DailyDDoSe™ by @ELyssaD™

PROMIS Software evolution to Ptech

2012-02-19T22:39:00.001-06:00

PROMIS Software evolution to Ptech

altacocker.com | Nov 7th 2001

Michael Kane

"I believe that Dick Cheney also had the ability using evolutions of the PROMIS software, to penetrate and override any other radar computer or communications system in the government."

- Mike Ruppert, in "Summation: Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury," from Crossing The Rubicon, p.592

[At the heart of our story is a program (we'll call it Ptech, after the company that produced it) that combines artificial intelligence, datamining, and "interoperability," the capacity for one program to read, operate, and modify the source codes of other programs. The computational power of the Ptech evolution of PROMIS represents a daunting new surveillance-and-intervention capability in the hands of the same elites who planned 9/11, prosecute the subsequent resource wars, and are presiding over what may become a full economic and military disaster for the resource-consuming citizens of America and the world. Since the "War On Terror" and the coming dollar/fossil fuel collapse will necessitate new levels of domestic repression, this is just the capability those elites require. Ptech is the functional equivalent of Total Information Awareness.

The human side of Ptech is where the thievery and murder come in: among the financiers and programmers of Ptech are apparent members of an international network of organized criminals involved in decades of narcotraffic, gunrunning, money laundering, and terrorism. Their personal and professional connections reach up into the highest levels of the American government, and their activities are still underway.

The issue of Saudi complicity in the attacks of 9/11 has played out into two different views. The first is the idea that the Saudis were solely responsible. This has been pumped up by Fox News and largely accepted as gospel in certain parts of the mainstream media. The second view is that the Saudis were set up to take the fall for having pulled off 9/11, covering up U.S. complicity. Neither view is correct, and both depend on a mistaken view of that country as a monolithic, homogeneous actor on the world stage. The opposite is true.

At the top of Arabian society is the giant royal House of Saud, descendants of Abdul Aziz Ibn Saud, a charismatic warlord who used religious and marital alliances to consolidate his military conquests and, eventually, found a modern state on the Arabian Peninsula in 1932. Ibn Saud's success was partially dependent on his powerful religious allies, the inheritors of a doctrinaire form of Islam founded by the cleric Mohammed bin Abdul Wahhab (1702 - 1793). That coalition became increasingly unstable with the massive influx of oil wealth that began shortly after the first Arabian discoveries by SoCal (now Chevron) and Texaco, also in the 1930's.

Like virtually all Islamic states, Saudi Arabia has been the target of ongoing efforts by American intelligence aimed at suppressing any stirrings of incipient secular leftism. This is opposed, we believe, to what may be convenient and clandestine support for "al-Qaeda" terrorists (i.e. fundamentalists), acting as US proxies, who might destabilize the kingdom in advance of the US carving off only those regions with oil reserves. Socially polarized oil wealth, the ever-changing Arab-Israeli conflict, and American geopolitical maneuvering configure a daunting matrix of hidden forces that can't be fully understood or managed - not least because the intelligence elements are often double or triple agents with inscrutable loyalties.

The Ptech story is of intense interest for its implications about US government guilt in 9/11. As Ralph Schoenman, Michel Chossudovsky, Paul Thompson and others have argued, "al Qaeda" is not only traceable to CIA activity in Pakistan and Afghanistan during the Soviet period, it is also a current tool of American imperial ambitions. That directly contradicts the official story, in which al Qaeda is the foreign devil incarnate, a militant hate group formed straight from the soil of Saudi ideology - with no economic grievances, no interests in common with anyone in the non-Muslim world, and above all, no connections to the United States through funding, personnel, armaments, drug trafficking, visa assistance, or communications. It certainly is a militant hate group, but the rank and file may be totally unaware of real connections between their own leaders and the people they oppose with their very lives. These disturbing links would be just as agonizing - and just as unthinkable - for American citizens as they would be for a militant Islamist teenager in a ski mask jumping hurdles at some secret training camp.

Beneficiaries of the Ptech-connected MAK charities, the young men in Hezbollah and Hamas are fighting in land disputes, not heady ideological quests. They are also bitter, bereaved, murderous bigots with all the psychic rigidity and hysteria found in fundamentalists from Oklahoma to Hebron to Jeddah. Their hatred of the American national security state is surely absolute, but they are also beneficiaries of the Pentagon's need for an Enemy. That means that they can expect the United States to provide covert help of some kind at crucial points in the game. And the most despicable element in the American side of that process is the Bush-Cheney junta itself, which used its own assets inside the terrorist network associated with Osama bin Laden to murder three thousand civilians in New York, Washington, and Pennsylvania as a pretext for unending warfare. This was done for reasons of state. But it was also done for personal gratifications including vast sums of money, permanent blackmail over those involved, and a heroin-like rush of criminally insane individual power. Sophisticated or naïve, cynical or grandiose and idealistic, each person involved betrayed humanity. And the apparatus that permitted this remains in place - as do most of the personnel.

The solution to the Ptech problem is not just to get all that creepy software the hell off the computers. The bigger solution is transparency and disclosure, de-militarization and political internationalism; localization of production and exchange; and a more equitable distribution of resources and opportunity. As Stan Goff has explained in these pages, the word opportunity does not necessarily refer to competition for purchasing power and domination. It means the opportunity to grow Haitian rice in Haiti and sell it in Haiti, without having to contend with the export dumping of American corporate agribusiness. It means the chance to maintain a tribal existence in an Afghanistan that is neither the proving ground for a US-Soviet proxy war nor the playground of American-funded drug lords. And though all ideals are warped by the rigors of practice, this was the point of President Kennedy's de-escalation in Laos, his Alliance for Progress in Latin America, and his refusal to invade Cuba:

What kind of peace do I mean? What kind of peace do we seek? Not a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war. Not the peace of the grave or the security of the slave. I am talking about genuine peace, the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living, the kind that enables men and nations to grow and to hope and to build a better life for their children--not merely peace for Americans but peace for all men and women--not merely peace in our time but peace for all time.

Now let's get back to the business of sticking up for people who were murdered on 9/11 and in its aftermath, and to diminishing the present danger. - JAH].

January 27, 2005, PST 0900 (FTW) - Ptech - the software company whose major investors and directors are strongly linked to the Muslim Brotherhood - produced software that derived from PROMIS, had an artificial intelligence core, and was installed on virtually every computer system of the U.S. government and its military agencies on September 11, 2001.

This included the White House, Treasury Department (Secret Service), Air Force, FAA, CIA, FBI, both houses of Congress, Navy, Department of Energy, IRS, Booz Allen Hamilton, IBM, Enron and more.

Whoever plotted 9/11 definitely viewed the FAA as an enemy that morning. Overriding FAA systems would be the most effective way to ensure the attacks were successful. To do this, the FAA needed an evolution of PROMIS software installed on their systems and Ptech was just that; the White House & Secret Service had the same software on their systems - likely a superior modified version capable of "surveillance and intervention" functions.

Ptech is enterprise architecture software, which Indira planned on customizing to use as "risk architecture" software.

Enterprise architecture software is designed with the express purpose of knowing everything that is going on throughout the entirety of the enterprise in real-time. In the case of Ptech software installed on Whitehouse, Secret Service, Air Force and FAA systems, the enterprise included all of the data produced by those agencies in real-time.

Maybe this is why Ari Fleischer stated the Whitehouse didn't view Ptech as a threat; quite to the contrary.1 The Ptech software was a vital asset needed for the White House to execute the 9/11 plot, and may still be in place for possible use against professionals in government and military positions trying to do their jobs in the future.

The FAA & Ptech
In the 9/11 Commission report a "phantom flight 11" was added to the official version of what happened that day. A tape was played at the final commission hearing on June 17, 2004, of a woman from the FAA telling NORAD that flight 11 was still airborne at 9:24 am, long after it had actually struck the WTC. Originally this was reported to be the time when the FAA notified NORAD that flight 77 was off course and headed to the Pentagon.

This information was used by the commission to claim NORAD had never been informed that flight 77 was headed towards Washington D.C., leaving the FAA holding the bag for the penetration of the most heavily guarded airspace in the world. The commission's report states they were "unable to identify the source of this mistaken FAA information."

So what was it doing there?

FTW's position is that "phantom flight 11" was injected onto FAA radar screens by "the maestro"4 using Ptech software to override FAA systems. Let's examine the feasibility of such a scenario.

Ptech had been working on the data blueprint of the FAA's entire network for 2 years prior to 9/11. Their confidential business plan lays out just how much access they had to the FAA's data systems.

Ptech Inc. Confidential Business Plan: Page 37 of 46

The FAA recognized the need for leveraging its IT investment, with a means of centralizing activities and introducing consistency and compatibility within the operating systems environment. A Ptech consulting team was organized to use activity modeling to identify key functions that could be examined for improvement in network management, network security, configuration management, fault management, performance management, application administration, network accounting management, and user help desk operations.5

What the above tells us is that Ptech had access to the entire informational barn door of the FAA's data systems. In an amazing exchange published in part 1 of this series, FTW editor Jamey Hecht was able to confirm a central thesis of Crossing the Rubicon while interviewing Wall St. Whistleblower Indira Singh. Indira is an IT professional who started First Boston's first Information Technology group in 1975 and had worked on Wall St. until 2002. She's been an IT consultant for Banker's Trust, the U.N., JP Morgan, and American Express. In 1988 she started TibetNet - a derivative of DARPA's Internet, the service you are likely reading this report on at the moment. The exchange was as follows:

Jamey Hecht: You said at the 9/11 Citizens' Commission hearings, you mentioned - its on page 139 of transcript - that Ptech was with Mitre Corporation in the basement of the FAA for 2 years prior to 9/11 and their specific job was to look at interoperability issues the FAA had with NORAD and the Air Force, in case of an emergency.

Indira Singh: Yes, I have a good diagram for that…

Jamey Hecht: And that relationship had been going on mediated by Ptech for 2 years prior to 9/11. You elsewhere say that the Secret Service is among the government entities that had a contract with Ptech. Mike Ruppert's thesis in Crossing the Rubicon, as you know, is that the software that was running information between FAA & NORAD was superseded by a parallel subsuming version of itself that was being run by the Secret Service on state of the art parallel equipment in the PEOC with a nucleus of Secret Service personnel around Cheney.

…In your view, might it have been the case that Cheney was using Ptech to surveil the function of the people who wanted to do their jobs on the day of 9/11 in FAA & NORAD, and then intervene to turn off the legitimate response?

Indira Singh: Is it possible from a software standpoint? Absolutely it's possible. Did he (Cheney) have such a capability? I don't know. But that's the ideal risk scenario - to have an over-arching view of what's going on in data. That's exactly what I wanted for JP Morgan.

You know what's ironic about this; I wanted to take my operational risk blueprint which is for an operational event going wrong and I wanted to make it generic for extreme event risk to surveil across intelligence networks. What you're describing is something that I said, 'boy if we had this in place maybe 9/11 wouldn't have happened.' When I was going down to In-Q-Tel and getting these guys excited about creating an extreme event risk blueprint to do this, I'm thinking of doing exactly what you're saying Cheney might have already had! [emphasis added]

-- end of transcript

Ptech was working with Mitre Corp. in the FAA and, according to Indira, Ptech was the Alpha dog in that relationship. Mitre has provided simulation & testing technologies for the Navy.6 They provide multiple FAA technologies and boast in their annual reports that their two biggest clients are DOD & FAA. Mitre knew the FAA's technological enterprise inside and out, including any simulation-and-testing (war game) technology operated by the FAA.

This was the perfect marriage to ensure that the capacity to covertly intervene in FAA operations on 9/11 existed - in the middle of simulated war games.It is also the perfect marriage to ensure that the command and control of these capabilities was readily available to Dick Cheney via Secret Service Ptech software in the Presidential Emergency Operations Center, the bunker to which Cheney was "rushed" by the Secret Service. As already pointed out in part 1 of this series, Ptech does what Total Information Awareness (TIA, the DARPA program to monitor all electronic transactions in real-time) is supposed to do. (There are an undetermined number of other software programs in the hands of an undetermined number of corporations also capable of this. Again, enterprise architecture software is designed with the express purpose of knowing everything that is going on throughout the entirety of the "enterprise" in real-time.

In the case of Ptech software, installed on White House, Secret Service, Air Force and FAA systems (as well as most American military agencies), the enterprise included all of the real-time data of the above mentioned agencies. Indira has confirmed Ptech software could have been set up to allow Dick Cheney to surveil and intervene on FAA radar screens.

As documented by former Bush counter-terrorism advisor Richard Clarke in his book, Against All Enemies, on 9/11 the Secret Service had the capability of seeing FAA radar screens in real time; and as documented by Mike Ruppert in Crossing the Rubicon, Secret Service has the authority to take supreme command over any and all American agencies - including the Air Force.

9/11 is a prime example of what Indira Singh calls "extreme event risk." In the months prior to the attack, she was working on a program capable of providing data in real time to prevent these types of events from happening. She had pitched this very idea just one week before 9/11 at In-Q-Tel Headquarters (CIA) in Virginia, giving a final presentation for an ICH (Interoperability Clearinghouse) project code named "Blue Prophet." Indira explained to CIA why she was supporting ICH in this project.

She told the In-Q-Tel team, "The intelligence and other agencies need this now." One of the men with CIA looked at Indira with what she describes as the "blackest, coldest look anyone has ever given her."

They weren't interested in Blue Prophet's software for interoperability or risk, but rather the data it would produce because the data would point in the right directions. That data was very predictive, producing quality real-time intelligence. This is one week before 9/11. If In-Q-Tel already had this capability, it's no wonder they would be wary of someone like Indira - the woman from New York in Risk Management who resided a few minutes' walk from the Twin Towers.

Debriefed by Secret Service - looking for a PROMIS
It was Indira Singh whose investigative research into Ptech laid the groundwork for this series. One of the first reporters Indira contacted was Joe Bergantino, a 20-year veteran investigative reporter for a CBS affiliate in Boston.

"There are some great people in mainstream media," says Indira, and according to her, Joe is one of them. Joe told her that Ptech's CEO Oussama Ziade had stated, "If it wasn't for that woman in New York, none of this (the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) raid) would be happening". Neither Joe nor Indira liked the way that sounded.

Joe contacted Senator Grassley's office. A Secret Service agent, Charlie Bopp, was reassigned to Grassley's office, and put in charge of the Ptech file. An initial meeting was scheduled with Indira in January 2003.

Indira showed up with what she called, "A major Ground Zero attitude." She was supposed to be on the 106th floor of the WTC on 9/11 but instead responded as a civilian EMT that morning. This was very personal for her. Charlie understood and nevertheless made the arrangements for a debriefing at the Secret Service's National Threat Assessment Center (NTAC) in April 2003.

During the debriefing Indira was asked by a member of the Secret Service, "Is Ptech PROMIS?"

"I already knew what had happened to Danny Casolaro, and they were asking me if I had copies of Ptech," Indira told FTW.

Danny Casolaro was the investigative journalist mysteriously "suicided" in a West Virginia hotel room while investigating the theft of PROMIS software. Casolaro's investigation had uncovered a shadowy network he called "the Octopus" that seemed to have its hands in everything from drug trafficking and money laundering, all the way up to political assassinations and coups d'etat. When Casolaro's body was discovered, his arms were violently slashed and all the documents he traveled with were missing. He had told friends and relatives if anything happened to him they shouldn't believe it was by accident.

Being asked such a loaded question, she responded with her Ground Zero attitude saying:

"You have a copy of the software, why don't you tell me? This is not about the software guys, ok - was it a PROMIS? It was a place you could hide a PROMIS, a place you can drop a PROMIS."

Indira told FTW, "I was going to use Ptech software for risk surveillance at JP Morgan - Duh!"

By the very nature of risk surveillance, it is necessary to use PROMIS progeny based on artificial intelligence to achieve the capabilities we are describing. Charlie Bopp and those present for Indira's debriefing knew this, but they wanted to talk about the software and not the people behind the software. That is extremely significant. In part 1 of this series we've shown how the major people behind Ptech link to the Muslim Brotherhood, elements of the Saudi Royal Family, as well as Dick Cheney and the powerful American 'Christian' cult known as "The Fellowship," or, "The Family."

Indira wanted to name names, but Charlie wouldn't let her. "We can't investigate the people behind Ptech," said Charlie. "Just trust me, let's focus on the software." They gave no reasoning for this, they just said, "we can't."

"Well if you can't talk about the people behind this, it's a waste of time because with software like that you can't find trapdoors now. This is live stuff!" Singh told FTW. "You can't prove an intelligent agent [a small software component that reaches out to claim or insert information from another system - Ed.] went out and sent information somewhere. It's like proving you ate a piece of cake when you were 10 years old, unless you have video of it, it's not going to happen. It's that ephemeral." [emphasis added]

In other words, PROMIS-based activity leaves no footprints.

