US Intelligence Effectively Admits That, Despite Earlier Statements, They Don't Think Snowden Gave Docs To Russians

from the apparently-they-figured-out-what-he-had dept

The Washington Post has an interesting article about James Clapper calling intelligence officials around the globe to effectively pre-warn them that cooperative activities with US intelligence agencies are likely to be revealed in the press before long, thanks to Ed Snowden. It's a worthwhile read, but two things struck me about it:

1. It sounds like the NSA might have finally figured out what Snowden took, only five or so months later.
2. They seem to know that (contrary to what they've claimed publicly) Russia does not have access to the trove of Snowden docs. That's not stated explicitly, but the following snippet makes it pretty clear:

   In one case, for instance, the files contain information about a program run from a NATO country against Russia that provides valuable intelligence for the U.S. Air Force and Navy, said one U.S. official, who requested anonymity to discuss an ongoing criminal investigation. Snowden faces theft and espionage charges.
   
   “If the Russians knew about it, it wouldn’t be hard for them to take appropriate measures to put a stop to it,” the official said.

   That statement certainly indicates that the Russians haven't taken those appropriate measures... meaning that they don't yet know about it. Of course, Snowden himself recently insisted that he got rid of the docs before going to Russia, but some chose not to believe him. The statements above suggest not only that Snowden was being truthful, but also that administration and Congressional officials who insist that Snowden gave the documents to the Russian are ignorant or lying.

It's funny how a little sunlight and transparency often has a contagious way of revealing even more over time...

Filed Under: ed snowden, intelligence, james clapper, leaks, russia

How The 'Information Dominance Center' Was Made To Look Like The Starship Enterprise Bridge

from the whooooosh dept

Update: As some folks pointed out in the comments, the Washington Post is noting that Alexander inherited the room, which was built a few years before he took over. Our apologies. The Foreign Policy story suggested otherwise. The Post notes that Alexander still liked to use the room to impress politicians, but he did not build it himself.

Last week, in discussing Foreign Policy magazine's giant profile on NSA boss Keith Alexander, we noted the wackiness of his decision, in an earlier job, to have the information center set up to he used a room designed to look like the bridge of the Starship Enterprise to impress politicians:

When he was running the Army's Intelligence and Security Command, Alexander brought many of his future allies down to Fort Belvoir for a tour of his base of operations, a facility known as the Information Dominance Center. It had been designed by a Hollywood set designer to mimic the bridge of the starship Enterprise from Star Trek, complete with chrome panels, computer stations, a huge TV monitor on the forward wall, and doors that made a "whoosh" sound when they slid open and closed. Lawmakers and other important officials took turns sitting in a leather "captain's chair" in the center of the room and watched as Alexander, a lover of science-fiction movies, showed off his data tools on the big screen.

"Everybody wanted to sit in the chair at least once to pretend he was Jean-Luc Picard," says a retired officer in charge of VIP visits.

A few stories had popped up focusing on this tidbit, but now photos of the setup have been revealed, as the architect firm who designed it, DBI Architects, apparently at one point published a PDF about the project, complete with a bunch of pictures. While the case study doesn't specifically call out Star Trek, it does note:

The futuristic, yet distinctly military, setting is further reinforced by the Commander’s console, which gives the illusion that one has boarded a star ship.

While some have reported this is the NSA's headquarters, that's not true. As noted, it was back when Alexander was running the Army's Intelligence and Security Command, and the room was built back in 1999 (prior to Alexander taking on the job). Still, it does give you a sense of how Alexander "charms" politicians. And, how can we not call out the fact that this place was called the "Information Dominance Center." So aggressive. Wouldn't it be better if the politicians involved in oversight of the intelligence community were focused on doing their jobs, rather than getting to play pretend in a taxpayer-funded Star Trek set?

Filed Under: army, information dominance center, intelligence, keith alexander, nsa, nsa surveillance, starship enterprise

DailyDirt: Eating The Right Stuff

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

We've all heard the phrase, "you are what you eat" as advice to avoid junk foods (even ethically-shady foods). It does make some intuitive sense that the foods we consume have a significant impact on our health, but it's often difficult to separate the fact from fiction for what constitutes heathy eating. There are raw food trends and diet fads to avoid just about any conceivable food category. Here are just a few interesting links on the topic of the things we eat having some rational health benefit.

