clip of Clapper in March telling Democratic Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon the National Security Agency does not wittingly collect data of millions of Americans.
SEN. RON WYDEN: Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?
JAMES CLAPPER: No, sir.
SEN. RON WYDEN: It does not?
JAMES CLAPPER: Not wittingly. There are cases where they could inadvertently, perhaps, collect, but not wittingly.
AMY GOODMAN: That's James Clapper. He has now admitted that statement was false and apologized to Congress. In June, Clapper sent a letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee saying he misunderstood the question: quote, "I have thought long and hard to re-create what went through my mind at the time," he said. Clapper wrote, "My response was clearly erroneousfor which I apologize."
I want to go back to Coleen Rowley, former FBI, a special agent from 1981 to 2004, again, named Person of the Year by Time magazine after the 9/11 attacks. Coleen, you recently were at Congress to hear more testimony for officials. This moment where Clapper didn't tell the truth and now said he's trying to figure out what was going through his mind to lie to Congress, are these officials sworn in when they testify?
COLEEN ROWLEY: Well, I don't know if he was sworn in that other time, but the October 2nd hearing, which was to discuss possible reform of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, neither Alexander, General Alexander, nor Clapper were sworn in. And this was in contrast to the law professors, who merely gave their opinion on the law, afterwards who were forced to raise their right hand and swear to tell the truth. So, you know, when Edward Snowden says it's not oversight, it's undersight, I have been saying it's not oversight, it's overlook, because, in essence, the directors who are fact witnesses to what has occurred and have dissembled to the American public and not told the truth, and even to CongressSenator Wyden was absolutely stunned to know that there were secret interpretations of FISA law, and yet have James Clapper tell the American public the opposite.
AMY GOODMAN: The New York Post published an article called "Rogues Go to Russia to Celebrate Snowden." In it, journalist S.A. Miller wrote, quote, "A fan club of US traitors went all the way to Russia to give an award to their hero, terror-watch secrets-spiller Edward Snowden." Jesselyn Radack, you worked in the Justice Department. You were an attorney there in the Justice Department's Professional Responsibility Advisory Office. Can you respond? "Rogues" to Russiathey're talking about you.
JESSELYN RADACK: Yes, I understand that, despite the fact that I'm a legal ethicist and have served on the D.C. Bar Legal Ethics Committee. Tom Drake was completely vindicated. There's nothing traitorist about him. He went through all internal channels that he could have gone through as an NSA whistleblowerto his boss, to the NSA general counsel, to the Department of Defense inspector general, and to two 9/11 congressional committeesand they turned around and prosecuted him for espionage, which is one of the most serious charges you can level against an American. Now, if the New York Post bothered to do its homework, it would have realized that all 10 felony charges against Thomas Drake were dropped, and the case collapsed in spectacular fashion. It would realize that Coleen Rowley was never under any kind of criminal cloud, and instead, Time made her Person of the Year in 2003, the year of the whistleblower. And in my own case, I have been vindicated by the D.C. Bar and by the U.S. Attorney's Office in D.C. So, I suggest that the New York Post quit trying to do the government's work of turning patriots into traitors and confusing fear with freedom and confusing dissent with disloyalty. I am glad to be in the company of people who went over to see Ed. And Ed is part of that same group. And while history will remember Ed favorably, I am quite sure it is not going to remember New York Post headlines to the effect of the one you read.
AMY GOODMAN: Let me put that question to Ray McGovern, about calling you rogues or traitors, supporting a traitor. You were a top CIA briefer for President George H.W. Bush. You worked for the Central Intelligence Agency. What is your response to what is loyal, what is being patriotic, and what is breaking the law?
RAY McGOVERN: Well, sticks and stones may hurt my bones, and so forth. You know, it's almost laughable, if it weren't so serious. I mean, take NBC, for example. Their top foreign correspondent was in Russia, just a few days before we were, interviewing Anna Chapman, the fiery redhead who's going to start her own TV program, and they wanted to ask her about her wedding proposal to Edward Snowden. Give me a break. That's all over NBC. No one asked any of us to be on the Sunday TV shows yesterday. Maybe that's asking too much. But the mainstream media here is laughable in terms of the way they treat this. They're very much part of the government apparatus, and they follow the government line. So, if they're going to call me rogue, well, I've been called worse things.