This means trapdoors are no longer necessary, or at least, no longer detectable. If Indira is correct, there would have been no "fingerprints" left of any kind showing just what Ptech software was used for on 9/11 and who used it.

"These guys debriefing me were from Military Intel, so they were trying to find out what I knew," says Singh. According to her, August of 2002 (the month before the story on Ptech was shut down by the White House, and three months before Ptech was raided) was a significant month. There were supposedly leaks of some kind coming out of the Persian Gulf. She was asked if Ptech software could have been the source of those leaks.

Singh responded, "Well if Military Intel are using Ptech in the Gulf, obviously! YES!"

During one of the initial meetings Indira threw a hat on the table from FDNY Engine 4, Ladder 15 and said, "I want you to put this on your desk, so any time you think of playing some political games you remember there were real people down there."

Indira Singh was done playing games.

Muslim Brotherhood, Christian Cultists, and Nazis
In part 1 of this series we documented the extensive ties from the Muslim Brotherhood running through Ptech. The Brotherhood was founded by Hassan Al-Banna and expanded with the help of Mahmoud Abu Saud of the House of Saud.7

This extensive network runs through various shell organizations and charities with interlocking boards, such as the New Jersey based real estate investment company BMI, CARE International, and the Northern Virginia based SAAR network - named after al Sulaiman Abdul Al-Aziz al-Rajhi, a scion of one of Saudi Arabia's richest families. Heading the SAAR network (renamed Safa) is Yakub Mirza, who also sits on the board of Ptech. It is of interest to note that claims against Al-Rajhi Banking & Investment Corp. for funding and supporting terrorism were recently dismissed by U.S. District Judge Richard Casey.

One of the central funding mechanisms in this nexus is the Al Taqwa Bank of Switzerland - now Nada Management - which the Department of Treasury says funds Al Qaeda.

Hitler supporter Albert Friedrich Armand Huber (aka Ahmed Huber) and Youseff Nada sit on the board of Al Taqwa. Nada reportedly helped the Grand Mufti escape from Nazi Germany when the Third Reich was teetering on the brink of collapse, and Ahmed Huber knew the Grand Mufti quite well; so well in fact, it was the Mufti who convinced Huber to convert to (the Brotherhood's form of) Islam.

Huber has spoken publicly of a "New Right" marriage of Nazi ideology and Islamist fascism. He has both a picture of Adolph Hitler and Osama bin Laden in his Swiss home.

Al Taqwa is a "hawala," a bank conducting transactions leaving no paper trail through a "good faith" global network that transfers funds - no questions asked.8 Bank Al Taqwa is located in the Bahamas; the parent company, Nada Management, is based in Lugarno, Switzerland, and is linked to the Royal Family of Liechtenstein.

Al Taqwa has done business with Asat Trust. The now deceased Prince Emanuel von und zu Liechtenstein became a board member of Asat Trust in May 1970 and stayed until November 1990, when he was replaced by Martin Wachter, the trust's current director.9

Asat Trust is on the American and U.N. terror list. According to the American Jewish Daily Forward, copies of business registration documents on file with authorities in Liechtenstein show that Asat Trust has been intimately involved with the Al Taqwa network during the last 30 years, registering changes in company names, personnel and financial structure.10

Most frightening of all is that this network seems to have links back to the powerful American Christian cult known as "The Fellowship," or "The Family." This organization is tied to American 'Christian' men of high political power including John Ashcroft, Dick Cheney, George W. Bush, multiple Congressional members and prominent business leaders. Some "Family" members have stated they would love to have Osama bin Laden as a guest speaker because of the covenant he has with his followers. Doug Coe, the Family's leader who was praised by George H.W. Bush at the 1990 National Prayer Breakfast for his "quiet diplomacy," openly admires Hitler's "covenant."11

Yassin Al Qadi - the Saudi terrorist financier who funded Ptech and BMI - claimed to have met Dick Cheney in Jeddah before he became Vice President and the two "still share cordial relations." When Cheney's office was asked to comment on this, spokeswoman Jennifer Miller Wise stated the Vice President gave her no reason to believe he had met with Al Qadi before he assumed office.12

That is a non-answer; "no reason to believe" he met Al Qadi leaves no reason to believe he didn't. Regardless, there are more transparent connections between elements of Saudi and American elites.

In November of 2001, Halliburton was awarded a $140 million contract to develop an oil field in Saudi Arabia by the kingdom's state-owned petroleum firm, Saudi Aramco, and a Halliburton subsidiary, Kellogg Brown & Root, along with two Japanese firms, hired by the Saudis to build a $40 million ethylene plant.13

Dick Cheney is, of course, the former CEO of Haliburton.

As recently as 1991 ARAMCO had Khalid bin Mahfouz sitting on its Supreme Council or board of directors. Mahfouz, Saudi Arabia's former owner of the nation's largest bank, has been reported in several places to be Osama bin Laden's brother in law. However, he has denied this and brought intense legal pressure to bear demanding retractions of that allegation.14 He also denies any involvement in financing terror organizations.

One journalist who was sued by bin Mahfouz, Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld, is counter suing in New York Federal Court. She is the only one of some 30 authors not to retract claims that Mahfouz has financed Al Qaeda operations as published in her book, Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed and How to Stop it.

Khalid bin Mahfouz has major partnership investments with the multi-billion dollar BinLadin Group of companies and is a former director of BCCI, the infamous criminal drug-money laundering bank which performed a number of very useful services for the CIA before its 1991 collapse under criminal investigation by the legal apparatus of multiple countries.15

George Herbert Walker Bush, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney all have extensive ties to the Saudi Royal family and Saudi elites, who in turn have questionable ties to terrorist financiers such as Yassin al-Qadi. It is therefore not unreasonable for Dick Cheney to have met al-Qadi while in Jeddah while CEO of Haliburton.

This is the reality of the world we live in; where a covert international power structure supercedes the interests of nation states, and the misnomer of "national security" is used to keep this network's secrets hidden from the prying eyes of authentic journalists and the public at large.

Original Page: http://www.altacocker.com/other_items/promis-2-ptech.htm

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

Illuminati Created the US to Advance NWO

2012-02-19T21:17:00.001-06:00

Illuminati Created the US to Advance NWO

by Henry Makow, henrymakow.com
March 29th 2010

You blind guides. You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel! (Matthew 23:24)

Most Americans scoff at the mention of conspiracy but their country was created by Freemasonry and they don't have a clue. Freemasons drafted the Constitution and signed the Declaration of Independence. The Indians who dumped the tea in the harbor were Masons. So was Paul Revere and his Minutemen, George Washington and most of his generals. The Marquis de Lafayette was shunned until he joined the Masons. At least 20 of the 42 US Presidents were "Brothers."

Freemasonry is the Church of Lucifer masquerading as a fraternal mystical philanthropic order. It fronts for Illuminati (Masonic & Cabalist Jewish) central bankers who started the US as a vehicle to advance their New World Order.

In the words of Masonic elder Manley P. Hall, "we must also perfect the plan of the ages, setting up here the machinery for a world brotherhood of nations and races." ("The Secret Destiny of America," 1944, p.3)

The Freemasons provided Americans with ideals -- civil liberties, equal opportunity and no taxation without representation -- which still are valid. But they were enticements designed to win power. As you might have noticed, these promises were not intended to be kept.

Most historians won't tell you this. In Upton Sinclair's words: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it."

But there was one historian who did reveal the truth. Bernard Fay (1893-1978) was a Harvard-educated Frenchman. He is considered an "anti-Mason" because his 1935 book, "Revolution and Freemasonry: 1680-1800" is one of the very few to reveal the extent of Masonic participation in the US and French Revolutions.

He had access to Masonic archives in the US and Europe. His book is actually a sympathetic portrayal of Freemasonry with no references to its occult nature. However, as a Vichy Frenchman, he subsequently helped the Nazis identify Masons during World War Two. He was imprisoned after the war but pardoned in 1952 by Charles De Gaulle.

MASONIC AMERICA

Fay explains that in the 1770's, the US consisted of 13 isolated colonies with different governments, religious affiliations, customs, racial profiles, and social and political structures. There were intense rivalries and longstanding antagonisms. A letter took three weeks to get from Georgia to Massachusetts. "Masonry alone undertook to lay the foundation for national unity in America because [as a secret society] it could spread throughout the colonies and work steadily and silently. It created in a limited but very prominent class of people a feeling of American unity without which... there would have been no United States." (p. 230)

"In 1760, there was no town, big or small, where Masonry had not spun its web. Everywhere it was preaching fraternity and unity." (230)

Benjamin Franklin, who was the Grand Master of a French lodge, raised millions of francs crucial to financing George Washington's army. He was the first to submit a concrete plan for military collaboration and political federation to a Congress representing all colonies. He established a chain of Masonic newspapers in all of the colonies. You can imagine where he found the money.

Fay says George Washington and his ragtag army kept the spirit of independence alive. He organized many military lodges and personally participated in their activities. On Dec. 27,1778, he led a parade after Philadelphia was recaptured:

"His sword at his side, in full Masonic attire, and adorned with all the jewels and insignia of the Brotherhood, Washington marched at the head of a solemn procession of 300 brethren through the streets of Philadelphia to Christ Church, where a Masonic Divine Service was held. This was the greatest Masonic parade that had ever been seen in the New World." (246)

"All the staff officers Washington trusted were Masons, and all the leading generals of the army were Masons: Alexander Hamilton, John Marshall, James Madison, Gen. Greene, Gen. Lee, Gen. Sullivan, Lord Stirling, the two Putnams, Gen. Steuben, Montgomery, Jackson, Gist, Henry Knox and Ethan Allen were Masons. They all gathered around their Master Mason Washington and they all met at the 'Temple of Virtue,' 'a rude structure forming an oblong square forty by sixty feet, one story in height, a single entrance which was flanked by two pillars... The atmosphere which surrounded Washington was Masonic and it may be said that the framework of his mind was Masonic." (p. 250)

Imagine if Washington had shown the same devotion to Christianity. Fay points to a "curious" degree of coordination between Masons in the US and British armies:

"It seems even likely that the unforgettable and mysterious laxness of certain English military campaigns in America, particularly those of the Howe brothers, was deliberate and due to the Masonic desire of the English general to reach a peaceful settlement..." (251)

SURRENDER OF CORNWALLIS

In this context, it is pertinent to recall the confession of General Cornwallis when he surrendered to General Washington at Yorktown (Oct. 19, 1781.)

"Jonathan Williams recorded in his "Legions of Satan," (1781,) that Cornwallis revealed to Washington that "a holy war will now begin on America, and when it is ended America will be supposedly the citadel of freedom, but her millions will unknowingly be loyal subjects to the Crown."

The Crown is the Illuminati (i.e. shareholders of the Bank of England.) Cornwallis went on to explain what would seem a contradiction:

"Your churches will be used to teach the Jew's religion and in less than two hundred years, the whole nation will be working for divine world government. That government that they believe to be divine will be the British Empire. All religions will be permeated with Judaism without even being noticed by the masses, and they will all be under the invisible all-seeing eye of the Grand Architect of Freemasonry."

In a 1956 speech, Senator Joseph McCarthy reflected on these words:

"Cornwallis well knew that his military defeat was only the beginning of world catastrophe that would be universal and that unrest would continue until mind control could be accomplished through a false religion. What he predicted has come to pass. A brief sketch of American religious history and we have seen Masonry infused into every church in America with their veiled Phallic religion."

CONCLUSION

We can't see the Judeo-Masonic conspiracy because we are not accustomed to thinking in terms of hundreds of years. But the Illuminati bankers have been plotting the "new order of the ages" (featured on the US dollar along with the uncapped Masonic pyramid) for thousands of years.

We may have the pleasure and pain of witnessing their design come to fruition. As we do, it is worth remembering that Americans, in fact all peoples, have allowed themselves to be duped.

Our role is analogous with that of the French nobles who collaborated in the French Revolution and then were slaughtered. Fay writes: "All these nobles did not hesitate to side with the revolutionary party, even though it was to cost them their rank, their estates and their lives." (p. 287)

In the words of a speaker at a secret B'nai Brith meeting in Paris in 1936:

"Yet it remains our secret that those Gentiles who betray their own and most precious interests, by joining us in our plot should never know that these associations are of our creation and that they serve our purpose...

"One of the many triumphs of our Freemasonry is that those Gentiles who become members of our Lodges, should never suspect that we are using them to build their own jails, upon whose terraces we shall erect the throne of our Universal King of Israel; and should never know that we are commanding them to forge the chains of their own servility to our future King of the World."

Original Page: http://www.henrymakow.com/the_united_states_is_a_masonic.html

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

Gang Stalking, An Overview

2012-02-19T20:59:00.001-06:00

Gang Stalking, An Overview (Sep. 15, 2006)

educate-yourself.org | Oct 15th 2006 9:29 AM

Translate this page:

Gang Stalking, An Overview

Author Unknown
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/gangstalkingoverview15sep06.shtml
Posted Sep. 15, 2006

http://www.gangstalking.ca/

OVERVIEW

Gang stalking involves the use of multiple individuals to stalk, harass and taunt a victim, as well as to vandalize personal property. This can take place for many years, particularly since law enforcement and legislation have yet to catch up with the reality of organized stalking by groups.

Techniques of psychological warfare are used against the target in a methodical and well orchestrated attack that often leaves the target a victim of ridicule among his friends and family because this occurrence is so hard to believe. However, the number of targets are increasing to the point that they can network with one another and find out that the same tactics are used everywhere. These tactics are intended to weaken the target to the point of physical and psychological collapse.

The reasons why a person is initially targeted can vary. Sometimes the person may be a political activist. Others may have been in the wrong place at the wrong time. Corporations apparently have even been known to hire these stalking groups to silence people who were once in their employ. These stalking gangs may be lied to about the target, thinking that perhaps the person is a deviant who needs to be driven out of town. The reasons are only limited to the imagination. In some cases, according to David Lawson, author of Terrorist Stalking in America, the person has done nothing wrong but is simply used as a practice target or as an example to others in the group to show what can happen to them if they anger the group in some way. This serves to keep the members of these stalking groups tied to the group through intense fear of becoming a target. It is such a terrifying prospect because the gang members are intimately aware that the lives of the targets are utterly destroyed. (See FAQ for more information).

Many people ask, "Why would anyone engage in this kind of activity?". In order to answer that question, it's important to realize that the person who has decided to target an individual is not the person (or persons in this case) doing the stalking. This is known as "stalking by proxy". Those who have called "the hit" (so-to-speak) may be doing it for any number of reasons, including revenge, jealousy, or a desire to keep someone silent. It may be that physically harming a person is considered too extreme or too risky by the perpetrators. In fact, this kind of psychological attack can be a far more effective way to harm someone. It can completely destroy a person's life while leaving little or no evidence to incriminate the perpetrators.

Additionally, there are the reasons that the stalkers themselves engage in the activity, which have little or nothing to do with why the person may have been targeted in the first place. It is conceivable that the participants in the harassment don't even know why the person has been targeted, nor would most of these individuals have any personal stake in harassing the victim. But certain things are clear - this is an both an addictive behavior as well as a form of entertainment for the stalkers. From the expressions on the faces of some of the perpetrators who come face-to-face with their targets, there is a vicious kind of pleasure that they derive from bullying their victim. Clearly they like the feeling of being "in control".

Like our society's current obsession with "reality TV", this activity must inevitably gain popularity as the ultimate experience of "reality" entertainment. Such is the nature of the bottomless pit within the stalkers that thirsts, evermore, for greater and greater thrills. To the perpetrators, their targets are merely their prey, in a game that never ends. But make no mistake, whatever the reasoning behind it, this is a vicious and calculated hate crime.
DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITIES

The types of activities which take place are often subtle, and sometimes cannot be distinguished from normal everyday things that go wrong, but they typically occur much more frequently than they would normally. David Lawson points out in his book, Terrorist Stalking in America, that the victim is intentionally "sensitized" to the presence of the stalkers, so he or she will know that the occurences are orchestrated. This causes intense psychological strain due to the isolation and ridicule that results when the target tries to share these experiences with others. It is a psychological reign of terror intended to make a victim look crazy and intended to keep him or her in a constant state of anxiety and stress as to "what will happen next" (also known as "hyper-vigilance").

There was a 1944 movie called "Gaslight" about a husband trying to drive his wife crazy, from which the term "gaslighting" was derived. According to Slang City, "to gaslight someone is to drive them crazy by intentionally confusing them. It comes from the 1944 movie Gaslight, in which sweet heiress Ingrid Bergman marries creepy Charles Boyer, who hopes to get her inheritance by driving her insane. He convinces her she's seeing and hearing things that don't exist, including the gaslights (what they had before light bulbs) going on and off when he isn't home." The subtle techniques used to make the wife doubt her own sanity are similar to the techniques used by gang stalkers to unnerve a target. To see a summary by Eleanor White on the topic, click here.