• Cooking food allowed our ancestors to grow bigger brains since we didn't have to spend as much energy on hunting and gathering. Big brains need a lot of calories, consuming about 20% of the calories we ingest even though the brain is only about 2% of our body mass. [url]
• There's a common myth that taking vitamins can produce almost magical health benefits, but more scientific studies are finding that vitamins aren't necessarily a boon to society. Linus Pauling, the famous chemist who won two Nobel prizes, promoted the idea that vitamin C was particularly beneficial... but the science doesn't quite back him up. [url]
• Iodine has been added to dietary salt since 1924, originally to prevent goiter, but there's some evidence that iodine also plays a critical role in brain development. Economists studying the differences between areas of low iodine consumption versus higher iodine intake have found that people in areas that avoided iodine deficiencies have gotten smarter and may explain part of the Flynn Effect (which observes that developed countries saw a rise in IQ scores of 3 points per decade throughout the 20th century). [url]

If you'd like to read more awesome and interesting stuff, check out this unrelated (but not entirely random!) Techdirt post via StumbleUpon.

Filed Under: cooking, flynn effect, food, healthy, intelligence, iodine, iq, linus pauling, nutrients, vitamin c, vitamins

DailyDirt: Children Are The Future, Engineer Them Well, & Let Them Lead The Way

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

The movie GATTACA came out back in 1997, but the technology to breed better people is just now starting to become more practical. We've been able (through in vitro fertilization) to select a desired baby gender for years, so selecting other traits doesn't seem that far off -- even though gene expression is a pretty complicated process. Here are just a few more projects that could lead to designing our kids' genes with more fine tuning.

• Zhao Bowen heads up a genetic research project at BGI Shenzhen that aims to crack the genetic code for intelligence by sequencing the genes of thousands of intelligent people around the world. The project boldly claims that it could boost the IQ of unborn children by 20 points. [url]
• Genetic research is finding possible links between genetic markers and some forms of autism, suggesting that there could be genetic therapies in the future. Mapping genetic mutations to particular brain traits isn't a simple task, but with more data, brain research has the potential to make significant changes to society. [url]
• Professor Julian Savulescu argues that screening babies for genetic defects is simply responsible parenting. The debate over designer babies is far from over.... [url]

If you'd like to read more awesome and interesting stuff, check out this unrelated (but not entirely random!) Techdirt post via StumbleUpon.

Filed Under: autism, babies, children, designer babies, dna sequencing, eugenics, gattaca, gene therapy, genetic engineering, intelligence, iq, julian savulescu, parenting, zhao bowen
Companies: bgi shenzhen

Once Again, Will People Say That Reporters Revealing Details Of US Intelligence On Syria Be Called Criminals?

from the just-wondering dept

We've pointed out many times now how the old guard media seems to hate the new guard, in part because they're not getting their stories the "old fashioned way" -- which is buddying up to government officials and having them as "sources" where the reporter acts as an unofficial press officer for the government. Instead, when a Glenn Greenwald comes along, and gets information from Ed Snowden, he's accused of criminal acts. People keep insisting that Snowden's leaks revealed sources and methods, but so far they really haven't.

Yet, when more detailed leaks come directly from more obvious government sources, no one bats an eye. We pointed out how clear this was in the past with Barbara Starr, the CNN reporter that Greenwald has jokingly referred to as "the Pentagon spokesperson who works at CNN." She was among those who keep publishing reports from "inside sources" claiming that Snowden's leaks were incredibly damaging.

And yet, here is the very same Barbara Starr, reporting from an anonymous "U.S. official," details about what kinds of communications the US has intercepted by Syrian military leaders.

CNN has learned the United States has intercepts of conversations among top Syrian military officials discussing the chemical weapons attack after it took place last week, according to a U.S. official.

The intercepts form a key basis for the conclusion that the Syrian regime was behind the attack.

Right, so just as the US is pushing to intervene militarily in Syria, suddenly we get a "leak" revealing details of intelligence intercepts of Syrian leaders? Wouldn't you think that's the kind of thing that the government would most want to keep secret? But, of course, in this case, the hope is that this "leak" will help bolster the government's case for bombing Syria, so it's "okay." Yet, how come we don't hear the normal Snowden and Greenwald attackers calling for investigations into this "leak" and suggesting that Starr is a criminal?