AMY GOODMAN: ... then come back to some interesting news that The Guardian is reporting on the editor of The New York Times, Jill Abramson, about what British officials wanted from her. We're talking with the four former intelligence officials in the United States who went to Russia to bestow upon Edward Snowden an Integrity in Intelligence Award: Coleen Rowley of the FBI; Jesselyn Radack of the State Departmentof the Justice Department, rather; Ray McGovern of the CIA; and Thomas Drake of the NSA. Stay with us.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I'm Amy Goodman. The Guardian is reporting the editor of The New York Times, Jill Abramson, has confirmed that senior British officials attempted to persuade her to hand over secret documents leaked by the former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden. Abramson said she was approached by the British embassy in Washington after it was announced that The New York Times was collaborating with The Guardian to explore some of the files disclosed by Snowden. Among the files are several relating to the activities of GCHQ, the agency responsible for signals interception in Britain. She said, quote, "They were hopeful [that] we would relinquish any material [that] we might be reporting on, relating to Edward Snowden. Needless to say I considered what they told me, and said no."
Thomas Drake, you worked for the National Security Agency. You were prosecuted by the U.S. government for attempting to leak information about what you were most disturbed by in the National Security Agency. Can you respond to this latest news of the British intelligence trying to get the head of The New York Times to hand over the NSA documents of Edward Snowden?
THOMAS DRAKE: Well, it reminds me of the very reason why we had the first American Revolution and why there was a First Amendment to our Constitution. This is clearly a brazen attempt to remove from public disclosure and public interest the extraordinary revelations of Edward Snowden in terms of the institutionalized surveillance state and NSA's direct partnership with GCHQ, not just on ayou know, on an international scale. And so, you know, this just strikes again at the reality that it's extremely dangerous in today's world, in the United States as well as within the United Kingdom, to speak truth to or of power, and if you do so, it becomes a criminal act. Yet the very individuals in the United States, through a whole litany of lies before Congress and the public, as has been clearly demonstrated over the last number of yearsthe fact that we've essentially had the equivalent of a constitutional coup d'état since 9/11, we've come off the rails in terms of the rule of law, and we're simplywe're simply going to get all the data we can, no matter whatwhere it is and no matter what form it takes, because we just need it in case we need to protect our nation ostensibly under that label and mantle of national security, which I've argued has really become the new state religion in the United States and is something you don't question.
AMY GOODMAN: Thomas Drake, if you
THOMAS DRAKE: The First Amendmentthe
AMY GOODMAN: If you could say what happened to you, and compare it to the case of Edward Snowden?
THOMAS DRAKE: Well, I was there from the foundations of the secret surveillance state. Within just days of 9/11, I becameit became known to me. I discovered, much to my horror, that Pandora's box had been opened up, and the United States had set aside the Fourth Amendment and had set aside the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. I mean, we have to remember, this goes back to the 1970s. And so, it was to my horror that I was eyewitness to the subversion of our own Constitution, the Constitution in which I had taken an oath to support and defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic. And so, I knew that if I remained silent, that I would be complicit in the government conduct in violation of the rule of law and the Constitution. And I would not do so.
And so, I began a multi-year set of activities to blow the whistle on the secret surveillance programs that ultimately were the foundation, in those first years after 9/11, that became institutionalized. And then we have the prima facie evidence, the documented evidence, that Edward Snowden has disclosed, with extraordinary conviction of courage, to make it available in the public interest, because you cannot have governance in the United States, you know, without the consent of the governed, and what we have is a secret government who's governing without consent, and is doing so in secret coercion.
AMY GOODMAN: Are Snowden's disclosures changing the way the NSA works? I want to talk about legislation right now. A Republican congressmember who co-authored the PATRIOT Act is poised to introduce a new bill to curb spying by the National Security Agency. Congressmember Jim Sensenbrenner helped to expand spying powers under U.S. intelligence agencies under George W. Bush, but now says the programs have gone too far. Coleen Rowley, why don't you take this one, in Minneapolis? Former FBI agent, you know, Time whistleblower of the year, you worked for the agency for decades. What about what is being proposed now as a result of what Edward Snowden has revealed?
