08/1/15

Donald Trump’s Greatest Hits

Donald Trump has gotten popular, in part, by challenging the media. But he has praised journalists on occasion. His 2011 book, Time to Get Tough, said David Gregory was “doing a fine job filling some awfully big shoes over at Meet the Press.” It was a reference to legendary and highly respected host Tim Russert, who had passed away.

So-called “Sleepy Eyes Chuck Todd,” who replaced Gregory, is a favorite Trump target. “The thing I find most offensive about Chuck Todd is the fact that he pretends to be an objective journalist,” Trump writes, “when in reality the guy is a partisan hack.”

In many ways, as Trump said, David Gregory was doing a fine job. Some of the criticism of Gregory’s performance as “Meet the Press” host missed the mark, such as when he interviewed Edward Snowden collaborator Glenn Greenwald. As we noted at the time, some in the media were aghast that Gregory asked Greenwald a perfectly reasonable question on “Meet the Press:” “To the extent that you have aided and abetted Snowden, even in his current movements, why shouldn’t you, Mr. Greenwald, be charged with a crime?”

Snowden, the NSA leaker, has been charged with espionage and still resides in Russia.

In his book, Trump takes on Jon Stewart, the host of “The Daily Show” on the Comedy Central network who is quitting after years of service to President Obama and the liberal-left. Stewart’s strategy is spewing curse words and invective toward conservatives and Republicans.

Trump recognized Stewart as Obama’s tool before it was recently revealed that Stewart was secretly meeting with people in the Obama White House, including President Obama, in efforts “by the president and his communications team to tap into Mr. Stewart’s influence with younger voters,” as The New York Times put it.

“I actually enjoy the guy,” Trump’s book says of Stewart, “but when he did a segment mocking presidential candidate Herman Cain, and used a very racist and degrading tone that was insulting to the African American community, did he get booted off the air like Don Imus? No. Where was the Reverend Jesse Jackson? Where was the Reverend Al Sharpton? Where was Sleepy Eyes Chuck Todd to provide hard-hitting journalistic ‘analysis?’ Nowhere. Stewart should have lost his job—at least temporarily. But he didn’t and he won’t because liberals in the media always get a free pass, no matter how bad their behavior.”

Cain himself had noted that Stewart had mocked him using the racially-charged “Amos & Andy” dialect. He concluded that Stewart has a problem with black conservatives.

In other comments in his book, Trump discussed the journalists “who are obsessed with protecting Obama,” noting that ABC’s George Stephanopoulos is among the “big Obama fans.” He added that “it was incredible to see how overprotective reporters got toward Obama when I simply said what everyone in America was thinking: ‘Where’s the birth certificate?’”

While he praises Fox News and Roger Ailes, the executive behind the popular channel, Trump faults the “disappointing behavior by people in the press” which “occurs on both sides of the aisle,” and singles out Charles Krauthammer of Fox News for special criticism. Trump said Krauthammer had attacked him on the air as a joke candidate, and that he was not given any rebuttal time.

Discussing a speech he gave to Republicans, during which he had used “strong language,” Trump admits, “I’m not a big curser but it did take place” and the controversial remarks were reported by the media. But Trump counters: “Of course, Joe Biden dropped the f-word in front of the entire media on a stage with the president. But Biden gets a pass because he’s with Obama, and as we all know, Obama can do no wrong in the media’s eyes.”

Other quotable comments from his book include the observation that The New York Times is Obama’s “favorite newspaper,” and that “The press constantly maligns, ridicules, and mocks the Tea Party folks.”

During the current campaign, Trump has not shied away from putting reporters on the spot.

Asked a question by Telemundo anchor José Díaz-Balart, who distorted his position on illegal immigration, Trump fired back, “You know what, that’s a typical case. Wait. That’s a typical case of the press with misinterpretation. They take a half a sentence, then they take a quarter of a sentence, they put it all together. It’s a typical thing. And you’re with Telemundo, and Telemundo should be ashamed.”

In an interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper, he said, “Anderson, you are not a baby, okay. You are not a baby.”

Asked by NBC’s Katy Tur if he had a gun and used it, he responded, “It is none of your business, it is really none of your business. I have a license to have a gun.”

After The Wall Street Journal attacked Trump and his conservative supporters in the media, the businessman responded by saying the paper had a “dwindling” readership and “is worth about one-tenth of what it was purchased for…”

After Bill Kristol of The Weekly Standard said he was “finished” with Trump, he responded, “Bill, your small and slightly failing magazine will be a giant success when you finally back Trump.”

Fox News media reporter Howard Kurtz notes, “Look, Trump thrives on being attacked. He’s a great counterpuncher. He particularly relishes doing battle with the media. And this latest story hands him a big fat gift to do just that.”

That “latest story” was in The Daily Beast and concerned some allegations about alleged marital rape from Trump’s divorce proceedings. Trump’s ex-wife Ivana responded, “I have recently read some comments attributed to me from nearly 30 years ago at a time of very high tension during my divorce from Donald. The story is totally without merit.”

She added, “Donald and I are the best of friends and together have raised three children that we love and are very proud of. I have nothing but fondness for Donald and wish him the best of luck on his campaign.”

Since then, a story has surfaced about Trump criticizing an opposing attorney who wanted to breast-pump in front of him. Trump told CNN he may have said to her that it was “disgusting.” He added, “Bottom line. I beat her.” He said the judge had even awarded him legal fees.

For turning the tables on the media, Trump deserves the praise of those who are sick and tired of the liberal media setting the national agenda and demonizing conservatives.

I have a feeling that the Donald Trump hit parade will continue.