For example, the perpetrators (who appear to frequently have access to their targets' homes) may sometimes come into the house while the target is out and move things around a little bit, or spread some dirt on the floor or on furniture, or move an item from the house to the car. But usually they won't cause enough damage to involve the Police. This shows that this activity is a psychological game of cat and mouse, and has little to do with any overt kind of damage that may be caused, such as burning someone's house down or stealing valuables.

In some cases, the target doesn't know s/he is being targeted. It just looks as though the world is full of very rude people, and everything s/he owns breaks constantly ("bad luck"). According to Lawson, the perpetrators don't need the target to know s/he is targeted in order to fill the need within themselves that they are in control.

See Terrorist Stalking in America for more information.
( http://www.gangstalking.ca/terstalk_2.htm )

Related

Group Stalking, a Growing Menace (Aug. 25, 2006)
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/groupstalking17aug05.shtml

FAQ on Organized Gang Stalking In North America (Aug. 25, 2006)
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/gangstalkingfaq2001.shtml

Poisoning, Gang Stalking & Psychotronic Torture in Canada (Mar. 15, 2006)
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/gangstakingandpsychotronicsincanada15mat06.shtml

Reader Comments

Subject: "Gang" or Organized Stalking
From: Kevin To: Editor

Hi Ken,

I just read your online report on "gang" stalking. Pretty amazing stuff. Nearly all of the methods of stalking described and those discussed on Eleanor White's website mirror those that I've experienced over the past four years from San Francisco to the Middle East, to New York, and in Illinois. What is particular to my experience and may be for others is an occult (demonic or satanic) element (I call them, collectively, "the synagogue of satan") directed by a non-human entity I'd known for more than fifteen years before I realized that he was central to the negative influences I was experiencing with increasing intensity.

There's a demonic manifestation I've read about from several individuals online at sites like the ethericwarriors.com and astraldynamics.com forums who calls itself "St. Germaine" that John Gibson, my demonic or satanic lead stalker, bears many similarities with. A week or so ago, in a kind of half-sleep, in the middle of a lot of his nonsensical babbling, I asked him what he wanted and he replied, "You." My answer, as always, remains firmly, "No."

Do you recall two years ago when the comedian Dave Chappelle abruptly left his hugely successful television show and fled the United States? After reading something of his experiences it would appear that he was also a subject of organized stalking, although he probably doesn't yet realize it. What's interesting about my having been stalked by an organized group is the cable television show called "The Kevin Hill Show" that began airing at precisely the time when I was most confused by my attackers and my physical and mental defenses were at their lowest.

I'd been experiencing intense harassment for a little over a year in San Francisco before that show began airing at which point my stalkers, many of them I understand now to be non-humans, began to generate talk amongst themselves, but always within my hearing, that my immediate family had somehow sold the rights to personal diaries I've kept since early childhood without my knowledge or permission. A ridiculous idea, of course, but one of the key objectives of organized harassment is isolation of the target, and many of the people

I'd tried to describe the experiences of stalking and harassment to were planned participants in the activity who merely claimed not to understand what I was talking about, or suggested that I was somehow mentally unstable. Years later I understand this as both an attack from within and without the human body and mind, meant to break down all senses and defenses against satanic initiation and/or demonic possession. Organized stalking as a program would seem to take many years of observation of the intended subject, as well as careful planning, before a human target begins to notice that anything is amiss.

Robert Bruce has written an excellent book called "Practical Psychic Self-Defense" that I would recommend to anyone under psychic or spiritual assault. My name was used as the title of a show to create discord, and to generate what Mr. Bruce calls"core images" that can be triggered during rest or by "gang" harassment participants in public settings to cause stress, anxiety, and probably physical symptoms of illness related to energy body attachments. Some of the terminology used in the related link to Ms. White's website like "public theater" and the film "Gaslight" are terms that perpetrators used to describe to me, indirectly, what was happening.

Thank you very much for publishing your findings. Although it's unfortunate to read that a great many others the world over are experiencing this new social phenomena, it's a relief to learn that we're not alone.

Kevin

***

Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2006
From: bestckurself@yahoo.com
To: Editor

Thank You for publishing the article on stalking. This has been going on in my life now for almost 3 years, I am now homeless, friendless, and live with the primary member who has admitted it, but won't tell me why.

I have no where else to go, living like this is hell........ There is no help, nowhere to turn. I'm trapped... God how can this be... Everything in the article is true, I have backup documentation to prove it, to no avail. The police can't do anything and my family thinks I'm nuts....

Anyway thanks again, it's sad to say, but it is nice to now I'm not alone

***

Current News | Introduction | Colloidal Silver | Chemtrails | Sylphs | Emerging Diseases | Forbidden Cures |Ozone | Immunity Boosting | Nutrition | The CIA
Mind-Body Connection | Ozone | Bioelectrification | Story on Drugs | Vaccine Dangers | Cancer | Newsletter | New World Order | NWO News | Pam Schuffert
James Casbolt | Phil Schneider | Al Bielek | Trevor James Constable | Mind Control | Brice Taylor | Ted Gunderson | The Relfes | Free Energy || Montalk
Dr. Robert Bitzer | T. Lobsang Rampa | Ruth Drown | ZS Livingstone | David Brandt | Red Elk | Phil Ledoux | Gary Wade | BBB | The Draft | Veterans Awaken
Tone Gen | Depleted Uranium | Discussion | Dowsing | Police & Tasers | Rev. Sun Myung Moon | British Israel | The End Times | Amy Goodman Gatekeeper
'Peak Oil' | Amitakh Stanford | Military Draft | Rosie's Predictions | Project Blue Beam | Otto Skorzeny | Insights on Aliens | Cell Towers | Cell Phone Dangers
CPS/DCF Tyranny | Adrenal Burnout | The Women Warriors | Orgone Adventures | Dr. John Coleman | Railroading Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald | Henry Makow
Bush Family & Nazis | Holistic Dentists | Metal Free Dentistry | Water Supply Sabotage | Dr. Hulda Clark Books | Planet X Sequel | 'Undocumented Immigrants'
War on Terror | Tavistock | U.S. Concentration Camps | FEMA | Aliens Are Coming! | Guiding Principles | Global Warming | Gang Stalking | Monoatomic Gold
Spiritualsim | Hope | Healing Thought Forms | Vanquish Fear | Prevent Alien/Demonic Attacks | Rethinking Noam Chomsky | Rockefeller File | War is a Racket
Letters | Codex Alimentarius | Zeitgeist Refuted | Airport Authoritarianism | Daily Blog | Global Warming | Allies Contact Sheet | Hydrogen Peroxide | Protocols of Sion |
Radio Interviews | The Strawman Explained | Swine Flu Hoax/Vaccine | Gary Null on Vaccine Dangers | Don Nicoloff | "Everything is OK" |
Daily Blog | Products | Orgone Generators | The Succor Punch | The Mini Silver Terminator | Home | Links | Contact Us/ E-mail

Want to Contact the Editor? First read this

Original Page: http://educate-yourself.org/cn/gangstalkingoverview15sep06.shtml

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

An Explanation of the New World Order.

2012-02-19T20:52:00.001-06:00

New World Order Definition

threeworldwars.com | Mar 20th 2003

Introduction

The following article is extracted from an excellent analysis of the New World Order by author Ken Adachi which can be found at educate-yourself.org.

The term New World Order (NWO) has been used by numerous politicians through the ages, and is a generic term used to refer to a worldwide conspiracy being orchestrated by an extremely powerful and influential group of genetically-related individuals (at least at the highest echelons) which include many of the world's wealthiest people, top political leaders, and corporate elite, as well as members of the so-called Black Nobility of Europe (dominated by the British Crown) whose goal is to create a One World (fascist) Government, stripped of nationalistic and regional boundaries, that is obedient to their agenda.

Listen to the Zionist* banker, Paul Warburg:

"We will have a world government whether you like it or not. The only question is whether that government will be achieved by conquest or consent." (February 17, 1950, as he testified before the US Senate).

Their intention is to effect complete and total control over every human being on the planet and to dramatically reduce the world's population by two thirds. While the name New World Order is the term most frequently used today to loosely refer to anyone involved in this conspiracy, the study of exactly who makes up this group is a complex and intricate one. For further research sources, please see the side bar on the left.

In 1992, Dr John Coleman published Conspirators Hierarchy: The Story of the Committee of 300. With laudable scholarship and meticulous research, Dr Coleman identifies the players and carefully details the New World Order agenda of worldwide domination and control. On page 161 of the Conspirators Hierarchy, Dr Coleman accurately summarizes the intent and purpose of the Committee of 300 as follows:

"A One World Government and one-unit monetary system, under permanent non-elected hereditary oligarchists who self-select from among their numbers in the form of a feudal system as it was in the Middle Ages. In this One World entity, population will be limited by restrictions on the number of children per family, diseases, wars, famines, until 1 billion people who are useful to the ruling class, in areas which will be strictly and clearly defined, remain as the total world population.

There will be no middle class, only rulers and the servants. All laws will be uniform under a legal system of world courts practicing the same unified code of laws, backed up by a One World Government police force and a One World unified military to enforce laws in all former countries where no national boundaries shall exist. The system will be on the basis of a welfare state; those who are obedient and subservient to the One World Government will be rewarded with the means to live; those who are rebellious will simply be starved to death or be declared outlaws, thus a target for anyone who wishes to kill them. Privately owned firearms or weapons of any kind will be prohibited."

Why the Conspiracy is Unknown

The sheer magnitude and complex web of deceit surrounding the individuals and organizations involved in this conspiracy is mind boggling, even for the most astute among us. Most people react with disbelief and skepticism towards the topic, unaware that they have been conditioned (brainwashed) to react with skepticism by institutional and media influences. Author and de-programmer Fritz Springmeier (The Top 13 Illuminati Bloodlines) says that most people have built in "slides" that short circuit the mind's critical examination process when it comes to certain sensitive topics. "Slides", Springmeier reports, is a CIA term for a conditioned type of response which dead ends a person's thinking and terminates debate or examination of the topic at hand. For example, the mention of the word "conspiracy" often solicits a slide response with many people.

What most people believe to be "Public Opinion" is in reality carefully crafted and scripted propaganda designed to elicit a desired behavioral response from the public. Public opinion polls are really taken with the intent of gauging the public's acceptance of the New World Order's planned programs. A strong showing in the polls tells them that the programming is "taking", while a poor showing tells the NWO manipulators that they have to recast or "tweak" the programming until the desired response is achieved.

The NWO Modus Operandi

The NWO global conspirators manifest their agenda through the skilful manipulation of human emotions, especially fear. In the past centuries, they have repeatedly utilized a contrivance that NWO researcher and author David Icke has characterized in his latest book, The Biggest Secret, as Problem, Reaction, and Solution.

The technique is as follows: NWO strategists create the Problem - by funding , assembling, and training an "opposition" group to stimulate turmoil in an established political power (sovereign country, region, continent, etc.) that they wish to impinge upon and thus create opposing factions in a conflict that the NWO themselves maneuvered into existence. In recent decades, so called opposition groups are usually identified in the media as 'freedom fighters' or 'liberators'.

At the same time, the leader of the established political power where the conflict is being orchestrated is demonized and, on cue, referred to as 'another Hitler' (take your pick: Saddam Hussein, Milosevic, Kadaffi, etc.). The 'freedom fighters' are not infrequently assembled from a local criminal element (i.e. KLA, drug traffickers). In the spirit of true Machiavellian deceit, the same NWO strategists are equally involved in covertly arming and advising the leader of the established power as well (the NWO always profits from any armed conflict by loaning money, arming, and supplying all parties involved in a war).

The conflict is drawn to the world stage by the controlled media outlets with a barrage of photos and video tape reports of horrific and bloody atrocities suffered by innocent civilians. The cry goes up "Something has to be done!" And that is the desired Reaction.

The NWO puppeteers then provide the Solution by sending in UN 'Peace Keepers' (Bosnia) or a UN 'Coalition Force' (Gulf War) or NATO Bombers and then ground troops (Kosovo), or the military to 'search for Weapons of Mass Destruction', which of course are never found. Once installed, the 'peace keepers' never leave. The idea is to have NWO controlled ground troops in all major countries or strategic areas where significant resistance to the New World Order takeover is likely to be encountered.

Who is the NWO?

The corporate portion of the NWO is dominated by international bankers, oil barons and pharmaceutical cartels, as well as other major multinational corporations. The Royal Family of England, namely Queen Elizabeth II and the House of Windsor, (who are, in fact, descendants of the German arm of European Royalty - the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha family - changed the name to Windsor in 1914), are high level players in the oligarchy which controls the upper strata of the NWO. The decision making nerve centers of this effort are in London (especially the City of London), Basel Switzerland, and Brussels (NATO headquarters).

The United Nations, along with all the agencies working under the UN umbrella, such as the World Health Organization (WHO), are full time players in this scheme. Similarly, NATO is a military tool of the NWO.

The leaders of all major industrial countries like the United States, England, Germany, Italy, Australia, New Zealand, etc. (members of the "G7/G8" ) are active and fully cooperative participants in this conspiracy. In this century, the degree of control exerted by the NWO has advanced to the point that only certain hand-picked individuals, who are groomed and selected are even eligible to become the prime minister or president of countries like England, Germany, or The United States. It didn't matter whether Bill Clinton or Bob Dole won the Presidency in 1996, the results would have been the same. Both men are playing on the same team for the same ball club. Anyone who isn't a team player is taken out: i.e. President Kennedy, Ali Bhutto (Pakistan) and Aldo Moro (Italy). More recently, Admiral Borda and William Colby were also killed because they were either unwilling to go along with the conspiracy to destroy America, weren't cooperating in some capacity, or were attempting to expose/ thwart the takeover agenda.

The NWO's Role in Shaping History

Most of the major wars, political upheavals, and economic depression/recessions of the past 100 years (and earlier) were carefully planned and instigated by the machinations of these elites. They include The Spanish-American War (1898), World War I and World War II; The Great Depression; the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917; the Rise of Nazi Germany; the Korean War; the Vietnam War; the 1989-91 "fall" of Soviet Communism; the 1991 Gulf War; the War in Kosovo; and the two Iraq wars. Even the French Revolution was orchestrated into existence by elements of the NWO.

The instigation of a trumped-up war as a cover for amassing fortunes which can be dated back to at least the 12th Century when only a core group of nine members of the Knights Templar, kicked off the The Crusades that lasted for over a century and a half.

The core group mentioned above have been reported as being the military arm of a secret society known as the Priory of Sion, but this has been proven to be a hoax,

In 1307, the king of France, Philippe the Fair, coveted the wealth and was jealous of the Templars' power. The French king set out to arrest all the Templars in France on October 13. While many Templars were seized and tortured, including their Grand Master, Jacques de Molay, many other Templars (who had been tipped off) escaped. They eventually resurfaced in Portugal, in Malta (as the Knights of Malta) and later in Scotland as The Scottish Rites of Freemasonry, with Albert Pike playing a key role in defining a plan for establishing a world government.

The acquisition and consolidation of ever greater wealth, natural resources, total political power, and control over others are the motivating forces which drive the decisions of the NWO leaders. The toll in human suffering and the loss of innocent lives are non issues for these individuals.

Next: The New World Order Timeline.

Previous: World War 1 and World War 2 compared.

The preceding article was extracted from an excellent analysis of the New World Order by author Ken Adachi which can be found at http://educate-yourself.org/nwo/.

* See Zionism for a discussion of the difference between Zionism and Judaism.

If you found this article interesting and want access to other carefully researched and well written articles, you might want to see what others are saying about the ThreeWorldWars newsletter.

Original Page: http://www.threeworldwars.com/new-world-order.htm

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

Project Monarch: The Tangled Web

2012-02-19T20:41:00.001-06:00

Project Monarch: The Tangled Web

web.archive.org | May 2nd 1999
The following is a draft copy, and will be revised or corrected by Mr. Cannon based on the feedback he receives - Doc]

There has been some discussion on this group about the alleged "Monarch" mind control project. The primary proponents of this story are Mark Phillips and Cathy O'Brien, with whom I interacted about five years ago.

The final chapter of my upcoming book, "The Controllers," includes a section discussing (objectively and somewhat skeptically) the claims made by this couple. Perhaps the readers of the newsgroup would appreciate an advance peek at what I've written. (Please keep in mind: This draft is still somewhat rough.)

Project Monarch: The Tangled Web

by Martin Cannon

Since 1991, Mark Phillips and Cathy O'Brien have alternately appalled and enthralled their growing audience with tales of mind control, programmed prostitution, ritual abuse, and worse. The handsome couple from Tennessee initially told their story to a select group of writers and journalists. Now, they spread the word via right-wing periodicals and outside-the-mainstream radio programs. They've also written a book: Trance-formation of America.