COLEEN ROWLEY: Well, our visitin our visit, we weretold Edward Snowden that he had begun the debate by disclosing to American citizens what was going on, this massive spying upon American citizens. We were happy to tell him the debate has begun, but he is very concernedand this isthis is actually the reason he has sacrificed so much, is that he wants to see these laws, these secret interpretations of law, I should say, fixed.
And, of course, the debate has begun. The Senate Judiciary has had hearings. They have heard, unfortunately, from Clapper and Alexander, who have not been truthful. For instance, Alexander has claimed that the NSA's massive spying has thwarted 54 incidents of terrorism affecting the United States. This was immediately debunked bymostly by the press, and the FBI then later testified in hearings that, no, it's really only one example they can come up with, and it's actually a very flimsy example of a case involving giving a few thousand dollars to Shabab.
So, here's the problem. Senator Feinstein and others are able to, kind of in a very misleading way, revise history and claim that if NSA had been collecting the massive data before 9/11, these attacks would not have occurred. They can do this because many people have forgotten that the 9/11 Commission and the various inquiries concluded just the opposite of what Dianne Feinstein is saying. Back then, the rationale was that the dots were not connected, and the dots were not connected because there was too much intelligence flowing in. Officials claim that intelligence is like a firehose, and we can't get a sip from a firehose. That was the excuse for why they had all this information, specific clues includingincluding hijackers or terrorist suspects who came into California, and CIA Director Tenet never told the FBI; of course, the case in Minnesota, where the FBI did not itself act upon intelligence; and the amount of intelligence that was not even read, let alone appreciated, assessed and then acted upon. So this whole history is being revised and turned on its head now
AMY GOODMAN: So, this collection of data
COLEEN ROWLEY: to try to thwart reform.
AMY GOODMAN: So this collection of data is actually hindering, hurting national security, because there is too much information pouring in, and it's hard for them to sift through this. I wanted to go to Ray McGovern, former CIA analyst. Earlier this month, during a cybersecurity panel hosted by The Washington Post, former National Security Agency Director Michael Hayden joked about putting Edward Snowden on a kill list after learning of his nomination for a European human rights award. Hayden said, quote, "I must admit, in my darker moments over the past several months, I'd also thought of nominating Mr. Snowden, but it was for a different list." Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Chair Mike Rogers, responded, "I can help you with that." Ray McGovern, can you comment on this? And how ishow is Edward Snowden getting by in Russia?
RAY McGOVERN: Well, I asked Ed whether he was aware of these suggestions, shall we say, that he be put on the kill list for assassination. He kind of winced and shook his head, as if to say, "My god, you know, what has our country become?" It's unconscionable that these people would joke about things like that, but it shows the poverty of thought and the determination to make thisI call him a patriot, not a hero. Heroes can be dismissed. Edward Snowden is a patriot, OK? And it's easier to dismiss this fellow if you frontally attack him personally, the way these folks have done.
I want to say one more thing. Tom Drake, when he was acquitted, the judge upbraided the Justice Department, saying, "You had no business persecuting this person for four years." Guess what? Tom had an experience in Moscow when he met Ed Snowden, and I'm sure Tom was thinking, "Wow! I guess some good can come out of this," because it was Ed Snowden who freely said, right upfront, that it was Tom's example, what happened to him by going through channels, that persuaded Ed Snowden to seek a more circuitous route, and now he is in total safety, at least for this year.
AMY GOODMAN: Your thoughts, very quickly, on that, Tom Drake? We just have 10 seconds.
THOMAS DRAKE: Well, I feel extraordinary kinship with Edward Snowden. I mean, he's held up the mirror to the government. He wants the Constitution restored. He wants the rule of law restored. He wants the surveillance state disbanded. I mean, that's the reality. It's gone far beyond its mandate to deal with terrorism and other threats, threats to the nation.
AMY GOODMAN: And finally, Sarah Harrison could be also very seriously endangered by all that she has done, targeted by the British and U.S. governments. Was there concern about this, Tom?
THOMAS DRAKE: Yes. Well, I mean, she sacrificed herself and essentially is, in her own way, under her ownher own asylum, by virtue of not being
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Reply
British snooping battle continues apace.