07/10/15

Americans Clueless about George Orwell, 1984, and term “Orwellian”

Hat Tip: BB

06/15/15

Obama Administration Incompetence Subjects Millions of Americans to Cyber Hackers

By: Roger Aronoff
Accuracy in Media

Millions of American government employees, former employees, contractors and more have had their most personal and private information breached by hackers, because the government failed to take the necessary steps to protect those records. According to Politico, “Administration officials have said privately that signs point to the first hack having originated in China, and security experts have said it appeared to be part of a Chinese effort to build dossiers on federal employees who might be approached later for espionage purposes.”

It is an outrageous and unacceptable breach of trust. The federal government, through the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), interviews everyone who requires any sort of security clearance, and asks the most detailed and personal questions about past associations, indiscretions and behavior, to make sure nothing in their past could subject them to blackmail or subversion. The interviews extend to friends and associates of those being vetted, and those people are also in the databases that have been breached. But now it has come to light that OPM failed to hold up the Obama administration’s end of the bargain by not doing everything they could to protect those records.

According to David Cox, the national president of the American Federation of Government Employees, in a letter to the OPM director, “We believe that hackers have every affected person’s Social Security number(s), military records and veterans’ status information, address, birth date, job and pay history, health insurance, life insurance and pension information; age, gender, race, union status, and more. Worst, we believe that Social Security numbers were not encrypted, a cybersecurity failure that is absolutely indefensible and outrageous.”

The Obama administration initially downplayed the cyber hack of the OPM, which centrally manages records for current and former federal employees. It did so even though it had missed the hack for at least four months, if not more, until a company, CyTech Services, which was conducting a sales demonstration, found malware in OPM’s system that could have been there for a year or more. The unfolding series of disasters has affected at least four million Americans—and perhaps as many as 14 million—including all current federal employees, retired federal employees, and a million former federal employees.

Reports of a second hack by China has added to the outrage, and compounded the problems. “Hackers linked to China have gained access to the sensitive background information submitted by intelligence and military personnel for security clearances, U.S. officials said Friday, describing a cyberbreach of federal records dramatically worse than first acknowledged,” reported the Associated Press.

“The forms authorities believed may have been stolen en masse, known as Standard Form 86, require applicants to fill out deeply personal information about mental illnesses, drug and alcohol use, past arrests and bankruptcies. They also require the listing of contacts and relatives, potentially exposing any foreign relatives of U.S. intelligence employees to coercion. Both the applicant’s Social Security number and that of his or her cohabitant is required.”

How many millions of Americans serving their country does this place at risk?

Under a Republican president, this newest administration scandal would have been front-page, round-the-clock news, with the most sinister of motives ascribed to them, probably for many days running. But as of Friday morning, The Washington Post had relegated coverage of this story to page A14, and several other news outlets began covering the story by simply reposting an AP article to their own websites. Television news has been dominated by stories of two escaped convicts, a local head of the NAACP who falsely represented herself as African American, and the reset, or re-launch, of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

Where are the talking heads, the pundits in the media, calling for President Obama—not agencies, not government bureaucrats, but President Obama—to show more care in protecting American citizens against cyberattacks? Such attacks violate our privacy and leave each of us open to hacking, blackmail, and targeting by China, which has been connected in most reports to the breaches. And it serves as a reminder how likely it is that Hillary Clinton’s private email server that she used during her tenure as Secretary of State was hacked by the Chinese, and possibly the Russians, North Koreans and Iranians. One can only imagine what they have on her.

“What’s more, in initial media stories about the breach, the Department of Homeland Security had touted the government’s EINSTEIN detection program, suggesting it was responsible for uncovering the hack,” reports Wired.com. “Nope, also wrong.”

“The OPM had no IT security staff until 2013, and it showed,” reports Wired.

Ken Dilanian’s AP article, despite its wide distribution, fails to mention the number of warnings that OPM, and the government as a whole, has received about its lack of adequate security. “U.S. Was Warned of System Open to Cyberattacks,” reported The New York Times on June 5, describing OPM’s 2014 security as “a Chinese hacker’s dream.”

The 2014 Inspector General’s report was based on an analysis conducted between April and September of last year. While the administration has said that the attack occurred in December of last year, The Wall Street Journal’s Damian Paletta and Siobhan Hughes wrote of the first reported attack: “Investigators believe the hackers had been in the network for a year or more” when it was discovered in April.

That IG report stated that OPM’s status was “upgraded to a significant deficiency” due to a planned reorganization, and that it had “material weakness in the internal control structure” of its IT program.

“The agency did not possess an inventory of all the computer servers and devices with access to its networks, and did not require anyone gaining access to information from the outside to use the kind of basic authentication techniques that most Americans use for online banking,” reported the Times. “It did not regularly scan for vulnerabilities in the system, and found that 11 of the 47 computer systems that were supposed to be certified as safe for use last year were not ‘operating with a valid authorization.’”

Neither the AP nor the Times noted that this situation reaches as far back as at least fiscal year 2007, with the 2013 IG report indicating that there was a “lack of IT security policies and procedures.” This worsened in fiscal year 2009, with some corrections in 2012, but as of fiscal year 2013 instituted reforms had “only been partially implemented.”

Clearly, this failure has been growing on President Obama’s watch.

The Times noted that “upgrades were underway” when the first reported attack happened, and cited an unnamed former Obama administration official as saying, “The mystery is what took the Chinese so long.”

When asked about the IG reports, White House press secretary Josh Earnest insisted on setting the cited reports aside, because “there is risk associated” with using any computer network. The U.S. government has been raising that risk by not securing its own networks.