Cathy claims to be a victim of the Monarch Project, an insidious CIA/military/Satanist plan to use ritual abuse victims as mind-controlled guinea pigs. Victims of the plot, almost always female, grew up within multi-generational Satanic families. Sold by their parents to government brainwashers, Monarch kids are intentionally "split" into directed multiple personalities, useful for various criminal purposes - as spies, as drug mules, as prostitutes, and so forth. The well-developed primary personality never realizes what was done by, or to, the alter personalities. Powerful individuals with a taste for sexual excess choose their playmates from the ranks of Monarch graduates, the better to avoid after-the-fact blackmailers and tattle-talers, a la Vicki Morgan and (if you believe certain writers) Marilyn Monroe. For example, O'Brien describes in detail how one important aide to Ronald Reagan enjoyed raping her anally while using a stun device to prod her body with electric convulsions. This is the sort of fetish that might cause some concern among the voters, if ever they learned the truth. Hence, Monarch.

Little about the basic Monarch theory struck me as technically implausible - indeed, this putative project seems, in many ways, the logical extension of MKULTRA. I therefore initially found the O'Brien/Phillips story quite intriguing. But I also found Mark and Cathy exceptionally frustrating to deal with.

Mark Phillips has offered varying descriptions of how he first learned about Monarch programming. At one point, he said he had worked for an unnamed "DIA contractor," in which position he came across various materials detailing the government's mind control projects. But in a letter to me (June 1, 1991), he claimed to have discovered the operation during his "tenure in the '60s and '70s at NASA (Huntsville, Alabama) and Woodland Hills R&D (Woodland Hills, California)" I have lived near Woodland Hills most of my life, yet have never heard of any such corporation, which remains a mystery to everyone else I have consulted. (A call to Directory Assistance came up goose eggs.) Phillips seems rather too young to have worked in a sensitive position at NASA in the 1960s. He supposedly "retained" copies of classified documents detailing "harmonics, electroshock, hypnotic programming, mind/body conditioning (torture), (limited) drug applications for programming and deprogramming, and the names and backgrounds of the expendables (victims)." Peculiarly, he has never produced any of this confirming documentation. Nor has he produced any evidence that he ever worked for any government contractor. Independent background checks have revealed only that he has held far less impressive jobs, such as selling recreational vehicles.

He also briefly joined forces with a Tennessee businessman named Alex Houston. Houston, in a telephone interview with researcher Mike Knight, claims that he was married to Cathy O'Brien in 1988. Oddly, she never mentioned this marriage in her voluminous autobiographical writings, although she has frequently labeled Houston an operator within Project Monarch - an accusation he strongly denies. Houston reports that he and Phillips once traveled to China to sell capacitors, and were briefly detained on suspicion of espionage by the Chinese government. After returning to the United States, Houston found that Cathy had gone off with Mark.

Mark Phillips claims that his "inside knowledge" allowed him immediately to spot Cathy's status as a Monarch victim. He therefore whisked her away and embarked on a deprogramming operation - although his description of "how to deprogram" seems unnervingly similar to descriptions I have read of how to instill programming. The couple traveled to Alaska, where, Cathy claims, they gave the FBI testimony concerning various entertainment figures involved in the Monarch drug conspiracy. In 1991, the couple began distributing "documented proof" of the scheme to their network of journalists, researchers, and interested parties - including myself.

Unfortunately, the only "documentation" I ever saw consisted of unsworn testimony written by Cathy O'Brien, in which she accused various political and entertainment figures of participation in the plot. Her two-to-ten page short-stories-from-hell detailed the horrific deeds (mostly involving sex and drugs) perpetrated by the likes of Ronald Reagan, George Bush, and Cathy's bête noir, Senator Robert Byrd. The entire program, she averred, was commanded by the occultist I have already labeled "Mr. A." Cathy also identified other putative Monarch victims, such as Country singer Loretta Lynn and Dodger pitcher Fernando Valenzuala, who, we are told, owed his baseball prowess to hypnosis. (Apparently the trance wore off.) Even comedian Jack Benny fell afoul of the Monarch conspiracy.

On one occasion (or so Cathy claims), she was taken to a rural retreat, where she serviced the eldritch sexual needs of then-vice president George Bush and one of his chief aides. This story's high point depicts Bush "kissing the sky" while strung out on heroin, as he repeatedly gurgles to his comrade: "You look just like Elmer Fudd!" (A wicked part of me almost wishes it were true)

I once told Mark that found impressive Cathy's willingness to name names, thereby placing the couple at some legal risk. Mark became nervous, and, rather less-than-gallantly, observed that his name didn't appear as author on any of the accusatory writings, leaving him in a position protected from libel action.

A number of journalists, such as freelance writer Civia Tomarkin (who has followed the ritual abuse controversy), quietly studied the O'Brien/Phillips "paperwork." But, as Tomarkin observes, "there's a difference between testimony and proof," and Mark and Cathy refuse to provide the proof they have promised. Cathy has frequently asserted that her body bears many marks, wounds, and "cancerous moles" corroborating her tales of torture - yet she never makes available probative photographs or other medical evidence. Nor will she provide documentation that she has had cancer. Everyone who meets her notices that her fashion-model good looks remain unflawed by any visible scars. Cathy often describes the genitalia of the famous politicos she has serviced - but no journalist could hope to validate these descriptions, unless he possesses a talent for furtive glances in the Senate restroom.

The couple use familiar tactics to counter their critics: After Tomarkin's interest turned to skepticism, Mark Phillips asserted that the journalist was herself part of the Great Monarch Conspiracy.

It is a very powerful conspiracy, indeed. We are told that Hollywood animators deliberately place hypnotic cue images into children's television shows, such as Disney's Duck Tales. Rock-and-roll Monarchists deliberately include hypnotic cue words in the lyrics of many popular songs. When asked why they don't bring civil charges against the Monarchians, Mark and Cathy explain that the Satanic plot controls the entire court system - just as it also controls the presidency, much of Congress, the entertainment industry, and large sectors of both the Mormon and Catholic churches. The Vatican looms large in the Phillips/O'Brien demonology. In their 1996 book "Trance-formation of America," the couple describe World Vision as a "Jesuit" conspiratorial group intent on bringing about a socialistic "New World Order." (World Vision is actually a conservative Protestant missionary group. ) Ever since our intrepid anti-Monarch crusaders discovered that their primary audience leans far to the Right, they have heavily emphasized the "New World Order" bugaboo and Mark takes pains to hide his atheism.

I backed away from this story in September of 1991, when Cathy sent a letter begging me to "rally the troops" in support of Mark Phillips after a Federal Grand Jury in Tennessee had called him in for testimony. "We nervously anticipate a set-up," Cathy wrote, apparently hoping her network would start a "Free Mark" movement. I didn't bite. Soon thereafter, Mark Phillips explained to me that the Grand Jury had falsely accused him of threatening President George Bush. This assertion made no sense: Anyone accused (even falsely) of posing a presidential threat would first confront the Secret Service, not a Grand Jury. Later still, I discovered that the Grand Jury had merely called in Mark Phillips as a potential witness in a matter unrelated to either Bush or Monarch. Why, then, the call-to-arms?

Throughout 1991, O'Brien and Phillips inundated their network with "paperwork" outlining the crimes of numerous American political figures, especially those hailing from the south. Yet they never mentioned Arkansas governor Bill Clinton, either in writing or in telephone interviews. That situation changed after the 1992 Democratic convention, which chose Bill Clinton as the party's presidential candidate: Cathy then distributed a two-page report titled "Clinton Coke Lines" - allegedly "compiled 3/89." (Why, then, didn't we see it earlier?)

In this paper, Cathy claims to have met then-governor Clinton in 1984, at a contributor's mountain retreat. All parties did mounds of cocaine while they discussed using a fleet of trucks, jestingly labeled "Clinton's Coke Lines," to run CIA drugs through Arkansas. Thus spake Bill, as per O'Brien: "Bottom line is, we've got control of the drug industry, therefore we've got control of them (suppliers). You control the guy underneath ya, and Uncle has ya covered - what have ya got to lose?" Soon after making this observation, Clinton insisted that Cathy (apparently brought in to supply "entertainment") had to leave the room, even though she was a "presidential model" capable of keeping state secrets.

Cathy O’Brien claims that Arkansas entertainment director H.B. Gibson was present at this meeting. In 1993, investigator Mike Knight telephoned Gibson. Knight, no fan of the president he will always call "Slick Willie," undoubtedly wanted to prove this story true. But Gibson seemed genuinely bewildered when he heard the names Alex Houston and Cathy O'Brien. After lengthy, carefully-phrased questioning, Knight reluctantly decided that Cathy had witnessed no such meeting involving Bill Clinton.

And that's the bottom line: Mark-and-Cathy stories never come backed by hard evidence. When Cathy claimed on the radio that a Vermont Senator had sexually abused her in an L.L. Bean store located in that state, a caller pointed out that the L.L. Bean company maintains no stores in Vermont. Cathy rationalized the problem away. There's always a rationalization.

Just to make matters pluperfectly surreal: Mark Phillips has privately admitted to at least one researcher that he (Phillips) concocted the name "Project Monarch," just to see who would pick it up.

At this point, an honest investigator can only feel aggravated and dispirited - which may be the entire point of this charade. In fact, ritual abuse claimants throughout the country had spoken darkly of a "Project Monarch" well before Mark and Cathy came on the scene. Now, skeptics can posit that Mark Phillips contaminated the testimony of others, even though the chronology argues against this scenario.

As mentioned previously, the essential idea behind the Monarch theory seems "do-able." And to be fair, Mark and Cathy never seemed to be "in it for the money" - in fact, they spent a tremendous amount on their mailings, while the potential for libel suits placed them at some financial risk. I doubt that sales of their book (published by a small firm, and undistributed, so far, in the larger stores) will fetch them much monetary benefit.

How, then, do we assess their claims? Some believe that Cathy's testimony is essentially true, while others damn it as a pack of lies. Still others suspect that Mark and Cathy have played out a clever disinformation gambit, mixing fact and fiction in order to discredit any genuine victims who "break program." Worth noting: "Mr. A" has never attempted to sue the couple, even though they have accused him publicly of numerous crimes, and even though he is notorious for having his lawyers write intimidating letters to anyone he perceives as injuring his reputation.

At the end of the day, we can only contemplate Shakespeare's famous phrase: "Oh, what a tangled web we weave" The sentiment has never seemed more appropriate.

Home Back Æ

Original Page: http://web.archive.org/web/19980424205231/http://www.io.com/~hambone/arch/monarch.html

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

Notable Names Project Monarch #Nashville

2012-02-19T20:36:00.001-06:00

Notable Names

web.archive.org | Apr 24th
Project Monarch: Nazi Mind Control

Amidst the subtle cerebral circumvention of the gullible populace, through a multitude of manipulated mediums, lies one of the most diabolical atrocities perpetrated upon a segment of the human race; a form of systematic mind control which has permeated every aspect of society for almost fifty years.

by Ron Patton

To objectively ascertain the following, one may need to re-examine preconceived ideologies relating to the dualistic nature of mankind. Resolving the philosophical question of whether we are inherently good or inherently evil is tantamount in shaping our perception of reality; specifically, the spiritual variable within the equation of life.

This exposition is substantiated by declassified U.S. government documents, individuals formerly connected to the U.S. intelligence communities, historical writings, researchers knowledgeable in mind control, publications from mental health practitioners, and interviews taken from survivors unwittingly subjected to a highly complex form of trauma-based mind control known as MONARCH programming. A word of caution for survivors of intensively systematic mind control and/or some form of ritualized abuse: There are numerous "triggers" in this article. It is therefore recommended not to read it unless appropriate support systems are in place or if you have a thoroughly reintegrated personality.

A Brief History of Control

The Mystery Religions of ancient Egypt, Greece, India and Babylon helped lay the foundation for occultism, meaning "hidden knowledge." One of the earliest writings giving reference to occultism is the Egyptian Book of the Dead, a compilation of rituals explicitly describing methods of torture and intimidation (to create trauma), the use of potions (drugs) and the casting of spells (hypnotism), ultimately resulting in the total enslavement of the initiate.¹ These have been the main ingredients for a part of occultism known as Satanism, throughout the ages.

During the 13th Century, the Roman Catholic church increased and solidified its dominion throughout Europe with the infamous Inquisition. Satanism survived this period of persecution, deeply entrenching itself under the veil of various esoteric groups.

In 1776, a Bavarian Jesuit by the name of Adam Weishaupt was commissioned by the House of Rothschild to centralize the power base of the Mystery Religions into what is commonly known as the Illuminati, meaning "Enlightened Ones." This was an amalgamation of powerful occultic bloodlines, elite secret societies and influential Masonic fraternities, with the desire to construct the framework for a "New World Order."

The outward goal of this Utopia was to bring forth universal happiness to the human race. However, their underlying intention was to gradually increase control over the masses, thus becoming masters of the planet.

The Anglo Alliance

By the 19th century, Great Britain and Germany were recognized as the primary geographic areas of Illuminati control. It then should be of little surprise to know the first work in Behavioral Science research was established in England in 1882, while much of the early medical and psychiatric techniques involved in mind control were pioneered at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute in Germany.

The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations was set up in London in 1921 to study the "breaking point" of humans. Kurt Lewin, a German psychologist, became the director of the Tavistock Institute in 1932, about the same time Nazi Germany was increasing its research into neuropsychology, parapsychology and multi-generational occultism.

Interestingly, a progressive exchange of scientific ideas was taking place between England and Germany, most notably in the field of eugenics: the movement devoted to "improving" the human species through the control of hereditary factors in mating. The nefariously enigmatic union between the two countries was bonded, partly through the Order of the Golden Dawn, a secret society which consisted of many high ranking officials in the

Nazi party and British aristocracy.

Top SS Nazi officer Heinrich Himmler was in charge of a scientific project called Lebersborn, which included selective breeding and adoption of children, a peculiarly large number of twins among them.² The purpose of the program was to create a super-race (Aryans) who would have total allegiance to the cause of the Third Reich (New World Order). Much of the preliminary experimentation concerning genetic engineering and behavior modification was conducted by Dr. Josef Mengele at Auschwitz, where he coldly analyzed the effects of trauma-bonding, eye-coloring and "twinning" upon his victims.

Beside the insidious surgical experimentation performed at the concentration camp, some of the children were subjected to massive amounts of electroshock. Sadly, many of them did not survive the brutality. Concurrently, "brain-washing" was carried out on inmates at Dachau, who were placed under hypnosis and given the hallucinogenic drug mescaline.

During the war, parallel behavioral research was led by Dr. George Estabrooks of Colgate University. His involvement with the Army, CID, FBI and other agencies remains shrouded in secrecy. However, Estabrooks would occasionally "slip" and discuss his work involving the creation of hypno-programmed couriers and hypnotically-induced split personalities.³

After WWII, the U.S. Department of Defense secretly imported many of the top German Nazi and Italian Fascist scientists and spies into the United States via South America and the Vatican. The code name for this operation was Project PAPERCLIP.⁴ One of the more prominent finds for the U.S. was German General Reinhard Gehlen. Hitler's Chief of Intelligence against Russia. Upon arriving in Washington D.C. in 1945, Gehlen met extensively with President Truman, General William "Wild Bill" Donovan, Director of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) and Allen Dulles, who would later become the stalwart head of the CIA. The objective of their brain-storming sessions was to reorganize the nominal American intelligence operation, transforming it into a highly efficient covert organization. The culmination of their efforts produced the Central Intelligence Group in 1946, renamed the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in 1947.

Reinhard Gehlen also had profound influence in helping to create the National Security Council, from which the National Security Act of 1947 was derived. This particular piece of legislation was implemented to protect an unconscionable number of illegal government activities, including clandestine mind control programs.

The Evolution of Project MKULTRA

With the CIA and National Security Council firmly established, the first in a series of covert brain-washing programs was initiated by the Navy in the fall of 1947. Project CHATTER was developed in response to the Soviet's "successes" through the use of "truth drugs." This rationale, however, was simply a cover story if the program were to be exposed. The research focused on the identification and testing of such drugs for use in interrogations and the recruitment of agents.⁵ The project was officially terminated in 1953.

The CIA decided to expand their efforts in the area of behavior modification, with the advent of Project BLUEBIRD, approved by director Allen Dulles in 1950. Its objectives were to:

discover a means of conditioning personnel to prevent unauthorized extraction of information from them by known means,
investigate the possibility of control of an individual by application of special interrogation techniques,
investigate memory enhancement and
establish defensive means for preventing hostile control of agency personnel.