It's nice to see that the man in charge of Parliamentary oversight - Malcolm Rifkind - is the usual political placement type who won't take on the security and intelligence services, let alone try to ensure they operate within the law. Weak, weak, weak... Imo, of course.

Quote:Snowden leaks: MI5 chief accused of using 'foolish self-serving rhetoric'Former DPP Lord Macdonald dismisses Andrew Parker's claim that greater scrutiny would harm intelligence agencies

Lord Macdonald: law has to be master of spying technology



Nick Hopkins and Matthew Taylor
theguardian.com, Monday 14 October 2013 15.23 BST
[ATTACH=CONFIG]5396[/ATTACH]
Lord Macdonald called for an urgent review of the oversight regime of MI5, MI6 and GCHQ. Photograph: Frank Baron for the Guardian
A former director of public prosecutions has launched a strident attack on the head of MI5 for using "foolish self-serving rhetoric" to resist legitimate calls for Britain's intelligence agencies to face more scrutiny in the face of revelations about their surveillance capabilities.
Lord Macdonald QC said it was wrong for Andrew Parker and other senior figures in the intelligence community to argue that greater scrutiny and more transparency would affect the ability of MI5, GCHQ and MI6 to do their work.
Arguing that the existing legislation governing the services was "anti-modern", the peer, now a defence lawyer, said that an urgent review of the oversight regime was needed to prevent an "an increasing subservience of democracy to the unaccountability of security power".
Writing in the Guardian, Macdonald was responding to Parker's claim last week that stories about GCHQ's mass surveillance programmes had been "a gift to terrorists", and that there was no need for more rigorous oversight.
The MI5's chief's views were shared by Sir Malcolm Rifkind, the chair of the intelligence services committee, which is supposed to provide parliamentary scutiny of the agencies.
Macdonald said Rifkind, who was in charge of GCHQ when he was foreign secretary, was "badly compromised" and appeared too close to the organisations he was supposed to be holding to acccount.
The laywer added that the disclosures from the whistleblower Edward Snowden had revealed "the sickly character" of the UK's current scrutiny regime, which needed an overhaul.
In his sharpest remarks, Macdonald said: "Worst of all has been the argument, heavily deployed in recent days, including by Sir Malcolm himself, that any more daylight than we currently enjoy simply assists the nation's enemies.
"Andrew Parker, the new director general of MI5, should be slower to employ this foolish, self-serving rhetoric, which naively begs a perfectly legitimate question: how should we ensure that those privileged to be granted special powers to intrude into everything that is private, serve a real public interest, rather than the dangerously false god of securitisation for its own sake?"
Macdonald is the latest heavyweight figure to enter the debate about surveillance. His comments come at the start of a week in which the deputy prime minister, Nick Clegg, will begin to assess what might be done to shine more light on the work of the agencies.
Macdonald praised the way technological innovations had enhanced human knowledge and engagement, but warned this had transformed the way spies go about their business.
"It has also meant that the spooks, who once sat in cubicles steaming open the glued-down flaps of a few dozen suspect envelopes, now have more fertile plains to furrow and the marvellous means to do it. Now they can steam open everything.
"This blinding transformation has careered into a world where current legislation is so anti-modern that it struggles to distinguish between miniature bugs screwed into telephone ear pieces, and remote tapping from old-world, long-gone GPO exchanges," the peer said.
He added: "So it seems very obvious that when it comes to surveillance and techniques of domestic spying, the law should be the master of technology. Anything else risks a spiralling out of control, an increasing subservience of democracy to the unaccountability of security power. This means, at the very least, that as technologies develop, parliament should consider afresh the rules that govern their use by state agencies."
Macdonald said nobody seemed to know which laws permitted spies "access to everything" and that the ISC should never again "be led by someone whom the public might perceive as having an axe to grind or an interest to defend. Not the least of the inadequacies exposed by fallout from the Snowden revelations has been the sickly character of parliamentary oversight of the security agencies, even after recent reforms."
He criticised the intelligence and security committee for conducting an apparently cursory inquiry, saying that its decision to go "into brief private session, only to emerge blinking into the daylight with protestations of apparent fealty towards the security services is a very poor substitute for grown-up scrutiny.
"Co-option is not a uniquely British problem, but it surely is underlined when, amazingly, the ISC is chaired by Sir Malcolm Rifkind who was once himself responsible for MI6 as foreign secretary."