Greg Mitchell has a succinct update of Richard Nixon's famous "if a President does it, it's not illegal" statement for the modern era. Apparently, "if a President leaks it, it's not illegal."

Filed Under: barbara starr, intelligence, journalism, leaks, nsa, reporting, sources, syria

Intelligence Official Says He Was Fired For Not Lying To Congress; Says Rogers & Feinstein Don't Know What's Happening

from the more-whistleblowing dept

As more and more details come out about the NSA surveillance programs, the federal government is looking more and more ridiculous. The latest comes from a column by John Fund at the National Review Online -- a publication which has been a pretty strong supporter of the surveillance state. The column highlights that even the NSA's staunchest defenders are beginning to get fed up with the NSA as more leaks come out (especially last week's revelation of thousands of abuses). But the really interesting tidbit is buried a bit:

A veteran intelligence official with decades of experience at various agencies identified to me what he sees as the real problem with the current NSA: “It’s increasingly become a culture of arrogance. They tell Congress what they want to tell them. Mike Rogers and Dianne Feinstein at the Intelligence Committees don’t know what they don’t know about the programs.” He himself was asked to skew the data an intelligence agency submitted to Congress, in an effort to get a bigger piece of the intelligence budget. He refused and was promptly replaced in his job, presumably by someone who would do as told.

Yes, it's an unsourced quote, so you can take it with whatever grains of salt you'd like. However, given the various revelations over the past few weeks and months, it's becoming increasingly clear that Congress does not, in fact, know what the NSA is up to, despite the claims by Rogers and Feinstein that there's strong oversight. Given that we've already seen how NSA agents are told to withhold certain info from those in charge of oversight, combined with the use of a loophole to avoid reporting details of its activities to Congress, the statement above certainly is supported by the various leaks to date.

Fund also highlights how the claim that Rogers' strong defense of the NSA appears to be out of ignorance of what's going on is based on Rogers' own quotes:

Back in July, House Intelligence Committee chair Mike Rogers claimed that there have been “zero privacy violations” on the part of NSA. After the leaked audit made news on Friday, he retreated to saying that “there was no intentional and willful violation of the law.”

A person who was really in charge of oversight would be demanding more information, public hearings and changes. But Rogers is doing none of that. How is he still in that job?

Filed Under: abuses, congress, dianne feinstein, intelligence, mike rogers, nsa, nsa surveillance, oversight, privacy

How The US Government Destroys The Lives Of Whistleblowers

from the there's-a-process? dept

One of the things we've heard over and over again from defenders of the NSA surveillance program is that Ed Snowden is somehow "not a whistleblower" because he could have just gone through "the proper channels" to alert people to abuse internally at the NSA. Of course, to most people, that seems quite laughable. They know what happens. The Washington Post has an article detailing how the government has destroyed the lives of various whistleblowers from within the intelligence community, who chose to go through "the proper channels" to voice their complaints. It's not pretty.

One of those discussed is Thomas Drake, whom we've written about often. He's now been reduced to working at an Apple store, because the government has more or less black-balled him, such that he can't get a job utilizing his actual skills. Bizarrely, he tells the story of Attorney General Eric Holder, who was in charge of the case against him that collapsed completely as it went to court, coming in to shop for a new iPhone:

Last year, he was working when he spotted an unlikely customer: Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., who came in to check out iPhones.

Drake introduced himself and asked: "Do you know why they have come after me?"

"Yes, I do," Holder said.

"But do you know the rest of the story?," he asked.

Holder quickly left with his security detail, Drake said.

They cover others, like Richard Barlow, who blew the whistle on the CIA lying to Congress about whether or not Pakistan could use some F-16s it was about to buy from the US to hold (and potentially launch) nuclear weapons. He went through the proper channels to alert officials of the mistake and three days later he was fired. Even though a GAO report vindicated Barlow and said his statements were reasonable and that he was clearly fired as a retaliatory move, he was unable to get another job in the government saying his "record was smeared." He now lives out near Yosemite Yellowstone in a mobile home and refers to himself as "seriously damaged, burned-out intelligence officer" who now suffers from PTSD.

The article has a few more stories like this one. Principled people who blew the whistle, and even when they were later vindicated, it made it impossible to get their jobs back or new jobs (or, in some cases, even to get money owed to them).