In August 1951, Project BLUE BIRD was renamed Project ARTICHOKE, which evaluated offensive uses of interrogation techniques, including hypnosis and drugs. The program ceased in 1956. Three years prior to the halt of Project ARTICHOKE, Project MKULTRA came into existence on April 13, 1953 along the lines proposed by Richard Helms, Deputy Director of Central Intelligence (DDCI) with the rationale of establishing a "special funding mechanism of extreme sensitivity."⁶

Of the 149 subprojects under the umbrella of MKULTRA having been identified, Project MONARCH, officially begun by the U.S. Army in the early 1960's (although unofficially implemented much earlier) appears to be the most prominent and is still classified as TOP SECRET for "National Security" reasons.⁹ MONARCH may have culminated from MKSEARCH subprojects, such as operation SPELLBINDER, which was set up to create "sleeper'' assassins (i e. "Manchurian candidates") who could be activated upon receiving a key word or phrase while in a post-hypnotic trance. Operation OFTEN, a study which attempted to harness the power of occultic forces was possibly one of several cover programs to hide the insidious reality of Project MONARCH.

Definition and Description

The name MONARCH is not necessarily defined within the context of royal nobility, but rather refers to the monarch butterfly. When a person is undergoing trauma induced by electroshock, a feeling of light-headedness is evidenced; as if one is floating or fluttering like a butterfly.

There is also a symbolic representation pertaining to the transformation or metamorphosis of this beautiful insect: from a caterpillar to a cocoon (dormancy, inactivity), to a butterfly (new creation) which will return to its point of origin. Such is the migratory pattern that makes this species unique.

Occultic symbolism may give additional insight into the true meaning. Psyche is the word for both "soul" and "butterfly" coming from the belief that human souls become butterflies while searching for a new reincarnation.¹⁰

Some ancient mystical groups, such as the Gnostics, saw the butterfly as a symbol of corrupt flesh. The "Angel of Death" (remember Mengele?) in Gnostic art works was portrayed crushing the butterfly.¹¹ A marionette is a puppet that is attached to strings and is controlled by the puppet master, hence MONARCH programming is also referred to as the "Marionette Syndrome." "Imperial Conditioning" is another term used, while some mental health therapists know it as "Conditioned Stimulus Response Sequences."

Project MONARCH could be best described as a form of structured dissociation and occultic integration, in order to compartmentalize the mind into multiple personalities within a systematic framework. During this process, a Satanic ritual, usually including Cabalistic mysticism, is performed with the purpose of attaching a particular demon or group of demons to the corresponding alter(s). Of course, most skeptics would view this as simply a means to enhance trauma within the victim, negating any irrational belief that demonic possession actually occurs.

Alters and Triggers

Another way of examining this convoluted victimization of body and soul is by looking at it as a complex computer program: A file (alter) is created through trauma, repetition and reinforcement. In order to activate (trigger) the file, a specific access code or password (cue or command) is required. The victim/survivor is called a "slave" by the programmer/handler, who in turn is perceived as "master" or "god." About 75% are female, since they possess a higher tolerance for pain and tend to dissociate easier than males. Subjects are used mainly for cover operations, prostitution and pornography; involvement in the entertainment industry is notable.

A former military officer connected to the DIA, told this writer, "In the 'big picture' these people [MONARCH victims] are in all walks of life, from the bum on the street to the white-collar guy". In corroboration, a retired CIA agent vaguely discussed the use of such personnel to be used as "plants" or "chameleons" for the purpose of infiltrating a designated group, gathering information and/or injecting an ulterior agenda.

There are an inordinate amount of alters in the victim/survivor with numerous back-up programs, mirrors and shadows. A division of light-side (good) and dark-side (bad) alters are interwoven in the mind and rotate on an axis. One of the main internal structures, (of which their are many) within the system is shaped like a double-helix, consisting of seven levels. Each system has an internal programmer which oversees the "gatekeeper" (demons?) who grant or deny entry into the different rooms. A few of the internal images predominately seen by victims/survivors are trees, the Cabalistic "Tree of Life," with adjoining root systems, infinity loops, ancient symbols and letters, spider webs, mirrors or glass shattering, masks, castles, mazes, demons/monsters/aliens, sea shells, butterflies, snakes, ribbons, bows, flowers, hour glasses, clocks, robots, chain-of-command diagrams and/or schematics of computer circuitry boards.

Bloodlines and Twinning

A majority of the victims/survivors come from multi-generational Satanic families (bloodlines) and are ostensibly programmed "to fill their destiny as the chosen ones or chosen generations" (a term coined by Mengele at Auschwitz). Some are adopted out to families of similar origin. Others used in this neurological nightmare are deemed as the "expendable ones" (non-bloodliners), usually coming from orphanages, foster care homes, or incestuous families with a long history of pedophilia. There also appears to be a pattern of family members affiliated with government or military intelligence agencies.

Many of the abused come from families who use Catholicism, Mormonism, or charismatic Christianity as a "front" for their abominable activities (though members of other religious groups are also involved.) Victims/survivors generally respond more readily to a rigid religious (dogmatic, legalistic) hierarchical structure because it parallels their base programming. Authority usually goes unchallenged, as their will has been usurped through subjective and command-oriented conditioning.

Physical identification characteristics on victims/survivors often include multiple electrical prod scars and/or resultant moles on their skin. A few may have had various parts of their bodies mutilated by knives, branding irons, or needles. Butterfly or occult tattoos are also common. Generally, bloodliners are less likely to have the subsequent markings, as their skin is to "remain pure and unblemished."

The ultimate purpose of the sophisticated manipulation of these individuals may sound unrealistic, depending upon our interpretive understanding of the physical and spiritual realms. The deepest and darkest alters within bloodliners are purported to be dormant until the "Anti-Christ" is revealed. These "New World Order" alters supposedly contain call-back orders and instructions to train and/or initiate a large influx of people (possibly clones or "soulless ones"), thereby stimulating social control programs into the new millennium.

Non-biological "twinning" is yet another bizarre feature observed within MONARCH programming. For instance, two young non related children would be ceremoniously initiated in a magical "soul-bonding" ritual so they might be "inseparably paired for eternity" (possibly another Mengele connection?). They essentially share two halves of the programmed information, making them interdependent upon one another. Paranormal phenomenon such as astral projection, telepathy, ESP, etc. appear to be more pronounced between those who have undergone this process.

Levels of MONARCH Programming¹²

ALPHA: Regarded as "general" or regular programming within the base control personality; characterized by extremely pronounced memory retention, along with substantially increased physical strength and visual acuity. Alpha programming is accomplished through deliberately subdividing the victims personality which, in essence, causes a left brain-right brain division, allowing for a programmed union of L and R through neuron pathway stimulation.

BETA: Referred to as "sexual" programming. This programming eliminates all learned moral convictions and stimulates the primitive sexual instinct, devoid of inhibitions. "Cat" alters may come out at this level.

DELTA: This is known as "killer" programming, originally developed for training special agents or elite soldiers (i.e. Delta Force, First Earth Battalion, Mossad, etc.) in covert operations. Optimal adrenal output and controlled aggression is evident. Subjects are devoid of fear; very systematic in carrying out their assignment. Self-destruct or suicide instructions are layered in at this level.

THETA: Considered to the "psychic" programming. Bloodliners (those coming from multi-generational Satanic families) were determined to exhibit a greater propensity for having telepathic abilities than did non-bloodliners. Due to its evident limitations, however, various forms of electronic mind control systems were developed and introduced, namely, bio-medical human telemetry devices (brain implants), directed-energy lasers using microwaves and/or electromagnetics. It is reported these are used in conjunction with highly-advanced computers and sophisticated satellite tracking systems.

OMEGA: A "self-destruct" form of programming, also known as "Code Green." The corresponding behaviors include suicidal tendencies and/or self-mutilation. This program is generally activated when the victim/survivor begins therapy or interrogation and too much memory is being recovered.

GAMMA: Another form of system protection is through "deception" programming, which elicits misinformation and misdirection. This level is intertwined with demonology and tends to regenerate itself at a later time if inappropriately deactivated.

Method and Components

The initial process begins with creating dissociation within the subject, usually occurring from the time of birth to about six years. This is primarily achieved through the use of electroshock (ECT) and is at times performed even when the child is in the mother's womb.

Due to the severe trauma induced through ECT, sexual abuse and other methods, the mind splits off into alternate personalities from the core. Formerly referred to as Multiple Personality Disorder, it is presently recognized as Dissociative Identity Disorder and is the basis for MONARCH programming. Further conditioning of the victim's mind is enhanced through hypnotism, double-bind coercion, pleasure-pain reversals, food, water, sleep and sensory deprivation, along with various drugs which alter certain cerebral functions.

The next stage is to embed and compress detailed commands or messages within the specified alter. This is acheived through the use of hi-tech headsets, in conjunction with computer-driven generators which emit inaudible sound waves or harmonics that affect the RNA covering of neuron pathways to the subconscious and unconscious mind. "Virtual Reality" optical devices are sometimes used simultaneously with the harmonic generators projecting pulsating colored lights, subliminals and split-screen visuals. High voltage electroshock is then used for memory dissolution.

Programming is updated periodically and reinforced through visual, auditory and written mediums. Some of the first programming themes included the Wizard of Oz and Alice in Wonderland, both heavily saturated with occultic symbolism. Many of the recent Disney movies and cartoons are used in a two-fold manner: desensitizing the majority of the population, using subliminals and neuro-linguistic programming, and deliberately constructing specific triggers and keys for base programming of highly-impressionable MONARCH children.

A prime example of how subliminal programming works is by looking at the recent Disney cinematic sensation Pochahontas, curiously billed as their "33rd" (highest degree in Scottish Rite Freemasonry) animated movie. In the movie, Grandmother Willow is a mystical 400 year old tree who counsels the motherless Pochahontas to listen to her heart and help her realize all the answers lie within. Grandmother Willow is constantly talking in "double-speak" and using "reversals" (i.e. "Sometimes the right path is not the easiest one"; the esoteric derivative being: the left path [the path that leads to destruction] is the easiest one.)

In Illuminati Structured MPD Systems, the willow tree represents the occultic powers of Druidism. The intrinsic imagery of the tree's branches, leaves and root systems are very significant, as some of the dark spiritual proper ties associated with the Willow Tree Programming are:

The branches are used to whip victims in rituals for "cleansing"purposes,
A willow tree can endure severe weather disturbances (i.e. storms) and is known for it's pliability or flexibility. Victims/Survivors of the programming describe the willow's branches wrapping around them, with no hope of escape,
The deep root system of the willow tree makes the victim/survivor feel as if they are falling deeper and deeper into an abyss while in a hypnotic trance.

Music plays an instrumental role in programming, through combinations of variable tones, rhythms and words. Frightmeister Stephen King's numerous novels and subsequent movies, are purported by credible sources to be used for such villainous purposes. One of his latest books, Insomnia, features a picture of King with the trigger phrase "WE NEVER SLEEP," (indicative of someone with MPD/DID) below an all-seeing eye.

A partial list of other mediums used to reinforce base programming are:

Pinnochio, Sleeping Beauty, Snow White, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, The Little Mermaid, The Lion King, E.T., Star Wars, Ghost Busters, Trancers II, Batman, Bewitched, Fantasy Island, Reboot, Tiny Toons, Duck Tails, The Dead Sea Scrolls and The Tall Book of Make Believe.

A few movies which depict or portray some aspect of MONARCH programming are:

Hell raiser 3, Raising Cain, Labyrinth, Telefon, Johnny Mneumonic, Point of No Return, The Lawnmower Man and Closet Land.

Programmers and Places

It's difficult to figure out who the original programmer of this satanic project was, due to the substantial amount of disinformation and cross-contamination propagated by the "powers that be." The two that went by the color-coded name of Dr. Green are a Jewish doctor named Dr. Gruenbaum, who supposedly collaborated with the Nazis during WWII, and Dr. Josef Mengele, whose trademark of cold blooded and calculating brutality has not only scarred the souls of survivors from Auschwitz, but also a countless number of victims throughout the world. Mengele's direct involvement at the infamous Auschwitz concentration camp was suspiciously downplayed during the Nuremberg Trials, and consequently no intensified effort by the U.S. and it's allies was directed toward his capture.¹³

As a means to confuse serious investigators as to his whereabouts, U.S. officials would report Mengele being a non-threatening, recluse in Paraguay or Brazil, or that he was simply dead (the "Angel of Death" miraculously must have come back to life at least five different times). His unprecedented research, at the expense of thousands of lives, undoubtedly was a significant bonus to U.S. interests, Besides using the pseudonym of Dr. Green, survivors knew him as Vaterchen (daddy), Schoner Josef (beautiful Joseph), David and Fairchild.

A gracefully handsome man of slight stature, Mengele would disarm people with his gentle demeanor, while at other times, he would explode into violent rages.¹⁴ Other characteristics remembered by survivors were the cadence of his shiny black boots as he paced back and forth and his "I-love-you/l-love-you-not" daisy game. When he pulled off the last daisy petal, he would maliciously torture and kill a small child in front of the other child he was programming. Distraught survivors also recalled being thrown naked into cages with monkeys, who were trained to viciously abuse them. Evidently, Mengele enjoyed reducing people to the level of animals. He also would purposely restrain his victims from crying, screaming, or showing any excessive emotion.

Dr. D. Ewen Cameron, also known as Dr. White, was the former head of the Canadian, American and World Psychiatric Associations. Because of Cameron's extensive experience and credentials, the ClA's Allen Dulles funneled millions of dollars throughout organizations like the society for the Investigation of Human Ecology, which Cameron ruthlessly presided over. Experimentations were conducted at several locations in Montreal, mostly at McGill University, St Mary's Hospital and Allan Memorial Institute.

Besides the conventional methods of psychiatric tyranny, such as electroshock drug injections and lobotomies, Cameron conceived the technique of "psychic driving," wherein unsuspecting patients were kept in a drug induced coma for several weeks and administered a regimen of electroshocks, while electronic helmets were strapped to their heads and repetitive auditory messages were transmitted at variable speeds.¹⁵ Many of those exploited were abused children which had been run through the Roman Catholic orphanage system.

Not surprisingly, Dr. Cameron has been conveniently left out of most psychiatratic journals. This may have been, in fact, largely due to Project MKULTRA being publicly exposed in 1970, through lawsuits filed by Canadian survivors and their families. The CIA and Canadian government settled out of court so as not to be required to officially admit to any wrongdoing.

A former U.S. Army Lt. Col. in the DIA's Psychological Warfare Division, Michael Aquino, is the latest in a line of alleged government-sponsored sadists. Aquino, an eccentric genius, founded the Temple of Set, an offshoot of Anton LaVey's Church of Satan.

His obsession with Nazi pagan rituals and his hypnotic manipulation of people made him an ideal candidate for the position of "Master Programmer." Aquino was connected with the Presidio Army Base day care scandal, in which he was accused child molestation. Much to the dismay of the young victims' parents, all charges were dismissed. Code-named "Malcolm", Aquino developed training tapes on how to create a MONARCH slave and worked as a liaison between Government/Military Intelligence and various criminal organizations and occult groups in the distribution of MONARCH slaves.¹⁶

Heinrich Mueller was another important programmer who went under the code names "Dr. Blue" or "Gog." He apparently has two sons who have carried on the trade. The original "Dr. Black" was apparently Leo Wheeler, the nephew of deceased General Earle G. Wheeler, who was the commander of the Joint Chiefs of Staffs during the Vietnam War. Wheeler's protege, E. Hummel is active in the Northwest, along with W. Bowers (from the Rothschild bloodline).

Other alleged master mind manipulators, past and present, are:

Dr. Sydney Gottleib, Lt. Col John Alexander, Richard Dabney Anderson (USN), Dr. James Monroe, Dr. John Lilly, Lt. Comdr. Thomas Narut, Dr. William Jennings Bryan, Dr. Bernard L. Diamond, Dr. Martin T. Orne, Dr. Louis J. West, Dr Robert J. Lifton, Dr. Harris Isbel and Col. Wilson Green.

In order to keep MKULTRA from being easily detected, the CIA segmented its subprojects into specialized fields of research and development at universities, prisons, private laboratories and hospitals. Of course, they were rewarded generously with government grants and miscellaneous funding.

The names and locations of some of the major institutions involved in MONARCH programming experimentation were/are:

Cornell, Duke, Princeton, UCLA, University of Rochester, MIT, Georgetown University Hospital, Maimonides Medical Center, St. Elizabeth's Hospital (Washington D.C.), Bell Laboratories, Stanford Research Institute, Westinghouse Friendship Laboratories, General Electric, ARCO and Manking Research Unlimited.

The "final product" was/is usually created on military installations and bases, where maximum security is required. Referred to as (re) programming centers or near-death trauma centers, the most heavily identified are:

China Lake Naval Weapons Center, The Presidio, Ft. Dietrick, Ft. Campbell, Ft. Lewis, Ft. Hood, Redstone Arsenal, Offutt AFB, Patrick AFB, McClellan AFB, MacGill AFB, Kirkland AFB, Nellis AFB, Homestead AFB, Grissom AFB, Maxwell AFB and Tinker AFB. Other places recognized as major programming sites are Langley Research Center, Los Alamos National Laboratories, Tavistock Institute and areas in or by Mt. Shasta, CA, Lampe, MO and Las Vegas, NV.