One might question whether American citizens are any safer today, and if the Obama administration has made the necessary reforms following these attacks. Earnest, the White House press secretary, used vague language to describe security upgrades after the first cyber intrusion was reported. He cited “ongoing efforts” to “update our defenses and update our ability to detect intrusions” and blamed Congressional inaction.

“And the fact is, we need the United States Congress to come out of the Dark Ages and actually join us here in the 21st century to make sure that we have the kinds of defenses that are necessary to protect a modern computer system,” he said. “And we have not seen that kind of action in Congress.”

While cooperation with the private sector may help upgrade government information technology systems, it is the responsibility of the administration and the media to hold President Obama accountable for this debacle, which has been brewing over the course of his entire term in office. There should be a complete investigation, whether by Congress or an independent counsel, into the failure of the Obama administration to protect the privacy and personal information of millions of Americans. What did they know, when did they know it, and who or what is to blame? What can be done to ensure this doesn’t happen again? People should be held accountable.

“If OPM is behind on cybersecurity, which it is, it has plenty of company,” reported the Post on June 7. Almost all, 23 of 24, major agencies cited these security issues as a “major management challenge for their agency,” it reported. The GAO indicated last year that the number of breaches involving personally identifiable information has more than doubled between 2009 and 2013, according to the Post.

With the mainstream media intent on championing all the benefits of Obamacare amidst an upcoming Supreme Court decision over subsidies, coverage of the security deficits within the health care exchanges has virtually disappeared. “Independent agencies such as the Government Accountability Office and the HHS inspector general have warned of continued security problems,” wrote Rep. Diane Black (R-TN) for The Wall Street Journal last November. “This is concerning for Americans, as HealthCare.gov houses vast amounts of sensitive personal enrollment information—from full, legal names, to Social Security numbers, dates of birth and even income information.” She notes that Healthcare.gov has been “described by experts as a ‘hacker’s dream.’”

Just like OPM. How soon will we hear that the millions on the Obamacare exchanges have also had their personal information compromised by foreign hackers, and will the mainstream media also then blame that future disaster on a bureaucrat, and not Obama?

Our nation also remains vulnerable to an electromagnetic pulse attack, which could involve exploding a nuclear weapon at high altitude in the atmosphere. With Iran seeking nuclear capability, this becomes even more of a threat.

A report by the Department of Homeland Security indicates “that a massive electromagnetic pulse event caused by a solar flare could leave more than 130 million Americans without power for years,” reported WorldNetDaily last December.

“President Obama could sign an executive order mandating [that] DHS add EMP to its emergency planning, but he has not done so, even though he reportedly is aware of the consequences.”

When are the mainstream media going to hold President Obama accountable for the many scandals, and bungling incompetence, plaguing his administration? Our veterans are at risk because of scandals and incompetence at the VA, and our flying public because of scandals and political correctness at the FAA and TSA. Obama’s security policies are jeopardizing the safety and welfare of millions of Americans. If the Chinese government is really behind these attacks, which is still being investigated, do we plan to retaliate in any way? Or is there no price to pay? The mainstream media, once again, appear to be more interested in preserving their access to the halls of power, and in avoiding at all costs attributing any of the blame for this catastrophe to the Obama administration’s ineptitude and incompetence.

06/9/15

President Reagan Defends NSA

By: Cliff Kincaid
America’s Survival

This 1986 video, obtained from the public domain, shows President Ronald Reagan visiting the NSA, as he gave the official dedication speech for the NSA’s two new buildings and strongly defended the intelligence-gathering agency. He wanted to loosen “the legal reins governing intelligence,” a history of the NSA notes, a view that gave rise to Reagan executive order 12333. It gave the NSA latitude in SIGINT collection that the agency had not had during the disastrous Carter years. This executive order remains in effect.

06/9/15

The Secret Russian Role in Global Conflict

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

In an extraordinary judgment that throws U.S. policy in the Middle East into complete turmoil, strategic analyst Michael Ledeen has concluded, in regard to the activities of the Islamic State, “I think the Russians are involved, in tandem with the Iranians, who have had their own troops on the Syrian battlefield for years.”

This means that a U.S. congressional declaration of war on the Islamic State would miss the point, and that the Russians and the Iranians are the bigger threat.

“It’s part of the global war, of which Syria is only one killing field, and IS [Islamic State] is one of the band of killers,” says Ledeen.

The analysis of Ledeen, who previously served as a consultant to the National Security Council, the State Department, and the Defense Department, should serve as an opportunity to review what is really happening in the Middle East, and to examine whether the Islamic State is a Russian creation that is designed to pave the way for Iranian expansion.

Ledeen notes evidence that the top IS military commander, Abu Omar al-Shishani, is a Russian asset, and that “the Russians are exploiting their strategic position in Ukraine to set up transit facilities for IS.” He adds that Ukrainian security forces recently arrested five IS volunteers coming from Russia or the former Soviet republics.

Last September we reported on some of this evidence, noting, “We have heard repeatedly about Americans and Europeans fighting for ISIL [the Islamic state], but little attention is being devoted to the Russian-speaking foreign fighters that make up the group. Their numbers are estimated at 500 or more. Omar al-Shishani is usually described as a prominent Islamic State fighter who is Chechen. In fact, he was born in the former Soviet republic of Georgia and was trained there.”

Those who believe the Russians are incapable of such deception and misdirection have conveniently forgotten about the history of the old Soviet intelligence service, the KGB. It is represented in the Kremlin today by Russian President Vladimir Putin, a former KGB officer once based in East Germany.