Macdonald made clear he has no truck with those who believe the state could do without intelligence agencies, and he said transparency had to have its limits. He described the "Julian Assange philosophy" of full disclosure of state secrets and documents as "a childish stamp of the feet".
But he added that the trust the public had in the agencies was in danger of being eroded unless the weaknesses in the laws and in the scrutiny regimes were addressed, writing: "Nothing could be more damaging to this public support than a notion that, in pursuing a broadening vocation, the spies somehow find themselves squinting through lenses not just at the villains, but at the rest of us too."
Files leaked by Snowden show the British eavesdropping centre, GCHQ, and its US counterpart, the National Security Agency, have developed capabilities to undertake mass surveillance of the web and mobile phone networks. This is done by trawling the servers of internet companies and collecting raw data from the undersea cables that carry web traffic.
Two of the programmes, Prism and Tempora, can sweep up vast amounts of private data, which is shared between the two countries.
The Guardian recently revealed how GCHQ and the NSA have also successfully cracked much of the online encryption relied upon by hundreds of millions of businesses and individuals to protect their privacy.
The arguments over Snowden's leaks reached a new peak last week with Parker's speech the first he has made since he took over MI5 six months ago.
Sir David Omand, the former head of GCHQ, told the Guardian a fortnight ago its stories about UK surveillance had done enormous damage to national security.
However, the business secretary, Vince Cable, said last Friday the Guardian had done a great public service by revealing broad details about the extent of the UK's surveillance programmes.
Over the last fortnight a former member of parliament's intelligence and security committee, Lord King, a former director of GCHQ, and a former director general of MI5, Dame Stella Rimington, have questioned whether the agencies need to be more transparent and accept more rigorous scrutiny of their work.


Attached Files
.jpg   Ken-Macdonald-011.jpg (Size: 20.05 KB / Downloads: 2)
The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge.
Carl Jung - Aion (1951). CW 9, Part II: P.14
Reply

NSA collects millions of e-mail address books globally

[Image: Phone_Records_Obama_023dd_1381792719140.jpg] Video: In June, President Obama said the NSA's email collecting program "does not apply to U.S. citizens."



By Barton Gellman and Ashkan Soltani, Tuesday, October 15, 12:53 AM
The National Security Agency is harvesting hundreds of millions of contact lists from personal e-mail and instant messaging accounts around the world, many of them belonging to Americans, according to senior intelligence officials and top-secret documents provided by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden.
The collection program, which has not been disclosed before, intercepts e-mail address books and "buddy lists" from instant messaging services as they move across global data links. Online services often transmit those contacts when a user logs on, composes a message, or synchronizes a computer or mobile device with information stored on remote servers.

Read the documents
[Image: addressbook2-graph.jpg]

The NSA's problem? Too much data.

Read select pages from an NSA briefing on problems with high-volume, low-value collection of e-mail address books and buddy lists.


SCISSORS: How the NSA collects less

An NSA presentation on the SCISSORS tool that helps the agency cut out data it does not need.




An excerpt from the NSA's Wikipedia

An article from "Intellipedia," the NSA's classified wiki, on the problem of overcollection of data from Internet contact lists.









Rather than targeting individual users, the NSA is gathering contact lists in large numbers that amount to a sizable fraction of the world's e-mail and instant messaging accounts. Analysis of that data enables the agency to search for hidden connections and to map relationships within a much smaller universe of foreign intelligence targets.
During a single day last year, the NSA's Special Source Operations branch collected 444,743 e-mail address books from Yahoo, 105,068 from Hotmail, 82,857 from Facebook, 33,697 from Gmail and 22,881 from unspecified other providers, according to an internal NSA PowerPoint presentation. Those figures, described as a typical daily intake in the document, correspond to a rate of more than 250 million a year.
Each day, the presentation said, the NSA collects contacts from an estimated 500,000 buddy lists on live-chat services as well as from the inbox displays of Web-based e-mail accounts.
The collection depends on secret arrangements with foreign telecommunications companies or allied intelligence services in control of facilities that direct traffic along the Internet's main data routes.
Although the collection takes place overseas, two senior U.S. intelligence officials acknowledged that it sweeps in the contacts of many Americans. They declined to offer an estimate but did not dispute that the number is likely to be in the millions or tens of millions.
A spokesman for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which oversees the NSA, said the agency "is focused on discovering and developing intelligence about valid foreign intelligence targets like terrorists, human traffickers and drug smugglers. We are not interested in personal information about ordinary Americans."
The spokesman, Shawn Turner, added that rules approved by the attorney general require the NSA to "minimize the acquisition, use and dissemination" of information that identifies a U.S. citizen or permanent resident.
The NSA's collection of nearly all U.S. call records, under a separate program, has generated significant controversy since it was revealed in June. The NSA's director, Gen. Keith B. Alexander, has defended "bulk" collection as an essential counterterrorism and foreign intelligence tool, saying, "You need the haystack to find the needle."
Contact lists stored online provide the NSA with far richer sources of data than call records alone. Address books commonly include not only names and e-mail addresses, but also telephone numbers, street addresses, and business and family information. Inbox listings of e-mail accounts stored in the "cloud" sometimes contain content, such as the first few lines of a message.
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Reply
David Guyatt Wrote:British snooping battle continues apace.
It's nice to see that the man in charge of Parliamentary oversight - Malcolm Rifkind - is the usual political placement type who won't take on the security and intelligence services, let alone try to ensure they operate within the law. Weak, weak, weak... Imo, of course.