Notable Names

One of the first documented cases of a MONARCH secret agent was that of the voluptuous 1940's model, Candy Jones. The book, The Control of Candy Jones, (Playboy Press) portrays her 12 years of intrigue and suspense as a spy for the CIA. Jones, whose birth name is Jessica Wilcox, apparently fit the physiological profile as to be one of the initial experiments or human guinea pigs under the government's "scientific" project, MKULTRA.

The most publicized case of MONARCH monomania has surfaced through the book TRANCE Formation of America: The True Life Story of a ClA Slave by Cathy O'Brien. On the back cover it emphatically states, "Cathy O'Brien is the only vocal and recovered survivor of the Central Intelligence Agency's MKULTRA Project Monarch mind control operation." This documented autobiography contains compelling accounts of O'Brien's years of unrelenting incest and eventual introduction into Project MONARCH by her perverted father. Along with co-author Mark PhiIlips, her rescuer and deprogrammer, Cathy covers an almost unbelievable array of conspiratorial crime: forced prostitution (white slavery) with those in the upper echelons of world politics, covert assignments as a "drug mule" and courier, and the country-western music industry's relationship with illegal CIA activities.

Paul Bonaci a courageous survivor who endured almost two decades of degradation under Project MONARCH, has disclosed strong corroborating evidence of widescale crimes and corruption from the municipal/state level all the way up to the White House.¹⁷ He has testified about sexually-abused males selected from Boy's Town in Nebraska and taken to nearby Offut AFB, where he says they were subjected to intense MONARCH programming, directed mainly by Commander Bill Plemmons and former Lt. Col. Michael Aquino.¹⁸ After thoroughly tormenting the young boys into mindless oblivion, they were used (along with girls) for pornography and prostitution with several of the nation's political and economic power brokers. Bonnaci recalled being transported from the Air Force base via cargo planes to McClelland AFB in California. Along with other unfortunate adolescents and teenagers, he was driven to the elite retreat, Bohemian Grove. The perpetrators took full advantage of these innocent victims, committing unthinkable perversions in order to satisfy their deviant lusts. Some victims were apparently murdered, further traumatizing already terrified and broken children.

An insuitable actress of marginal talent (now deceased), a morally-corrupt T.V. evangelist, a heralded former Green Beret officer and a popular country-western singer are a few others likely having succumbed to MONARCH madness. Lee Harvey Oswald, Sirhan-Sirhan, Charlie Manson, John Hinckley Jr., Mark Chapman, David Koresh, Tim McVeigh and John Salvi are some notable names of infamy, strongly suspected of being pawns who were spawned by MKULTRA.

Deprogrammers and Exposers

Dr. Corydon Hammond, a Psychologist from the University of Utah, delivered a stunning lecture entitled "Hypnosis in MPD: Ritual Abuse" at the Fourth Annual Eastern Regional Conference on Abuse and Multiple Personality, June 25, 1992 in Alexandria, Virginia. He essentially confirmed the suspicions of the attentive crowd of mental health professionals, wherein a certain percentage of their clients had undergone mind control programming in an intensively systematic manner. Hammond alluded to the Nazi connection, military and CIA mind control research, Greek letter and color programming and specifically mentioned the "Monarch Project" in relation to a form of operative conditioning.

Shortly after his ground breaking speech, he received death threats. Not wanting to jeopardize the safety of his family, Dr. Hammond stopped disseminating any follow-up information, until recently.

Mark Phillips, a former electronics subcontractor for the Department of Defense, was privy to some of the top secret mind control activities perpetrated by the U.S. government. His inquisitive demeanor, strong conscience and heart-felt concern for Cathy O'Brien, a "Presidential Model" under Project MONARCH, prompted him to reveal the inner-workings of this grand deception beginning about 1991. As the story goes, he helped Ms. O'Brien escape from her captors and was able to deprogram her in about a years time in Alaska. The controversial Phillips has his share of critics who are skeptical of the veracity of his claims. New Orleans therapist Valerie Wolf introduced two of her patients before the President's Committee on Human Radiation Experiments on March 15, 1995 in Washington D.C. The astonishing testimony made by these two brave women included accounts of German doctors, torture, drugs, electroshock, hypnosis and rape, besides being exposed to an undetermined amount of radiation. Both Wolf and her patients stated they recovered the memories of this CIA program without regression or hypnosis techniques.¹⁹

Wolf presently devotes much of her time to counseling such survivors. A former labor attorney for Atlantic Richfield Co., David E. Rosenbaum, conducted a nine year investigation (1983-1992) concerning allegations of physical torture and coercive conditioning of numerous employees at an ARCO plant in Monaca, PA.²⁰ His clients, Jerry L. Dotey and Ann White, were victims of apparent radiation exposure; but as Mr. Rosenbaum probed deeper in the subsequent interview sessions, a "Pandora's Box" was unveiled. His most astonishing conclusion was that Jerry Dotey and Ann White were likely the off-spring of Adolf Hitler, based in part on the uncanny resemblance from photos (facial features; bone structure and size were taken into consideration). Rosenbaum also states, "They both exhibit feelings and experiences that indicate they are twins." Dotey and White were allegedly subjected to torture of many kinds while under drug induced hypnosis, with each one undergoing at least three training techniques by plant physicians.

Each victim was trained to enter into a hypnotic state upon the occurrence of specific stimuli, usually involving a "cue" word or phrase and trained to "remember to forget" what transpired in the hypnotic state. They were repeatedly subjected to identical stimulus-response sequence, to produce nearly automatic reactions to the particular status. MKULTRA veteran, Dr. Bernard Diamond, Dr. Martin Orne and Dr. Josef Mengele regularly visited the ARCO plant, according to Rosenbaum. The special conditioning of Dotey and White was intended for the artificial creation of dual German personalities. Rosenbaum, who is Jewish, has maintained a deep friendship with the two, despite the seemingly precarious circumstances. Other renowned therapists involved in deprogramming are Cynthia Byrtus, Pamela Monday, Steve Ogilvie, Bennett Braun, Jerry Mungadze and Colin Ross. Some Christian counselors have been able to eliminate parts of the programming with limited success.

Journalists who have recently expounded on the subject matter in exemplary fashion are Walter Bowart, Operation Mind Control, Jon Rappoport, U.S. Government Mind-Control Experiments on Children and Alex Constantine, Psychic Dictatorship In The USA.

Conclusion

The most incriminating statement to date made by a government official as to the possible existence of Project MONARCH was extracted by Anton Chaitkin, a writer for the publication, The New Federalist. When former CIA Director William Colby was asked directly, "What about monarch?" he replied angrily and ambiguously, "We stopped that between the late 1960's and the early 1970's."

Suffice to say that society, in its apparent state of cognitive dissonance, is generally in denial of the overwhelming evidence of this multifarious conspiracy. Numerous victims/ survivors of Project MONARCH are in desperate need of help. However, the great majority of people are too preoccupied with themselves to show any genuine compassion toward these severely wounded individuals. Apathy has taken over the minds of the masses, who choose to exist within the comforts of this world. Reality has thus become obscured by relativism and selfishness.

Although there has been some progress in deprogramming and reintegrating therapies, a much greater problem needs to be rectified. The Holy Bible addresses this problem as the fragmentation of the soul (Ezekiel 13:20). A spiritual restoration is what is truly needed (Psalm 23:3) but can only take place by completely trusting in Jesus Christ as the way to salvation (John 3:16; I Peter 3:18) and deliverance from demonic oppression and/or possession (Mark 16:17).

The true humility of Christ and the love of God effectively counters the pride and hatred of Satan.

Statistically, the road to recovery for these survivors of unimaginable depravity is a long and tedious one, but God is the ultimate healer and only within his time, through His strength and by His grace, can the captives be set free (Isaiah 61:1).

Endnotes:

David L. Carrico, The Egyptian Masonic Satanic Connection, 1992
Walter H. Bowart, Operation Mind Control, Flatland Editions, 1994, p. 216
Martin Cannon, Mind Control and the American Government, Prevailing Winds Research, 1994, p. 19
Linda Hunt, Secret Agenda, St. Martin's Press, 1991
Final Report of the Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations, U.S. Senate, April 1976, p. 337
Ibid, p. 390
John Marks, The Search For The Manchurian Candidate, Times Books, 1979, pp 60-61
Final Report of the Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations, U.S. Senate, April 1976, p. 391
Mark Phillips and Cathy O'Brien, Project Monarch, 1993
Barbara G. Walker, The Woman's Dictionary of Symbols and Sacred Objects, Harper Collins, 1988
Marshall Cavendish, Man, Myth and Magic, 1995
Dr. Corydon Hammond, The Greenbaum Speech, 1992; Mark Phillips and Cathy O'Brien, Project Monarch Programming Definitions, 1993
Gerald L. Posner, Mengele: The Complete Story, McGraw-Hill, 1986
Lucette Matalon Lagnado, Dr. Josef Mengele and the Untold Story of the Twins of Auschwitz, Morrow, 1991
Gordon Thomas, Journey into Madness: The True Story of Secret CIA Mind Control and Medical Abuse, Bantam Books, 1989
Cathy O'Brien and Mark Phillips, Trance Formation of America, 1995
John DeCamp, The Franklin Cover-Up, Child Abuse, Satanism and Murder in Nebraska, AWT Inc, 1992
Anton Chaitkin, "Franklin Witnesses Implicate FBI and U.S. Elites in Torture and Murder of Children", The New Federalist, 1993
Jon Rappoport, "CIA Experiments with Mind Control on Children", Perceptions Magazine, September/October 1995, p. 56
David E. Rosenbaum, Esq., First Draft Overview of Investigation of the Group, 1983-1993
Excerpt from:

Paranoia Magazine, Fall 1996, Vol. 4, No. 3.
P.O. Box 1041, Providence, RI 020901

Original Page: http://web.archive.org/web/19980424210418/www.brotherblue.org/libers/monarch.htm

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

Information About Cathy O'Brien #Nashville

2012-02-19T20:33:00.001-06:00

Cathy O'Brien

bibliotecapleyades.net | Nov 30th -0001

The above material was excerpted from the book:
Trance Formation of America:
The True Life Story of a CIA Mind Control Slave
1995 by Cathy O'Brien with Mark Phillips
P.O.B. 158352, Nashville, TN 37215
Published by Reality Marketing, Inc.
5300 West Sahara, Suite 101, Las Vegas, NV 89102

"Trance Formation of America is the documented
autobiography of a victim of government mind control.
Cathy O'Brien is the only vocal and recovered survivor
of the Central Intelligence Agency's MK-Ultra Project
Monarch mind control operation. Chiseled deep into the
white stone of the CIA's Langley, Virginia headquarters
is a partial verse lifted from the Holy Bible and writings
of Saint John...'and the truth shall make you free.' This
statement, like the agency, is total reality. The building
that it is engraved upon houses the world's most successful
manufacturer of lies to facilitate psychological warfare."

Trance Formation of America

On May 7, 1966 a 9 year old child named Cathy O'Brien was subjected to an occult ritual she called "The Rite to Remain Silent" in alleged preparation for her future interdimensional expeditions.

"I work for the Vatican, and now, so do you," [Michigan State Senator, Guy] VanderJagt told me. "You have just entered into a covenant with the holy Catholic church. You must never break that covenant."

Still capable of questioning at that time, I asked, "What is a covenant?" VanderJagt answered,

"A covenant is a promise to keep secrets, the secret that the church knew all along. The Pope has all the secrets locked away at the Vatican. Your Uncle Bob and I have been to the Vatican. It is time you entered into the holy covenant and learned the secrets of the church that were written long before Christ even came into being. The Dominican monks kept the covenant that Noah carried into the new world. They kept the secret with them. It was written on parchment and kept in a secret place in the Vatican. They took a Vow of Silence to never reveal its location, or its content. You must enter into the covenant. You must carry the secret to your grave. Keep it secret from your mom, dad, everybody."

9 Year Old Cathy

VanderJagt proceeded to fill my suggestible young mind with biblical interpretation that laid the groundwork for future "inter/inner dimensional" programming themes utilized by Project Monarch programmers to control the compartmentalization of memory synonymous with MPD/DID.

"Christ saw them all," VanderJagt was telling me. "They are dimensions, places you can see on your way to death. That's why they're called die-mentions. You must remember that Christ died and came back to tell us everything he saw while he was on his way to heaven. He was gone three days, but it was much longer than that where he was because time isn't the same in other dimensions. Purgatory is one other dimension. Hell is one. And there are lots of others in between. Oz is another dimension. The sky is not the limit to all the worlds out there waiting to be explored. You can travel in and out of all these dimensions, learning the secrets of the universe. You have been chosen to explore these other worlds for the church. Listen in the stillness and you will hear his voice guiding you on your missions. The rosy cross is like Dorothy's ruby slippers. Never take your rosy cross off, Cathy, when traveling other dimensions and you will always be able to return home."

Father Don [apparently from Muskegon's St. Francis of Assisi Church] joined VanderJagt in a ritual which bathed me in the blood of a slaughtered lamb, and subsequently, through this hideous blood trauma, locked their stated perceptions and a basis for mind-control programming deep in my mind. This basis for programming was anchored in the Vow of Silence which the Jesuit monks take "not only to keep secrets, but so they can still their mind and hear their inner guidance." Certain that the "Rite to Remain Silent" which they had performed would ensure that I keep their secrets, Father Don and Guy VanderJagt subjected me to their pedophile perversions. The two joked that I had become "a good Cathy-lick".

[...]

Cox was ordered out of Johnston's office, and he turned his full attention to me. When alone with the Senator [U.S. Senator Robert C. Byrd, D. West Virginia], Johnston [U.S. Senator J. Bennett Johnston, D. Louisiana previously of Shreveport General Dynamics R & D, now apparently affiliated with USPECC, on the Reston, VA Columbia Gas board of Directors and CEO of the Washington-based Johnston and Associates] manipulated my mind, and ultimately my beliefs and perceptions, for future programming. He referred to a picture of himself shaking hands with unknown Navy brass as he dramatically told me, "I was there that fateful day in 1943 when a hole was ripped in the fabric of time through what later became known as the Philadelphia Experiment.

All those fine boys vanished along with their ship in a bizarre twist of events that parallels the Atlantis disappearances. A vortex was created in an effort to slip dimensions and become invisible to the enemy. It was a success beyond the highest expectations and launched us all info universal travel. It is no wonder at all that we have had a man on the moon. Traveling to distant planets and galaxies is Mickey Mouse stuff in comparison to the high tech wizardry of trans-dimensional travel. Trans-dimensional travel circumvents all measures of time, including distance and speed.

When the fabric of time was torn, we opened ourselves up to intergalactic travel -- both in and out of this dimension -- and in and out of the future, as well as the past. We can alter the course of history by traveling back in time to alter events, or we can blast off into the future and gain wisdom and knowledge of events yet to come. We can control the future by controlling the past. At present, this is a relatively easy task according to the theory of relativity and abilities gained through the Philadelphia Experiment. I came back an ET (extraterrestrial) myself. And our ship returned to this Earth as a spaceship. I gained the keys to the universe on that fateful day, and I carry them with me now, sharing only a Key or two at a time with those who are Chosen.

You are a Chosen One (Johnston was deliberately interfacing with Rite to Remain Silent conditioning), and therefore must learn the ins and outs of interplanetary travel. Your mission is trans-dimensional. You can span infinite dimensions by learning from me. Take it from me, you're going places, kiddo. And I'll teach you to get there by riding the light. I'll teach you the groundwork, and you do the light work. The key to the universe lies in the speed of light. The only way to travel is by beam of light. You will learn to go to the light...Your mission is to learn how to Tinker with time. I'm going to take you on that journey myself. Come with me now. It's time we were leaving this plane and boarding another."

Johnston took me the short distance from his General Dynamics Corporation provided office to the Barksdale Air Force Base airfield. He was apparently well known at Barksdale, and a small cargo plane was ready to take us to our destination -- Tinker Air Force Base in Oklahoma.

[...]

About Faces

Soon after Kelly (Cathy's very young daughter) was inducted into George Bush's "Neighborhood" through horrific sexual abuse, Bush enforced his controls on me. Our mind-control handler, Alex Houston, had taken Kelly and me to Washington, D.C. for separately scheduled meetings with Bush. Kelly had already been escorted by agents to her rendezvous with him that morning, during which time I had been ordered to one of U.S. Senator Robert C. Byrd's offices located in the nearby FBI Hoover Building. There, Byrd reinforced his holds on me by claiming control of the Justice Department and "proving" once again that I had "no where to run and no where to hide". My horror reaction was compounded when Byrd looked at his pocket watch and notified me in Alice in Wonderland cryptic language, "You're late, you're late for a very important date," referring to my meeting with Bush.