In another area of global affairs that reveals a hidden Russian role, The New York Times has taken note in a June 7 story of evidence that the Russians under Putin are financing conservative movements and political parties around the world. The Times reports, “Not only is it [the Kremlin] aligning itself with the leftists traditionally affiliated with Moscow since the Cold War, but it is making common cause with far-right forces rebelling against the rise of the European Union that are sympathetic to Mr. Putin’s attack on what he calls the West’s moral decline.”

This is actually an old story. We have been reporting for more than a year about Putin acquiring agents of influence or dupes in the West, even in the United States. Perhaps the most prominent name associated with this pro-Moscow trend is veteran conservative columnist Patrick J. Buchanan. The World Congress of Families is the most prominent organization to embrace Moscow’s alleged devotion to Christian values.

It is quite natural for conservatives in favor of traditional values to abhor the Obama administration’s embrace of the so-called LGBT agenda, here and abroad. But to adore Putin in reaction to this trend is a major miscalculation that assumes Moscow is genuinely interested in preserving Western values.

It is a welcome development that The New York Times has finally taken note of Moscow’s hand in right-wing political movements.

But there’s more. The paper added, “American and European officials have accused Moscow of financing green movements in Europe to encourage protests against hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, a move intended to defend Russia’s gas industry. And a shadowy ‘troll farm’ in St. Petersburg uses Twitter to plant fake stories about chemical spills or Ebola outbreaks in the West.”

Another example of how Putin is deceiving the world lies in his exploitation of Edward Snowden, the former NSA employee still being hailed as a whistleblower in the United States.

Buchanan’s magazine, The American Conservative, has written about how figures on the U.S. political right such as Ronald Reagan biographer Craig Shirley have rallied to Snowden’s defense. In a recent column, Shirley condemned “the senior GOP leadership’s embrace of the National Security Agency’s enveloping surveillance activities.”

What Shirley and other Snowden supporters ignore is the fact that the NSA’s surveillance activities rely mostly on a Ronald Reagan Executive Order (12333) and that funding and manpower for the NSA increased dramatically under Reagan.

In fact, President Reagan used the NSA to undermine America’s enemies, especially the old USSR.

National security reporter Bill Gertz wrote in 2013 about how a former “top-secret” document, “United States Cryptologic History, Series VI, Vol. 5: American Cryptology During the Cold War, 1945-89,” contained a section on how President Ronald Reagan realized the value of the NSA’s unique electronic intelligence collection capabilities.

The history notes that “the best known exposure of SIGINT [signals intelligence] since the Pearl Harbor hearings of 1945 had actually come in 1983, when the Reagan administration played the intercepted cockpit conversations of the Soviet pilot as he shot down KAL-007. The SIGINT gave the administration a tremendous foreign policy coup.”

On September 1, 1983, the Soviet Union shot down the civilian airliner KAL-007, killing 269 people.

In 1986, the document states, Reagan became the first American president to visit the NSA, as he gave the official dedication speech for the NSA’s two new buildings. He wanted to loosen “the legal reins governing intelligence,” the document says, giving rise to Reagan executive order 12333. It gave the NSA latitude in SIGINT collection that the agency had not had during the disastrous Carter years.

This executive order remains in effect. Not even Obama has tried to revoke it.

Based on this history, one would have to conclude that President Reagan would defend the NSA, just as the GOP leadership in the U.S. Senate has done. Leaders like Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY) defended the NSA against the Obama administration, liberal Democrats and libertarian Republicans.

The tragedy is that, with Obama in office rather than a conservative like Reagan, some conservatives decided to join the campaign to undermine the agency that Reagan considered absolutely essential to America’s security and survival.

Could it be just a coincidence that the Islamic state, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and aggressive Chinese cyber-warfare against the U.S. have emerged as major problems in the wake of Snowden’s arrival in Moscow?

Those who blame Obama alone for all of our foreign policy setbacks should examine the evidence that Putin and the Russians may ultimately be pulling the strings. At the same time, the NSA can’t be blamed for Obama’s failure or unwillingness to use the agency effectively against our enemies.

When the next president takes office, he will need an NSA capable of gathering the intelligence information the nation needs to defend itself. The next administration will have to consider apprehending and then prosecuting Snowden for operating as a Russian/Chinese agent of influence and committing espionage against the United States.

Hopefully, those who defended or praised Snowden will one day have to answer for their foolishness.

06/5/15

Mark Levin: ‘It’s The Chinese Government’ Who Hacked Into Our Government Computers

Mark Levin: China’s Hacking of U.S. Government Computers ‘Is an Act of War’

Massive ‘data breach’ could affect every federal agency

China ‘building database on Americans’

Report: China Dispatching Surveillance Vessels Off Hawaii

06/3/15

ICYMI: KGB General: Of Course Snowden Is Working for Russian Intelligence

The Right Planet

The XX Committee

May 23, 2014

As the Snowden Operation devolves into farce, with the inevitable falling-out between Wikileaks and the Greenwald axis happening online for the world to see, it seems that Edward Snowden isn’t going anywhere anytime soon. What contact, if any, he had with foreign intelligence services before he fled Hawaii for Hong Kong and then Russia, where he remains, is an important question that cannot be answered yet with publicly available information. Indeed, it may take years, perhaps decades for a reliable answer to emerge, given the nature of the espionage business. However, nobody familiar with spy games, particularly when Russians are involved, has any doubt the Ed is working for the Russians now. After all, what choice does he really have?