Agreed that the prospects for meaningful oversight of the British Security/Intel apparatus are vanishingly small to zero, but Rifkind as 'weak weak weak' - not sure I can go along with that.

'Well-connected, well-connected, well-connected' more like - Top-draw Establishment in fact and put there for that very reason. He's also one of the most senior - in fact probably THE most senior - Conservative Friend of Israel and an ardent Zionist Jew, with all the egregious blind-spots and potential for dual-loyalty conflicts such a CV involves. My guess is that, in matters considered vital to Israel's 'national security interests', the Mossad would find it a straightforward matter to make this particular Right Honourable Member an offer he would not and could not refuse.

IMHO too of course.
Peter Presland

".....there is something far worse than Nazism, and that is the hubris of the Anglo-American fraternities, whose routine is to incite indigenous monsters to war, and steer the pandemonium to further their imperial aims"
Guido Preparata. Preface to 'Conjuring Hitler'[size=12][size=12]
"Never believe anything until it has been officially denied"
Claud Cockburn

[/SIZE][/SIZE]
Reply
Beam me up Scotty! People may come and go but the system lives on. I bet he will miss playing in his deck on the Starship Enterprise.
Quote:U.S. eavesdropping agency chief, top deputy expected to depart soonWed, Oct 16 19:22 PM EDT
[Image: getNewsImages?n=topNews&u=USBRE99F12W20131016&i=1]
By Warren Strobel and Mark Hosenball
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The director of the U.S. National Security Agency and his deputy are expected to depart in the coming months, U.S. officials said on Wednesday, in a development that could give President Barack Obama a chance to reshape the eavesdropping agency.
Army General Keith Alexander's eight-year tenure was rocked this year by revelations contained in documents leaked by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden about the agency's widespread scooping up of telephone, email and social-media data.
Alexander has formalized plans to leave by next March or April, while his civilian deputy, John "Chris" Inglis, is due to retire by year's end, according to U.S. officials who spoke on condition of anonymity.
One leading candidate to replace Alexander is Vice Admiral Michael Rogers, currently commander of the U.S. Navy's 10th Fleet and U.S. Fleet Cyber Command, officials told Reuters. The 10th Fleet and Fleet Cyber Command both have their headquarters at Fort Meade, Maryland, between Washington and Baltimore. The NSA is also headquartered at Fort Meade.
There has been no final decision on selecting Rogers to succeed Alexander, and other candidates may be considered, the officials said.
NSA spokeswoman Vanee Vines said Alexander planned to leave office in the spring after three extensions to his tenure, and the process for picking his successor was still under way.
"This has nothing to do with media leaks, the decision for his retirement was made prior; an agreement was made with the (Secretary of Defense) and the Chairman for one more year - to March 2014," Vines told Reuters in an email.
Alexander has served as NSA director since August 2005, making him its longest-serving chief. He also serves as commander of a related military unit, the U.S. Cyber Command.
Alexander, who has vigorously defended the NSA's activities as lawful and necessary to detect and disrupt terrorist plots, said previously he planned to leave in the first half of 2014.
Inglis, who began his NSA career as a computer security scientist, has been the NSA's second-ranking official since 2006.
The NSA - which spies on electronic communications of all kinds and protects U.S. government communications - has been one of the most secretive of all U.S. intelligence outfits. Its employees used to joke that NSA stood for either "No Such Agency" or "Never Say Anything."
But the agency became the focus of controversy this year when Snowden leaked to the media tens of thousands of highly classified documents from the NSA and its British eavesdropping partner.
SEPARATE LEADERS?
While both Alexander and Inglis are leaving voluntarily, the dual vacancies give Obama an opportunity to install new leadership following Snowden's revelations and to decide whether the NSA and Cyber Command should have separate leaders.
Cyber Command, which has grown significantly in recent years, has the authority to engage in both defensive and offensive operations in cyberspace. Many NSA veterans argue that having the same person lead the spy agency and Cyber Command diminishes the emphasis on the NSA's work and its unique capabilities.
Rogers has been the Navy's top cyber commander since September 2011. Before that, he was director of intelligence for the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff and for the U.S. Pacific Command.
Rogers is "a good leader, very insightful and well thought of within the community," said a U.S. defense official who was not authorized to speak publicly on the matter.
Gary Roughead, who retired as the Navy's top uniformed officer in September 2011, said Rogers would be a good choice.
"During my time as CNO (chief of naval operations), I spent a great deal of time and attention on cyber, or as we characterized it, information dominance. Mike Rogers was the best in the business and a widely recognized leader in shaping the future in that important domain," he told Reuters. "He would be an extraordinary successor to Keith Alexander."
(Additional reporting by Joseph Menn in San Francisco and Tabassum Zakaria, Andrea Shala-Esa and Deborah Charles in Washington; Editing by Will Dunham and Peter Cooney)
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBR...6?irpc=932
"The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it." Karl Marx