I sprinted from the Hoover Building, encountering Houston who waited just outside. Houston hurried me to the Smithsonian where I waited for my escorts as instructed at the "Face Changing" exhibit. This computerized exhibit illustrates how an individual's face can take on a radically different appearance by slightly altering any single feature.

The exhibit fascinated me as a programmed MPD since multiples often experience the unnerving phenomena of routinely not recognizing themselves in a mirror due to switching personalities. A multiple's face often changes slightly with each switch, which "validates" the religious communities' perceptions of so-called "demonic possession" in occultism. Logic quickly dispels this belief when it is realized that everyone's expression changes according to emotion, by skin color and tones, blood pressure, and by tightening or relaxing specific micro muscles. An MPD's face changes are more exaggerated when these natural conditions are combined with the results of sophisticated programming. "Charm School" teaches subconscious control over these natural phenomena as a ready- made disguise on government slaves such as myself, as well as to enhance sex slaves' "beauty" to their maximum potential. I was incapable of thinking or logically understanding my fascination with the display, as I stood totally enthralled, waiting for my escorts as ordered.

As the escorts approached, I was relieved to see Kelly with them. Though she was visibly tranced and traumatized, the fact that she was alive was all I was capable of grasping. When she saw the "Face Changing" exhibit, she excitedly exclaimed, "Uncle George [Bush] just read me a book about this!" Before I could hear anymore, I was led away, leaving Kelly with our handler, Houston.

I was then quickly taken to Bush's Residence Office, which heretofore was unfamiliar to me. Although it had slate blue, plush carpets and fine furnishings like the White House office, lattice work and smaller rooms provided a different air. I sat in a hard-back wooden chair as ordered, while Bush carefully positioned himself in front of me on a little wooden footstool. This allowed me clear visibility of the large book that he held in his lap. All illustrations faced me, while all text except the last page was printed in the holder's direction. This book was a unique, high tech piece of art specifically designed to enforce Bush's favorite method of programming, "You Are What You Read". The juvenile face depicted on the front of this hardcover book gave it the appearance of a children's storybook. It was entitled About Faces.

Bush explained the dynamics of "changing faces" and "becoming what I read". Although I had been conditioned to this idea all of my life through Disney stories, The Wizard of Oz, Alice In Wonderland, etc., I was not prepared for Bush's version of "You Are What You Read" programming explanations. The illustrations themselves were elaborate, consisting of mirrors add hypnotic depictions. He seemingly made the book come alive in my mind as he read page after poetic page of hypnotic, metaphorical language, all the while creating powerful illusions. His impersonations of the characters further enhanced the desired affect of fantasy becoming reality. This extraordinary effort to scramble reality would have worked -- perfectly -- had it not been for another victim and myself discussing it only a few days later. The purpose of Bush's book was clearly explained within the first few pages, which included the following passage:

I am the Vice President when circumstance demands,
And I am your Commander, you'll follow my commands.
The first command's important -- It is one you will heed,
When I send you a book, you are what you read.

Throughout my tenure as a Presidential Model mind-controlled slave, I was provided specific books according to Bush's program. These books, delivered through pre-established channels such as Ken Riley, Alex Houston, and even Ronald Reagan, came complete with specific commands on how they were to be interpreted and used. Some books were used to instruct me on operations; some were an attempt to scramble my memory with fantasy; others were used to load my mind with pertinent data such as bank account passbook numbers, and so on.

I was provided a paperback book entitled Afghanistan, from which I absorbed history, current political events, and the strength of the Afghany Freedom Fighters. I have since learned that the book I read was never publicly released in the text it was provided me. According to instruction, the book was delivered back to Bush as quickly as I finished memorizing it. I wonder in retrospect if any part of it contained fact beyond how I was supposed to perceive it.

I read stories of espionage, including Robert Ludlum's Bourne Identity, and William Diehl's Chameleon. Mostly I was provided steamy sex novels for further training as well as scrambles. Kelly was conditioned to fairy tales, Steven Speilberg's ET, NASA NSA operative George Lucas' Star Wars, and the nightmarish Never Ending Story. Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men caused Kelly constantly to quote the defendant character of Lenny for years saying, "Tell me what to do, George". She still does this each and every time I am allowed to visit with her in the mental institution. The attending therapist overseeing the visit has yet to pick up on this programming cue, and I am forbidden by Juvenile Court order not to discuss Kelly's past or therapy.

Bush's most effective example of "You Are What You Read" in his book About Faces occurred during his reading of the page depicting lizard-like "aliens" from a '"far-off, deep space place". Claiming to me to be an alien himself, Bush apparently activated a hologram of the lizard-like "alien" which provided the illusion of Bush transforming like a chameleon before my eyes.

[...]

E.T. Phone Rome

Anyone attending the Bohemian Grove on a regular basis was referred to by those in the know as a "Grover". One such Grover was Ronald Reagan's then Secretary of Education, Bill Bennett. Bill Bennett, who later became "Drug Czar" during the Bush Administration, wrote the so-called Book of Virtues and was/is? vying for the office of President. Bennett is apparently very close to his brother and fellow Grover, Bob Bennett. Although Bob Bennett holds the position of Legal Counsel to President Clinton, it is apparent that the brothers recognize no party lines.

It was clear to me that there were no partisan differences amongst those ushering in the New World Order, any more than there was loyalty to our Constitution. The close relationship I witnessed between the Bennett brothers, like the marriage between Clinton's and Bush's 1992 campaign managers James Carville and Mary Matlin, should raise questions as to their agenda.

When Bill and Bob Bennett together sexually assaulted my [very young] daughter, Kelly, and me at the Bohemian Grove in 1986, I had already known Bill Bennett as a mind-control programmer for some time. Bennett anchored his Jesuit/Vatican based programming of me in my Catholic conditioning initially instilled via the Rite to Remain Silent. Through further manipulation of my "inner-dimensional" perceptions, Bennett believed he had forever compartmentalized his personal secrets of perverse sex with his brother, Bob, and my then six-year-old daughter. Bennett also had manipulated my mind in accordance with Vatican "Orders" via Byrd's Jesuit College programming center in West Virginia. He used his role as Jesuit programmer for the purposes of carrying out his efforts as Education Secretary to implement Education 2000.

In order to program my mind for my role in bringing Education 2000 into the "Volunteer State" of Tennessee's school system, Bennett used sophisticated mind manipulation to set the stage -- the same kind of mind manipulation propaganda executed on national and international scale. Bennett's penchant for manipulating minds is apparently rooted in his knowledge of Catholic/Jesuit mind-control techniques.

When I met Bennett at a White House cocktail party in 1984, I was wearing the rosy cross necklace that Guy VanderJagt and Father Don had presented to me during my first communion, to signify the mode of program I was operating under at the time. Byrd had ordered that I wear it for the occasion.

Byrd was already talking with Bennett when a White House butler led me in to see Byrd. Byrd was saying,

"I was just talking about you with my friend, Secretary of Education William Bennett."

"Bill," Bennett corrected, sweeping his lecherous gaze over me as though I were merchandise. "How do you do?"

"As I am told, thank you," I said as I extended my hand as trained.

Bennett clumsily fingered the rosy cross necklace, blowing his alcoholic breath in my face as he said, "Your necklace is as beautiful as you are, and no doubt, as significant in purpose. Where did this come from and what does it mean to you?"

"From my first communion," I responded. "Guy (Byrd interrupted to clarify 'VanderJagt') gave it to me to consummate my holy communion."

Byrd corrected me, "Commemorate your holy communion." "She doesn't need a translator, Bobby," Bennett laughed. "I'm hearing her loud and clear."

Byrd left me with Bennett, who went into a long winded recitation on an interpretation of the Bible deliberately intended to further distort my Catholic instilled perceptions. "Christ was an alien in this land," he was saying in accordance with his learned Jesuit mind manipulation techniques.

"Once he landed in Earth's plane, it was plain to see he was a leader in inter-dimensional travel. We (Jesuits/aliens) followed his lead since he was the first to slip into Earth's dimension. In Christ's transformation from porpoise to purpose, he lost his will to Earth's demands. He lost his porpoise, so to speak."

Totally "trance-fixed," I listened as Bennett rattled on and on.

"When Christ emerged from the deep to inhale of Earth's atmosphere, time began ticking. It was not recognized or acknowledged until Christ's passing, however. We began marking time with his death. BC -- AD -- or is that AC-DC?"

Referring to high voltage used to compartmentalize memory, he continued,

"No, AC in DC stops time. At any rate, we followed his lead. He referred to you as sheep. He knew you needed to be led. He led us. He led you. He led us to you. We're here to lead you. The transformation is perfected now, updated with the latest in alien technologies whereby we no longer have to follow Christ's course to the grave. We can transcend dimensions free of the confines of Earth's gravitational pull. The time is now, and we are here to lead you. We know your mind. That's how we make you mind. Make you mine. Make you a mind. Make you mine. Journey with me now...."

Bennett manipulated my perceptions until, at last, he informed me,

"You and I will be working closely together on a global education project." Sweeping his hand around the crowded room, he continued, "This atmosphere is not conducive to the kind of work we need to be doing. Something else just came up that demands immediate attention. Let's complete tonight's business with pleasure, beat it out of this dimension, suspend your suspended animation, and get with the program."

In one of many White House bedrooms available for such purposes, Bennett led me into bed,

"I told you we were going to beat it out of this dimension, and that's exactly what I intend to do. A little Byrd told me you like a whip. Since I am not the Senate kind, I'll just represent the majority by giving you what you need most."

Bennett apparently found perverse pleasure in whipping me. With my wrists bruised and my body stinging with pain, Bennett lit up a cigarette and cryptically asked, "Was that your first cum-union with an alien?"

He threw me my clothes, and ordered, "Make yourself presentable. Make sure your wrists are covered. I'm not waiting around for you, I'll see you in the morning."

Bennett left. After awhile I was escorted back to Byrd, with whom I spent a brutal, short night. On the way to his room, Byrd told me,

"You've got work to do come morning with Mr. Bennett. Working for him is like working for me. We are working in conjunction with the state Governors in an effort to implement the global 2000 education formula for the future. I am excited at the prospect of meddling in the future through what I accomplish today. Since I hold this country's purse strings, it is up to me to delegate as much funding as is necessary to implement the educational program. I've withheld funding and withheld funding to the point where the individual states must rely on federal funding to get them out of hot water financially. I am ready to do just that so long as they follow my guidelines. Mr. Bennett is working out the details of this plan, and will be sharing much of that with you. I need you to do what you do best by enlisting the full cooperation of state government at the upcoming Governor's Convention. I have never demanded Conventional sex of you before, but this time is different. Persuade these Governors at their weakest moment -- bring them to their knees while you are on yours, and convince them that global education is the gateway to the future if there is to be any future at all."

Early the next morning, deep underground in the NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center mind-control lab near D.C., Bill Bennett began preparing me for the program. NASA uses various "CIA designer drugs" to chemically alter the brain and create exactly the mindset required at the time. Huntsville, Alabama's NASA drug of choice, "Train-quility," created a feeling of absolute, peaceful compliance and a sensation of walking on air. The drug administered this time was sufficiently similar to Tranquility to create total compliance. The beating I had endured the night before had rendered me helpless, anyway, and I could barely crawl up onto the cold, metal lab table as the drug took effect.

In the darkness surrounding me, I could hear Bill Bennett talking,

"This is my brother, Bob. He and I work as one unit. We are alien to this dimension -- two beings from another plane."

The high-tech light display swirling around me convinced me I was transforming dimensions with them. A laser of light hit the black wall in front of me, which seemed to explode into a panoramic view of a White House cocktail party -- as though I had transformed dimensions and stood amongst them. Not recognizing anyone, I frantically asked,

"Who are these people?"

"They're not people, and this isn't a spaceship," Bennett said. As he spoke, the holographic scene changed ever so slightly until the people appeared to be lizard-like aliens. "Welcome to the second level of the underground. This level is a mere/ (mirror) reflection of the first, an alien dimension. We are from a transdimensional plane that spans and encompasses all dimensions."

"Infinite dimensions," Bob injected. "Infinite dimensions spanned simultaneously."

Bill said, "No limitations".

Bob softly sang, "Let freedom ring".

"There truly is no where to run and no where to hide from us. We're who is looking from behind the Eye in the Sky," Bill continued.

"We're watching you," Bob said. He sang a line from the popular rock song "I'll Be Watching You".

"I have taken you through my dimension as a means of establishing stronger holds on your mind than the Earth's plane permits," Bill Bennett was saying. "Being alien, I simply make my thoughts your thoughts by projecting them into your mind. My thoughts are your thoughts."

The brief message Bennett programmed me with pertaining to Education 2000 was to be directed to state Governors at the upcoming convention while delivering a packet of information:

"The children. We must consider the children. Think for a moment beyond tomorrow. Our children are the future. Their future lies in education. We can control the future today by regulating education. Our thoughts and plans for the future -- put in their text. A text they can understand. Children's textbooks. The highest levels of government, the most brilliant minds on the face of this Earth would like input into the future by way of the children. You, as Governor, are in a position to provide that link. Global Education 2000 is ready for implementation. Look into it. Look into it and see the future."

Additional material on Cathy O'Brien

Original Page: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/bb/obrien.htm

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

Shocking Menace of Satellite Surveillance

2012-02-19T20:31:00.001-06:00

Shocking Menace of Satellite Surveillance

bibliotecapleyades.

by John Fleming
September, 2008
from EnglishPravda Website

John Fleming is the author of 'The War of All Against All: an Analysis of Conflict in Society'.
(Rowman & Littlefield - 800-462-6420)
5060 Peyton Place Ct
St. Louis MO USA 63128-2901
phone: 314-892-1813
email: jfflemin@swbell.net

Part I

08 September, 2008

Unknown to most of the world, satellites can perform astonishing and often menacing feats.

This should come as no surprise when one reflects on the massive effort poured into satellite technology since the Soviet satellite Sputnik, launched in 1957, caused panic in the U.S.

A spy satellite can monitor a person’s every movement, even when the “target” is indoors or deep in the interior of a building or traveling rapidly down the highway in a car, in any kind of weather (cloudy, rainy, stormy).

There is no place to hide on the face of the earth. It takes just three satellites to blanket the world with detection capacity. Besides tracking a person’s every action and relaying the data to a computer screen on earth, amazing powers of satellites include reading a person’s mind, monitoring conversations, manipulating electronic instruments and physically assaulting someone with a laser beam.

Remote reading of someone’s mind through satellite technology is quite bizarre, yet it is being done; it is a reality at present, not a chimera from a futuristic dystopia!

To those who might disbelieve my description of satellite surveillance, I’d simply cite a tried-and-true Roman proverb: Time reveals all things (tempus omnia revelat).

As extraordinary as clandestine satellite powers are, nevertheless prosaic satellite technology is much evident in daily life. Satellite businesses reportedly earned $26 billion in 1998. We can watch transcontinental television broadcasts “via satellite,” make long-distance phone calls relayed by satellite, be informed of cloud cover and weather conditions through satellite images shown on television, and find our geographical bearings with the aid of satellites in the GPS (Global Positioning System).

But behind the facade of useful satellite technology is a Pandora’s box of surreptitious technology. Spy satellites - as opposed to satellites for broadcasting and exploration of space - have little or no civilian use - except, perhaps, to subject one’s enemy or favorite malefactor to surveillance.

With reference to detecting things from space, Ford Rowan, author of Techno Spies, wrote,

“Some U.S. military satellites are equipped with infra-red sensors that can pick up the heat generated on earth by trucks, airplanes, missiles, and cars, so that even on cloudy days the sensors can penetrate beneath the clouds and reproduce the patterns of heat emission on a TV-type screen. During the Vietnam War sky high infrared sensors were tested which detect individual enemy soldiers walking around on the ground.”

Using this reference, we can establish 1970 as the approximate date of the beginning of satellite surveillance - and the end of the possibility of privacy for several people.

The government agency most heavily involved in satellite surveillance technology is the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA), an arm of the Pentagon. NASA is concerned with civilian satellites, but there is no hard and fast line between civilian and military satellites.

NASA launches all satellites, from either Cape Kennedy in Florida or Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, whether they are military-operated, CIA-operated, corporate-operated or NASA’s own. Blasting satellites into orbit is a major expense. It is also difficult to make a quick distinction between government and private satellites; research by NASA is often applicable to all types of satellites.

Neither the ARPA nor NASA makes satellites; instead, they underwrite the technology while various corporations produce the hardware.

Corporations involved in the satellite business include:

Lockheed

General Dynamics

RCA

General Electric

Westinghouse

Comsat

Boeing

Hughes Aircraft

Rockwell International

Grumman Corp.

CAE Electronics

Trimble Navigation

TRW

Spy satellites were already functioning and violating people’s right to privacy when President Reagan proposed his “Strategic Defense Initiative,” or Star Wars, in the early 80s, long after the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 had demonstrated the military usefulness of satellites.