As if to deflect attention from this obvious truth, today President Vladimir Putin publicly denied that Ed is their guy: he “is not our agent, and gave up no secrets.” This should be taken about as seriously as any Kremlin utterance these days, such as claims that Jewish neo-Nazis are running things in Ukraine. For good measure, Putin added that the whole spectacle is really the fault of America’s “unprofessional” intelligence services, who failed to do their job and prevent this unprecedented disaster. Vlad sometimes can’t help himself, adding, “Russia is not a country that gives up champions of human rights,” meaning Ed.

More important is a new interview with Oleg Kalugin, who is a good deal more honest than Vladimir Putin. Titled “Snowden is cooperating with Russian intelligence,” this is an important development, given Kalugin’s position. He is something of a legend in espionage circles, since he was the youngest general in the KGB at the height of the Cold War, heading up the foreign counterintelligence office of the KGB’s elite First Chief Directorate, its overseas espionage arm. As such, Kalugin was responsible for overseeing the recruitment of foreigners working in the intelligence business…in other words, people just like Edward Snowden. Kalugin’s exploits working against U.S. intelligence are the stuff of exciting late-night spy stories, and you can read about some of them in his memoir, which I recommend (if you read Russian, that version is even better).

I don’t know of anybody in the West with better bona fides than Kalugin to discuss the modus operandi of Russia’s “special services,” particularly in their dealings with Western intelligence sources and defectors. Therefore I am including most of the article, since it merits reading:

Former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden probably never envisioned that he’d someday be working for the Russian federal security service, or FSB.

But according to former KGB Major General Oleg Kalugin, he is now, albeit as a consultant or technical advisor.

“These days, the Russians are very pleased with the gifts Edward Snowden has given them. He’s busy doing something. He is not just idling his way through life.”

“The FSB are now his hosts, and they are taking care of him,” Kalugin boldly claimed in an interview with VentureBeat.

The 80 year-old retired Soviet intelligence officer is Russian spy royalty personified. At 34, he became the youngest KGB general in history, and Kalugin famously helped run Soviet spy operations in America during a career that spanned over three decades.

Kalugin and his wife relocated to Maryland after falling out of favor with the Russian regime in the 1990s. After becoming a vocal critic of Russian president Vladimir Putin (Kalugin called Putin a war criminal for his second invasion of Chechnya), a warrant was issued for his arrest. He’s been in the U.S. ever since.

Kalugin still has juice within Russian intelligence circles and maintains contacts with friends in Russia from his days as a Soviet spy. Kalugin teaches at the Centre for Counterintelligence and Security Studies and also sits on the advisory board for the International Spy Museum in Washington, D.C.

Back in Russia, according to Kalugin, Snowden is being handled by the FSB, the KGB’s successor. Kalugin claims that Snowden has shared much of his vast trove of secrets about the NSA with his Russian hosts, and in the process, has allegedly handed the FSB one of their biggest intelligence hauls and propaganda coups since the end of the Cold War.

This claim echoes early warnings from congressman Michael McCaul, senator Dianne Feinstein, lieutenant generalMichael Flynn, and congressman Mike Rogers, yet no concrete evidence proves that such an exchange took place. Snowden has consistently denied claims that he took security documents with him to Russia.

“Whatever he had access to in his former days at NSA, I believe he shared all of it with the Russians, and they are very grateful,” Kalugin claims.

It has been over a year since Snowden downloaded thousands of top secret NSA documents from his stint as a NSA contractor and traveled first to Hong Kong from his home in Hawaii. He arrived in Moscow August 1 after he failed to gain asylum in 30 other countries.

Snowden’s leaks revealed the NSA’s efforts to turn Facebook into a surveillance machine, the agency’s close ties with Google, and the theft of private user data from firms like Yahoo and Apple. In the wake of these revelations, many of the tech industry’s most powerful firms have frantically adopted new security protocols at unprecedented speeds.

Snowden shared his haul with security journalist Glenn Greenwald and other media outlets, like the Washington Post and Germany’s Der Spiegel, shedding unprecedented light on the prodigious intelligence gathering programs of his former employer and sending shockwaves around the world.

Greenwald, who lives in Brazil but is currently traveling in the U.S., did not return emails for comment.

These days, exile in Russia means Snowden, 30, has lots of time on his hands. A source in Moscow with connections to Russian intelligence said the American is believed to be living, at least part time, in a dacha 70 miles south of Moscow in an FSB retirement community reserved for favored cadres.

“He has lots of free time. He doesn’t need to go into the office anymore,” Kalugin said.

Snowden’s location could not be independently confirmed.

While free to leave Russia, Kalugin claims Snowden’s whereabouts are monitored by his FSB handlers, who allegedly control his spending budget and watch over whom he talks with.

In Kalugin’s view, Snowden is guilty of treason.

“Of course he is, by American standards. Snowden is a traitor,” Kalugin said. “When someone changes sides and goes over to the other side, it’s a victory,” he said.

Snowden’s value to his Russian handlers has not totally run its course, claims Kalugin, and the FSB will allegedly use him as a technical consultant and advisor on topics that interest them. His travel in the country also may be coordinated by the FSB, Kalugin said.

But the former KGB general believes that if he wants to, Snowden will have little trouble integrating himself into Russian culture and digging in for the long haul.

“He is not being left alone obviously. The Russians are trying their best to be hospitable,” Kalugin said.

“At this point,” said Kalugin, who has written three books on his 34 years in Soviet intelligence, “the reception in Russia for him has been exceptionally friendly.”

“And I’m sure that Snowden is enjoying it.”

Who’s Behind the “Disinformation” Against the NSA?