And people wonder why Snowden chose the path that he did? Sure, the other countries where he may end up don't have great track records either, but the US now has a well-established track record of doing serious harm to whistleblowers, especially within the intelligence community.

Filed Under: doj, ed snowden, eric holder, intelligence, leaks, nsa, thomas drake, whistleblowers

Valerie Plame & Joe Wilson: This Has Nothing To Do With Snowden, The Intelligence-Industrial Complex Is Out Of Control

from the transparency-needed dept

Husband and wife Valerie Plame Wilson and Joe Wilson are well-known for an earlier "leaking" of "intelligence" information that resulted in Plame being outed as a covert CIA officer. The two have now written a powerful op-ed for the Guardian pointing out that the "intelligence-industrial complex" is completely out of control and very ripe for abuse:

We are now dealing with a vast intelligence-industrial complex that is largely unaccountable to its citizens. This alarming, unchecked growth of the intelligence sector and the increasingly heavy reliance on subcontractors to carry out core intelligence tasks – now estimated to account for approximately 60% of the intelligence budget – have intensified since the 9/11 attacks and what was, arguably, our regrettable over-reaction to them.

They point out that the size of the operation, the reliance on private companies and contractors more focused on profits than what's best for the country, combined with the massive amount of secrecy all needs to change:

On this spying business, officials from Director of National Intelligence James Clapper to self-important senators are, in effect, telling Americans not to worry: it's not that big a deal, and "trust us" because they're keeping US citizens safe. This position must be turned on its head and opened up to a genuine discussion about the necessary, dynamic tension between security and privacy. As it now stands, these programs are ripe for abuse unless we establish ground rules and barriers between authentic national security interests and potential political chicanery.

Separately, they point out that the focus on Ed Snowden is nothing more than a "sideshow" which distracts from the real issue: which is just how insanely out of control the intelligence infrastructure of the country has become.

Filed Under: corruption, intelligence, intelligence-industrial complex, joe wilson, valerie plame

Government Has Already Fooled Us More Than Once On Privacy; History Belies How CISPA Will Be Used

from the let's-get-real dept

One of the key things we've seen in the pushback on CISPA is that its backers insist that people arguing against it don't really understand how the bill works, and that it does protect privacy. CISPA sponsor Rep. Mike Rogers himself took to Twitter this morning to tell the EFF that it's misreading his bill. But, of course, as we've seen, it seems that Rogers himself is the one being misleading when it comes to privacy. If he truly believed in privacy protections, he would have supported a variety of straightforward amendments that made it clear how privacy could be protected. But he didn't. Instead, he clearly left it open for abuse.

One of the key points that Rogers keeps saying over and over again is that this bill is not a "surveillance" bill. Why? Because it doesn't allow the NSA or others to go in and automatically get info. But Rogers is choosing his words very carefully, such that he absolutely misrepresents how the bill can and almost certainly will be used. And while he and other CISPA supporters will (and have) argued that the possible abuses of CISPA are crazy conspiracy theories that wouldn't happen in practice, we have too many examples of how the US government's intelligence infrastructure very quickly expands to make use of every single loophole provided to them within the law -- sometimes going so far as to interpret laws in ways clearly contrary to Congressional intent, just because they can. Let's just highlight two examples:

1. The FISA Amendments Act, which was passed in association with the Patriot Act, supposedly to give the NSA more powers to scoop up communications of folks involved in terrorist activity. Now, the NSA is -- by mandate -- not allowed to spy on Americans. And yet, multiple whistleblowers and hints from folks who know in Congress have made it quite clear that the NSA has interpreted the FISA Amendments Act to allow exactly that -- even as many in Congress clearly don't understand how the bill is being used.
   
   While it's still not official, enough information has been revealed to show that the NSA interprets the requirement that its surveillance target foreign persons to mean that as long as it's looking for foreign terrorist activity, it can spy on everyone. Get that? It's a sneaky trick that many have not realized. The NSA argues -- likely with agreement from a secret court ruling -- that so long as it can claim that it is investigating a foreign threat somewhere, somehow, the prohibition on spying on Americans does not apply. There is increasing evidence that this now means that the NSA is scooping up pretty much all data it can get its hands on. While it may not be going through it in real time, it appears to believe that as long as it can make the argument that it's searching for a foreign threat, that it can delve into that treasure chest of, well, everything.
   