"He would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies. When asked in court whether she knew that Lord Astor had denied having sex with her.

“I think it would be a good idea” Ghandi, when asked about Western Civilisation.
Reply
Quote:Mexico condemns US over alleged NSA hacking of ex-president's emailsGerman report says details were in a document leaked by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden

Reuters in Mexico City
theguardian.com, Monday 21 October 2013 07.23 BST
[ATTACH=CONFIG]5406[/ATTACH]Former Mexican president Felipe Calderon. Photograph: Pedro Pardo/AFP/Getty Images
Mexico has criticised the United States over new allegations of spying after a German magazine reported that the US National Security Agency (NSA) had hacked Felipe Calderon's public email account while he was president.
Der Spiegel said in May 2010, an NSA division known as "Tailored Access Operations" reported it had gained access to then-president Calderon's email account, and turned his office into a "lucrative" source of information.
It said details of the alleged NSA hacking of Calderon's account were contained in a document leaked by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden. Snowden's leaked information has prompted angry recriminations against Washington in Latin America, particularly Brazil.
According to Der Spiegel, the NSA succeeded in hacking a central server in the network of the Mexican presidency that was also used by other members of Calderon's cabinet, yielding a trove of information on diplomatic and economic matters.
.


Attached Files
.jpg   Mexican-president-Felipe--008.jpg (Size: 29.1 KB / Downloads: 1)
The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge.
Carl Jung - Aion (1951). CW 9, Part II: P.14
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Dumbo : how the CIA blind surveillance cameras Magda Hassan 0 34,188 14-08-2017, 12:16 AM
Last Post: Magda Hassan
  HR 658 Authorizes 30.000 surveillance drones over the USA - to be increased! Peter Lemkin 8 17,925 31-01-2017, 02:50 AM
Last Post: Magda Hassan
  AP Sues US Gov’t over Fake FBI News Article Booby Trapped with Surveillance Virus Magda Hassan 0 5,964 06-12-2015, 02:39 PM
Last Post: Magda Hassan
  Panopticon of global surveillance Magda Hassan 179 79,051 14-02-2015, 07:26 PM
Last Post: R.K. Locke
  'Five Eyes' surveillance pact should be published, Strasbourg court told Magda Hassan 1 4,129 09-09-2014, 09:34 AM
Last Post: David Guyatt
  Defensive Shift - Turning the Tables on Surveillance Magda Hassan 0 3,725 26-08-2014, 03:14 PM
Last Post: Magda Hassan
  Israeli Intelligence Eavesdropped on Kerry’s Phone During Palestine-Israel Peace Talks Magda Hassan 3 5,444 07-08-2014, 06:42 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  Ministers to pass law tracking mollie phone David Guyatt 0 3,285 07-07-2014, 09:24 AM
Last Post: David Guyatt
  Surveillance Capitalism Magda Hassan 0 3,264 05-07-2014, 02:44 AM
Last Post: Magda Hassan
  Biggest anti-mass surveillance event in the U.K. Magda Hassan 2 6,382 12-06-2014, 10:05 AM
Last Post: Magda Hassan

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)