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

Since Matt Drudge is a recluse who doesn’t respond to questions about his news judgment or political views, it’s hard to know for sure why he put a photograph of Edward Snowden on his website above the words, “Free to chat without NSA tracking! At least for now.” Was he recognizing enemy agent Snowden’s important role in Senator Rand Paul’s (R-KY) victory in the Senate in closing down National Security Agency (NSA) terrorist surveillance authority?

Despite the implication behind this misleading headline on Drudge’s influential website, people were always “free to chat.” That phrase contributes to the lingering misperception that the NSA is listening to ordinary Americans’ telephone conversations and gathering private and personal data about their lives.

Our media, under the influence of left-wing groups like the ACLU and libertarian organizations such as the Cato Institute, certainly have no desire to clear things up.

On Monday, these so-called “privacy advocates” and “surveillance experts” held a press call for the media, responding to the expiration of the Patriot Act and its various provisions. They are now desperate to prevent the Senate from adopting amendments to fix the flawed House bill known as the USA Freedom Act.

It’s fashionable to join this campaign and go with the flow, perpetuating false assumptions about what the NSA actually does.

But to his credit, Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL), also a presidential candidate, pointed out, “Internet search providers, Internet-based email accounts, credit card companies and membership discount cards used at the grocery store all collect far more personal information on Americans than the bulk metadata program” of the NSA.

As such, headlines like those on the Drudge Report are misleading to the point of paranoia and can only serve to make an enemy agent like Snowden, now living in Moscow and serving his Kremlin masters, into some kind of hero.

Yet, there can be no doubt that Snowden came out the big winner, thanks to Senator Paul.

If anything, this state of affairs should cause Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY) to rethink his support of Senator Paul’s presidential run.

In remarks on the Senate floor, McConnell said, “We shouldn’t be disarming unilaterally as our enemies grow more sophisticated and aggressive, and we certainly should not be doing so based on a campaign of demagoguery and disinformation launched in the wake of the unlawful actions of Edward Snowden.”

Those terms “demagoguery” and “disinformation” were directed at the junior senator from Kentucky. McConnell seemed to be suggesting that Paul was playing Snowden’s tune.

The term “disinformation” carries special weight, since it is an intelligence term that signifies a political influence campaign being waged by our enemies abroad, perhaps in Russia or China. Snowden, based in Moscow, has to be considered under the control of the Russian security services.

Was McConnell suggesting that Paul is acting on behalf of Russia or China?

As if this wasn’t bad enough, Paul acted on the Senate floor like President Obama was behind the NSA program and was trying to maintain it in its present form. Nothing could have been further from the truth. Obama has abandoned the NSA, something his progressive base had been demanding ever since Snowden went to Russia.

McConnell noted that Obama was pushing the House-passed USA Freedom Act, which Democrats admit has serious flaws and loopholes. McConnell said, “The administration’s inability to answer even the most basic questions about the alternate bulk-data system it would have to build under that legislation is, to say the least, troubling. And that’s not just my view. That’s the view of many in this body, including colleagues who’d been favorably predisposed to the House bill.”

McConnell went on: “In particular, I know senators from both parties have been disturbed by the administration’s continuing inability to guarantee whether the new system would work as well as the current one, or whether there would even be any data available to analyze. Because while the administration has let it be known that this non-existent system could only be built in time if telephone providers cooperate in building it, providers have made it abundantly clear that they will not commit to retaining the data for any period of time unless legally required to do so—and there is no such requirement in the House-passed bill.”

McConnell quoted one provider as saying, “[We are] not prepared to commit to voluntarily retain documents for any particular period of time pursuant to the proposed USA Freedom Act if not otherwise required by law.”

In other words, the USA Freedom Act effectively dismantles the terrorist surveillance powers of the NSA, while giving the impression of “reform.” It’s no wonder that Snowden-friendly media like the British Guardian are giving the measure favorable publicity.

It’s troubling that Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), another GOP presidential candidate, was backing the USA Freedom Act as well.

But Senator Paul stands to the left of even the House bill.

In another piece of disinformation, an outfit called America’s Liberty PAC released animated video showing Rand Paul vs. Barack Obama in a supposed showdown over the NSA, with the two of them depicted as the wrestlers “Rand Man,” and Obama as the head of the “Washington spy machine.”

Yet, Obama was mostly on the side of Rand Paul in this effort.

As noted, Obama had endorsed major changes in the NSA program that McConnell had described as unworkable. McConnell and those who wanted to maintain the system were Paul’s real enemies.

Let’s hope that Senator McConnell continues to set the record straight as the junior senator from Kentucky goes forward in the presidential campaign, attempting to portray himself as a friend of liberty and the Constitution against the odious Obama administration. Also odious is a presidential candidate who misrepresents the facts for political gain, and runs as a Republican when his position on the NSA makes him more comfortable in the Bernie Sanders wing of the Democratic Party.

It looks like Senator Paul is following in the footsteps of his father, who veered far-left on foreign policy matters and came to be associated with the “blame America first” mentality that the Democrats were once known for. Interestingly, America’s Liberty PAC, a Super PAC founded by former Ron Paul political operatives, is backing Rand Paul for president and has been endorsed by him.

In another example of pure disinformation, a video on a conservative website hailed Senator Paul’s actions under the headline, “Obama’s NSA Snoops Have Just Been Dealt A HUGE Setback That Could Shake Up The 2016 Race.”

Obama’s NSA Snoops? This is the same kind of nonsense that Senator Paul was spewing. The NSA is a professional intelligence agency whose main mission is to support America’s combat troops. It has also been assigned the job of maintaining a database of phone numbers possibly linked to foreign terrorist organizations. This information, after it is obtained legally, is provided to law enforcement agencies such as the FBI.