   
2. Next: the "national security letters" (NSL) issue. While a court recently ruled these unconstitutional, this process has been widely abused by the FBI for years to get private information on people without a warrant and with a gag order on recipients. Every time it's been investigated, it's been shown that the FBI has widely abused its NSL powers. However, since there's almost no oversight, the FBI still feels free to make widespread use of the tool, which was only supposed to be used in extreme circumstances.
   
   Along those lines, the FBI has gotten so comfortable with asking companies for data without a warrant or any formal oversight process, that it was revealed a few years ago that, rather than going through the drudge of actually processing paperwork to get private info from AT&T, some agents simply used Post-It Notes to make their requests, which AT&T readily coughed up without question.

The point, hopefully, is clear. We've never seen law enforcement show any hint of not making use of any and all powers it has at its disposal to twist and interpret laws to allow it to get private information on people without a warrant or any real oversight. While the latest version of CISPA pays some tiny lip service to privacy, the simple fact is that, by definition, it wipes out all privacy laws in protecting companies entirely from liability for coughing up your information.

CISPA supporters also like to claim that since CISPA is "voluntary," companies will have no reason to give up your private info. That's nice in theory. And, sure, perhaps some principled companies will resist, but we've already seen the AT&T example above. And, even more importantly, we've seen how pressure from the US government, or even threats of the government shaming them publicly for not "helping" have been incredibly effective in making "voluntary" action suddenly seem obligated.

The saying goes "fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." We've been fooled many times by the US government insisting that certain laws won't be used to violate our privacy, when it later comes out that they were used in exactly that way. So forgive us for calling bullshit on Mike Rogers' claims that CISPA doesn't "allow" the government to spy on Americans. It absolutely does. It opens up a clear path for law enforcement and intelligence agencies (and others!) to hide behind the liability protections within the law to pressure companies to reveal whatever they want with absolutely no repercussions.

That seems like a pretty serious issue, and one that Congress and supporters of CISPA don't seem to want to admit.

Filed Under: abuse, cispa, cybersecurity, fisa amendments act, intelligence, mike rogers, national security letters, privacy

DailyDirt: Are You Smarter Than A Dolphin?

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

We may think we're pretty smart, but animals like dolphins are pretty smart too. For over 30 years, scientists have been trying to determine how smart dolphins really are. Bottlenose dolphins have a brain-to-body-weight ratio that is only second to humans, and they also have a very complex neocortex, the part of the brain that is responsible for traits typically associated with human intelligence, such as problem-solving and self-awareness. Researchers have even found that dolphins have von Economo neurons, which are associated with emotions, social cognition, and the ability to sense what others are thinking. Besides dolphins, people may be underestimating the intelligence of animals in general. Here are just a few links related to animal smarts.

• Recently, divers off the coast of Kona in Hawaii caught video footage of a bottlenose dolphin asking a human for help to get out of a tangle of fishing lines. The dolphin swam up to one diver as he gestured with his hand for it to come closer. The diver removed a fishing hook out of the dolphin's left pectoral fin, and at one point the dolphin had to surface for air, but it went back so that the diver could finish untangling it. [url]
• Dog owners can now figure out just how smart their dogs are with Dognition. It's a web app that lets dog owners record the results of their experiments, which involve playing games with their dogs designed to assess five dimensions of intelligence (empathy, communication, cunning, memory, and reasoning). The data collected from the Dognition project could help scientists better understand the way dogs think and behave. [url]
• Dogs are able to subtly alter the timing, pitch, and amplitude of their barks to produce a variety of sounds that could have different meanings. While humans may have trouble distinguishing between a "food growl" and a "stranger growl," studies have shown that dogs can recognize the meaning of particular barks and growls of other dogs. [url]
• Here are eight other animals that show notable signs of intelligence: Chimpanzees have DNA that is more than 98% identical to human DNA; elephants exhibit self-awareness; cephalopods are curious and have the ability to learn and use tools; crows are crafty; squirrels can be deceptive; dogs can understand people's intentions; cats are extremely adaptable; and pigs can distinguish between familiar scribbles on a screen and ones that they have never seen before. [url]

If you'd like to read more awesome and interesting stuff, check out this unrelated (but not entirely random!) Techdirt post.

Filed Under: animal intelligence, animals, brains, cat, cephalopod, chimpanzee, crow, dog, dognition, dolphin, elephant, intelligence, pig, smart animals, squirrel