Largely because of the antics of Senator Paul, McConnell is now left with the option of bringing the House-passed bill to the Senate floor. “It’s not ideal but, along with votes on some modest amendments that attempt to ensure the program can actually work as promised, it’s now the only realistic way forward,” he said.

To his credit, Senator Rubio has backed McConnell’s effort to protect and preserve the NSA system. He noted, “Bulk metadata includes phone numbers, the time and duration of calls—nothing else. No content of any phone calls is collected. The government is not listening to your phone calls or recording them unless you are a terrorist or talking to a terrorist outside the United States.”

These basic facts have gotten lost in the “demagoguery and disinformation,” as Senator McConnell called the attacks on the NSA.

Even worse, the effort had a money-grubbing aspect to it. Paul posted a statement celebrating the end of the NSA program and urging his supporters to, “Click here to contribute and celebrate this tremendous victory for the Constitution.”

Edward Snowden was certainly celebrating. He had contributed to one of Ron Paul’s presidential campaigns and is probably tempted to support his son. But “clicking to contribute” rubles from Moscow might be going too far, even for the Pauls.

06/2/15

“Switch to Mitch” Better Than “Stand with Rand”

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

A new report on the damage done by Edward Snowden’s illegal leaks of classified information says terrorists now “better understand the scope and scale of Western intelligence capacity” and have altered the way they communicate about their plans to attack the United States and its allies. “By revealing information concerning intelligence-gathering techniques, Snowden has polluted ongoing operations” to catch terrorists, states the new report from the Henry Jackson Society.

At a time such as this, diminishing or dismantling the powers of the NSA seems like a suicidal course of action for the United States. Yet, acting at the instigation of Senator Rand Paul (R-KY), the Senate is close to voting for major changes to the NSA in the form of a so-called USA Freedom Act, which has already passed the House but which could risk a loss of critical intelligence information, thereby leading to future terrorist attacks. A Senate vote comes next Sunday, just hours before a vital NSA program authorized under Section 215 of the Patriot Act is scheduled to lapse.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who once endorsed Paul’s presidential run, seems to be having second thoughts as he scrambles to maintain the existing power of the NSA to obtain access to a databank of U.S. telephone numbers, known as metadata, which investigators could search for links to foreign terrorist organizations plotting attacks on the American homeland. Such information is obtained by the NSA and then provided to law enforcement agencies such as the FBI.

The Obama administration is backing Senate passage of the USA Freedom Act legislation that some experts describe as unworkable.

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Senator Richard Burr (R-NC) says that the USA Freedom Act “undercuts the Intelligence Community’s capability to stop terrorist attacks here and abroad. Our intelligence personnel have responsibly and professionally used authorities granted them under Section 215 for years, and have helped keep Americans safe as a result…. Even the Administration has admitted that no intentional abuses of privacy and civil liberties have resulted from the use of the legal authorities provided by Section 215.”

Burr points out that the legislation “envisions an unknown technical solution based on uncertain access to data that may or may not exist.” He says the bill lacks “a mandatory data retention requirement for the telecommunications companies,” and therefore offers no real mechanism for investigators to obtain the information that could help thwart terrorist attacks.

“As terror groups such as the Islamic State and Al-Qaida grow in number, capability, and technical sophistication, now is not the time to turn to an untested, unproven proposal” such as the House-passed USA Freedom Act, he said. Burr supports McConnell’s proposed clean authorization of section 215 of the Patriot Act.

The “Stand with Rand” crowd points to a Breitbart “exclusive” article from Paul, who is opposing McConnell’s effort and insists that “FBI agents can’t point to any major terrorism cases they’ve cracked thanks to the key snooping powers [for the NSA] in the Patriot Act.” Paul insists that the agency’s powers must be scaled back through Senate adoption of the USA Freedom Act.

In fact, however, the Senator’s claim about the NSA providing no role in cracking major terrorism cases is flat-out wrong, as AIM has documented. Paul was referring to a Justice Department Inspector General’s report that in fact confirmed the usefulness of NSA information in providing investigative leads and corroborating other information for the FBI. Cases are actually “cracked” by law enforcement authorities working with information provided by the NSA and other sources.

In another major miscue, the Kentucky senator claimed in his Breitbart column that “a recent Pew Research Poll shows that a majority of Americans want the Patriot Act changed.” But the link is to an article about a poll commissioned by the American Civil Liberties Union, one of the senator’s left-wing allies in attempting to shut down the powers of the NSA.

The biased poll from Global Strategy Group and G² Public Strategies gets large margins against NSA surveillance powers by framing the issue in terms of the “privacy” of Americans’ “personal information” versus “government spying.” In fact, the NSA does not collect any “personal information,” except in cases where telephone numbers of terrorist contacts in the U.S. are matched with foreign terrorist organizations. That information is used by the FBI to conduct investigations of terrorist groups on U.S. soil.

Meanwhile, Paul has denied that his filibuster against the Patriot Act was a money-raising tactic linked to the release of his new book, Taking a Stand, and his presidential campaign.

If a political issue is what he’s seeking, New Jersey Republican Governor Chris Christie, a former prosecutor, is giving it to him. Christie, a possible GOP presidential candidate, told the “Fox & Friends” show that Paul and his Senate allies are taking the side of NSA defector Snowden, “a criminal” who is “hiding in Russia.” Christie noted the irony in Snowden “lecturing to us about the evils of authoritarian government while he lives under the protective umbrella of Vladimir Putin.”

As several news organizations have pointed out, Paul makes the erroneous claim in his new book that six Americans died in the September 11, 2012 Benghazi attacks. This basic error of fact (four died at Benghazi) is a serious lapse for a presidential candidate who is already facing questions over his expertise in national security matters.

But, as Christie suggests, the most serious questions facing the Senator concern his willingness to regard Snowden, now living in Moscow under the protection of the Russian secret services, as a legitimate whistleblower concerned about the privacy of the American people.

The new study from the Henry Jackson Society, written by Robin Simcox, says Snowden has had “contact” with the Russian security service, the FSB, “an obvious cause of concern” that has led the U.S. Government to fear that Russian and Chinese cyber warfare capabilities have increased as a result of getting access to Snowden’s stolen files.

Simcox documents how the following has occurred as a result of the Snowden disclosures:

At least three al-Qaeda affiliates are known to have changed their communication methods.
Online jihadist platforms released new encryption tools, and at a quicker pace.
A video released onto a jihadist platform outlined what they had learned from the Snowden disclosures, providing advice on how to avoid detection and listing software packages that protect against surveillance.
Foreign terror suspects realized that their communications potentially passed through the U.S. (even if the individuals themselves were not based there) and that Communication Service Providers (CSP) was allowing the NSA to access these communications. They subsequently stopped using these CSPs to send emails, or even stopped using electronic communications altogether.

As one example of “non-domestic surveillance” revealed by Snowden, this report cites another report that the NSA had received permission to spy on groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood.

This may explain why groups like the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Muslim Brotherhood affiliate, have joined Senator Paul in opposing NSA surveillance powers. On Sunday’s “This Week” program, Muslim Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) said he would “Stand with Rand” against the Patriot Act. “I’ve been proud to stand with him” on this and other issues, he said.

The Senate faces a choice this Sunday: “Switch to Mitch” or “Stand with Rand” and risk catastrophe.

05/30/15

Emergence of a National Police Force

By: Andrew Kopas – Guest Columnist
Stand Up America

With the recent shooting in Ferguson and deaths in New York City and Baltimore of residents there involved in criminal activity at the time of their arrests, there is an outcry from the likes of civil rights activist Al Sharpton and others for nullification of state’s rights and the takeover of local and state police forces nationwide by the Federal Government, specifically by the Executive Branch.

BESTPIX BALTIMORE, MD - APRIL 27: Demonstrators climb on a destroyed Baltimore Police car in the street near the corner of Pennsylvania and North avenues during violent protests following the funeral of Freddie Gray April 27, 2015 in Baltimore, Maryland. Gray, 25, who was arrested for possessing a switch blade knife April 12 outside the Gilmor Homes housing project on Baltimore's west side. According to his attorney, Gray died a week later in the hospital from a severe spinal cord injury he received while in police custody. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images) *** BESTPIX ***

BESTPIX BALTIMORE, MD – APRIL 27 (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

In all of this, keep in mind that Obama has very successfully used “straw man” arguments to advance his objectives. In this particular case, the “straw man” argument being put forward is that all law enforcement agencies across America are inherently racist and that only his takeover of them will fix these racist organizations.

He has essentially painted a bull’s eye on the backs of our local and state law enforcement personnel and endorsed instead the criminal element in America that has responded by assassination style shootings of law enforcement personnel in NYC and most recently in Mississippi as well.

The nationalization of our local and state police forces is indeed a very bad idea and should be adamantly opposed by both the states and the general populace for several reasons.

First and foremost, it would bring ALL organized armed personnel, namely the American Military, Homeland Security, and all local and state police under the direct control of one man, namely Obama and any future Presidents of the United States.

That would in turn allow for tremendous abuses of that power that we have already seen in this Administration, such as use of the IRS and DHS against what he perceives to be his domestic enemies, namely anyone who opposes him and his policies.

Remember the National Police Force Obama Promised in 2008?

Secondly, if he decided to fully seize power and set aside the limitations of the Office of President imposed on him by the Constitution of the United States, which he has already done in a number of particulars such as with illegal immigration, failure to enforce DOMA, bypassing Congress unilaterally in matters of treaty negotiations, etc., there would be no armed force except the American people directly to stop him.

But without organization and leadership, the probability of that successfully happening on a national scale is remote.

In fact, he could use all of the organized armed forces at his disposal, including local and state police who would be under his direct control, to put down any such opposition that the people might undertake.

As reported in The Daily Bell on December 7, 2011, as early as 2009 Obama advocated “a civilian police force to match the size and power of our armed forces.” One has to ask the question “Why” such national control is required vs. local law enforcement properly trained and equipped to deal with any domestic terrorist threats?

His expansion of the Homeland Security Department has followed that pronouncement, as has his use of the NSA to go far beyond its mandate and monitor the communications of every man, woman and child in America.

And the fact that he is actively promoting and funding illegal immigration on a massive scale in America today without screening for terrorists crossing our borders begs the question of if he indeed wants to see an increase in domestic terrorist attacks like we have seen in many places across the USA such as at Ft. Hood, Oklahoma, Boston and most recently in Garland, Texas with the expressed purpose of forcing the need for such a national police force under his direct control to put down such attacks?

Obama has gone on record on more than one occasion to praise the Chinese Communist form of government and other authoritarian regimes that are essentially dictatorships based on central government control over all aspects of their citizens’ lives including how many children they can have, how they worship, how they communicate with each other over the Internet, and even how they assemble.

Do we want a man with the belief that an authoritarian form of government is preferable to a democratically elected government with clear separation of powers between the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches as set for in our Constitution to have the kind of unlimited power that nationalization of our local and state law enforcement agencies would give him?

God forbid!