Star Wars was supposed to shield the U.S. from nuclear missiles, but shooting down missiles with satellite lasers proved infeasible, and many scientists and politicians criticized the massive program. Nevertheless, Star Wars gave an enormous boost to surveillance technology and to what may be called “black bag” technology, such as mind reading and lasers that can assault someone, even someone indoors.

Aviation Week & Space Technology mentioned in 1984 that,

“facets of the project [in the Star Wars program] that are being hurried along include the awarding of contracts to study... a surveillance satellite network.”

It was bound to be abused, yet no group is fighting to cut back or subject to democratic control this terrifying new technology.

As one diplomat to the U.N. remarked,

“‘Star Wars’ was not a means of creating heaven on earth, but it could result in hell on earth.”

The typical American actually may have little to fear, since the chances of being subjected to satellite surveillance are rather remote. Why someone would want to subject someone else to satellite surveillance might seem unclear at first, but to answer the question you must realize that only the elite have access to such satellite resources.

Only the rich and powerful could even begin to contemplate putting someone under satellite surveillance, whereas a middle- or working-class person would not even know where to begin. Although access to surveillance capability is thus largely a function of the willfulness of the powerful, nevertheless we should not conclude that only the powerless are subjected to it. Perhaps those under satellite surveillance are mainly the powerless, but wealthy and famous people make more interesting targets, as it were, so despite their power to resist an outrageous violation of their privacy, a few of them may be victims of satellite surveillance.

No claim of being subject to satellite surveillance can be dismissed a priori.

It is difficult to estimate just how many Americans are being watched by satellites, but if there are 200 working surveillance satellites (a common number in the literature), and if each satellite can monitor 20 human targets, then as many as 4000 Americans may be under satellite surveillance. However, the capability of a satellite for multiple-target monitoring is even harder to estimate than the number of satellites; it may be connected to the number of transponders on each satellite, the transponder being a key device for both receiving and transmitting information.

A society in the grips of the National Security State is necessarily kept in the dark about such things. Obviously, though, if one satellite can monitor simultaneously 40 or 80 human targets, then the number of possible victims of satellite surveillance would be doubled or quadrupled.

A sampling of the literature provides insight into this fiendish space-age technology.

One satellite firm reports that,

“One of the original concepts for the Brilliant Eyes surveillance satellite system involved a long-wavelength infrared detector focal plane that requires periodic operation near 10 Kelvin.”

A surveillance satellite exploits the fact that the human body emits infra-red radiation, or radiant heat; according to William E. Burrows, author of Deep Black,

“the infrared imagery would pass through the scanner and register on the [charged-couple device] array to form a moving infrared picture, which would then be amplified, digitalized, encrypted and transmitted up to one of the [satellite data system] spacecraft... for downlink [to earth].”

But opinion differs as to whether infrared radiation can be detected in cloudy conditions. According to one investigator, there is a way around this potential obstacle:

“Unlike sensors that passively observe visible-light and infra-red radiation, which are blocked by cloud cover and largely unavailable at night, radar sensors actively emit microwave pulses that can penetrate clouds and work at any hour.”

This same person reported in 1988 that,

“The practical limit on achievable resolution for a satellite-based sensor is a matter of some dispute, but is probably roughly ten to thirty centimeters. After that point, atmospheric irregularities become a problem.”

But even at the time she wrote that, satellite resolution, down to each sub-pixel, on the contrary, was much more precise, a matter of millimeters - a fact which is more comprehensible when we consider the enormous sophistication of satellites, as reflected in such tools as multi-spectral scanners, interferometers, visible infrared spin scan radiometers, cryo-coolers and hydride sorption beds.

Probably the most sinister aspect of satellite surveillance, certainly its most stunning, is mind-reading.

As early as 1981, G. Harry Stine (in his book Confrontation in Space), could write that Computers have “read” human minds by means of deciphering the outputs of electroencephalographs (EEGs).

Early work in this area was reported by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) in 1978. EEG’s are now known to be crude sensors of neural activity in the human brain, depending as they do upon induced electrical currents in the skin. Magnetoencephalographs (MEGs) have since been developed using highly sensitive electromagnetic sensors that can directly map brain neural activity even through the bones of the skull.

The responses of the visual areas of the brain have now been mapped by Kaufman and others at Vanderbilt University.

Work may already be under way in mapping the neural activity of other portions of the human brain using the new MEG techniques. It does not require a great deal of prognostication to forecast that the neural electromagnetic activity of the human brain will be totally mapped within a decade or so and that crystalline computers can be programmed to decipher the electromagnetic neural signals.

In 1992, Newsweek reported that,

“with powerful new devices that peer through the skull and see the brain at work, neuroscientists seek the wellsprings of thoughts and emotions, the genesis of intelligence and language. They hope, in short, to read your mind.”

In 1994, a scientist noted that,

“current imaging techniques can depict physiological events in the brain which accompany sensory perception and motor activity, as well as cognition and speech.”

I believe that surveillance satellites began reading minds - or rather, began allowing the minds of targets to be read - sometime in the early 1990s. Some satellites in fact can read a person’s mind from space.

The means is a little sketchy, like much of this technology in general, but the basic procedure is to bounce channels of energy from the scalp, into space to be down-linked by giant mirrors or prisms to a ground station on earth, at which point the data is fed into a computer that has been programmed with information from the science of brain mapping.

Also part of satellite technology is the notorious, patented “Neurophone,” the ability of which to manipulate behavior defies description. In Brave New World, Huxley anticipated the Neurophone.

In that novel, people hold onto a metal knob to get “feely effects” in a simulated orgy where,

“the facial erogenous zones of the six thousand spectators in the Alhambra tingled with almost intolerable galvanic pleasure.”

Though not yet applied to sex, the Neurophone - or more precisely, a Neurophone-like-instrument - has been adapted for use by satellites and can alter behavior in the manner of subliminal audio “broadcasting,” but works on a different principle.

After converting sound into electrical impulses, the Neurophone transmits radio waves into the skin, where they proceed to the brain, bypassing the ears and the usual cranial auditory nerve and causing the brain to recognize a neurological pattern as though it were an audible communication, though often on a subconscious level. A person stimulated with this device “hears” by a very different route.

The Neurophone can cause the deaf to “hear” again. Ominously, when its inventor applied for a second patent on an improved Neurophone, the National Security Agency tried unsuccessfully to appropriate the device.

A surveillance satellite, in addition, can detect human speech.

Burrows observed that satellites can,

“even eavesdrop on conversations taking place deep within the walls of the Kremlin.”

Walls, ceilings, and floors are no barrier to the monitoring of conversation from space.

Even if you were in a high-rise building with ten stories above you and ten stories below, a satellite’s audio surveillance of your speech would still be unhampered. Inside or outside, in any weather, anyplace on earth, at any time of day, a satellite “parked” in space in a geosynchronous orbit (whereby the satellite, because it moves in tandem with the rotation of the earth, seems to stand still) can detect the speech of a human target.

Apparently, as with reconnaissance in general, only by taking cover deep within the bowels of a lead-shielding-fortified building could you escape audio monitoring by a satellite.

Part II
09 September, 2008

There are various other satellite powers, such as manipulating electronic instruments and appliances like alarms, electronic watches and clocks, a television, radio, smoke detector and the electrical system of an automobile.

For example, the digital alarm on a watch, tiny though it is, can be set off by a satellite from hundreds of miles up in space. And the light bulb of a lamp can be burned out with the burst of a laser from a satellite. In addition, street lights and porch lights can be turned on and off at will by someone at the controls of a satellite, the means being an electromagnetic beam which reverses the light’s polarity. Or a lamp can be made to burn out in a burst of blue light when the switch is flicked.

As with other satellite powers, it makes no difference if the light is under a roof or a ton of concrete - it can still be manipulated by a satellite laser. Types of satellite lasers include the free-electron laser, the x-ray laser, the neutral-particle-beam laser, the chemical-oxygen-iodine laser and the mid-infra-red advanced chemical laser.

Along with mind-reading, one of the most bizarre uses of a satellite is to physically assault someone. An electronic satellite beam - using far less energy than needed to blast nuclear missiles in flight - can “slap” or bludgeon someone on earth.

A satellite beam can also be locked onto a human target, with the victim being unable to evade the menace by running around or driving around, and can cause harm through application of pressure on, for example, one’s head. How severe a beating can be administered from space is a matter of conjecture, but if the ability to actually murder someone this way has not yet been worked out, there can be no doubt that it will soon become a reality.

There is no mention in satellite literature of a murder having been committed through the agency of a satellite, but the very possibility should make the world take note.

There is yet another macabre power possessed by some satellites: manipulating a person’s mind with an audio subliminal “message” (a sound too low for the ear to consciously detect but which affects the unconscious).

In trying thereby to get a person to do what you want him to do, it does not matter if the target is asleep or awake. A message could be used to compel a person to say something you would like him to say, in a manner so spontaneous that no one would be able to realize the words were contrived by someone else; there is no limit to the range of ideas an unsuspecting person can be made to voice.

The human target might be compelled to use an obscenity, or persons around the target might be compelled to say things that insult the target. A sleeping person, on the other hand, is more vulnerable and can be made to do something, rather than merely say something. An action compelled by an audio subliminal message could be to roll off the bed and fall onto the floor, or to get up and walk around in a trance.

However, the sleeping person can only be made to engage in such an action for only a minute or so, it seems, since he usually wakes up by then and the “spell” wears. It should be noted here that although the “hypnotism” of a psychoanalyst is bogus, unconscious or subconscious manipulation of behavior is genuine.

But the brevity of a subliminal spell effected by a satellite might be overcome by more research.

“The psychiatric community,” reported Newsweek in 1994, “generally agrees that subliminal perception exists; a smaller fringe group believes it can be used to change the psyche.”

A Russian doctor, Igor Smirnov, whom the magazine labeled a “subliminal Dr. Strangelove,” is one scientist studying the possibilities:

“Using electroencephalographs, he measures brain waves, then uses computers to create a map of the subconscious and various human impulses, such as anger or the sex drive. Then, through taped subliminal messages, he claims to physically alter that landscape with the power of suggestion.”

Combining this research with satellite technology - which has already been done in part - could give its masters the possibility for the perfect crime, since satellites operate with perfect discretion, perfect concealment.

All these satellite powers can be abused with impunity. A satellite makes a “clean getaway,” as it were. Even if a given victim became aware of how a crime was effected, no one would believe him, and he would be powerless to defend himself or fight back.

And this indeed is the overriding evil of satellite technology. It is not just that the technology is unrestrained by public agencies; it is not just that it is entirely undemocratic. The menace of surveillance satellites is irresistible; it overwhelms its powerless victims.

As writer Sandra Hochman foresaw near the beginning of the satellite age, though seriously underestimating the sophistication of the technology involved:

“Omniscient and discrete, satellites peer down at us from their lofty orbit and keep watch every moment of our lives... From more than five-hundred miles above earth, a satellite can sight a tennis ball, photograph it, and send back to earth an image as clear as if it had been taken on the court at ground zero. Satellites photograph and record many things... and beam this information, this data, back to quiet places where it is used in ways we don’t know. Privacy has died.”

This terror is in the here and now. It is not located in the mind of an eccentric scientist or futurologist.

Satellite surveillance is currently being abused. Thousands of Americans are under satellite surveillance and have been stripped of their privacy. And presently they would have little or no recourse in their struggle against the iniquity, since technology advances well ahead of social institutions.

The powers of satellites, as here described, especially lend themselves to harassment of someone. The victim could be a business or political rival, an ex-spouse, a political dissident, a disliked competitor, or anyone who for whatever reason provokes hatred or contempt. Once the target is a “signature,” he can almost never escape a satellite’s probing eyes.

(As an article in Science explained,

“tiny computers... check the incoming signals with computerized images, or ‘signatures,’ of what the target should like.”)

As long as his tormentor or tormentors - those with the resources to hire a satellite - desire, the victim will be subject to continuous scrutiny. His movements will be known, his conversations heard, his thoughts picked clean, and his whole life subjected to bogus moralizing, should his tormentor diabolically use the information gained.

A sadist could harass his target with sound bites, or audio messages, directly broadcast into his room; with physical assault with a laser; with subliminal audio messages that disturb his sleep or manipulate persons around him into saying something that emotionally distresses him; with lasers that turn off street lights as he approaches them; with tampering with lamps so that they burn out when he hits the switch; and in general with the knowledge gained through the omniscient eyes and ears of satellites.

In short, a person with access to satellite technology could make his victim’s life a living nightmare, a living hell.

How you could arrange to have someone subjected to satellite surveillance is secretive; it might even be a conspiracy. However, there seem to be two basic possibilities: surveillance by a government satellite or surveillance by a commercial satellite.

According to an article in Time magazine from 1997,

“commercial satellites are coming online that are eagle-eyed enough to spot you - and maybe a companion - in a hot tub.”

The Journal of Defense & Diplomacy stated in 1985 that,

“the cost of remote sensors is within the reach of [any country] with an interest, and high-performance remote sensors (or the sensor products) are readily available. Advances in fourth-generation (and soon fifth-generation) computer capabilities, especially in terms of VHSIC (very-high-speed integrated circuits) and parallel processing, hold the key to rapid exploitation of space-derived data.

Wideband, low-power data relay satellites are, at the same time, providing support for communication needs and for relay of remote sensor data, thus providing world-wide sensor coverage.”

In addition, The New York Times reported in 1997 that

“commercial spy satellites are about to let anyone with a credit card peer down from the heavens into the compounds of dictators or the back yards of neighbors with high fences.”

“To date [the newspaper further noted] the Commerce Department has issued licenses to nine American companies, some with foreign partners, for 11 different classes of satellites, which have a range of reconnaissance powers.”

But this last article discussed photographic reconnaissance, in which satellites took pictures of various sites on earth and ejected a capsule containing film to be recovered and processed, whereas the state of the art in satellite technology is imaging, detection of targets on earth in real time. Currently, industry is hard at work miniaturizing surveillance satellites in order to save money and be in a position to fill the heavens with more satellites.

It should be pointed out that although satellites are mentioned in this article with various forms of technology, the satellite is simply the most important component of space surveillance, but not the only component.

Since actually a satellite is rather passive in that it reflects to a ground station on earth a beam of energy containing information; the giant mirrors and prisms of the satellite do the crucial reflecting, thereby uniting, in a manner of speaking, two points on earth, point A, the ground station, and point B, the unfortunate target.

No satellite features an on-board EEG, Neurophone, brain-mapping device or other nefarious instruments.

Instead, the satellite is a means of delivering information that, when received by a technician at a ground station on earth, can be used for mind reading, conversation monitoring, and so forth. Also, no satellite has ever read a person’s mind per se; that can only be done by a human being in the very special situation of access to the information down-linked to a satellite’s ground station.

Thus, it should be clear that the satellite in space is only one link—although an inseparable one—in the technology of satellite surveillance. Yet no source of information on satellites indicates whether the abuse of satellite surveillance is mediated by the government or corporations or both.

More telling is the following disclosure by the author of Satellite Surveillance (1991):

“Release of information about spy satellites would reveal that they have been used against U.S. citizens. While most of the public supports their use against the enemies of the U.S., most voters would probably change their attitudes towards reconnaissance satellites if they knew how extensive the spying has been. It’s better...that this explosive issue never surfaces.”

Few people are aware of the destruction of the rights of some Americans through satellite surveillance, and fewer still have any inclination to oppose it, but unless we do, 1984 looms ever closer.

“With the development of television and the technical device to receive and transmit on the same instrument, private life came to an end.”

Original Page: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_satellitesurveillance.htm

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

How to Spot COINTELPRO Agents

2012-02-19T20:22:00.001-06:00

COINTELPRO - Counterintelligence Program

bibliotecapleyades.net

This page doesn't appear to be an article and therefore may not display well in the Article View. You may want to switch to the Full Web Page view.

If you know there should be an article here, help improve the article parser by reporting this page. Thanks!

COINTELPRO is an acronym for a series of FBI counterintelligence programs designed to neutralize political dissidents.

Although covert operations have been employed throughout FBI history, the formal COINTELPRO's of 1956-1971 were broadly targeted against radical political organizations.

In the early 1950s, the Communist Party was illegal in the United States.

The Senate and House of Representatives each set up investigating committees to prosecute communists and publicly expose them. (The House Committee on Un-American Activities and the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, led by Senator Joseph McCarthy).

When a series of Supreme Court rulings in 1956 and 1957 challenged these committees and questioned the constitutionality of Smith Act prosecutions and Subversive Activities Control Board hearings, the FBI's response was COINTELPRO, a program designed to "neutralize" those who could no longer be prosecuted.

Over the years, similar programs were created to neutralize civil rights, anti-war, and many other groups, many of which were said to be "communist front organizations."

As J. Edgar Hoover, longtime Director of the FBI, put it The forces which are most anxious to weaken our internal security are not always easy to identify. Communists have been trained in deceit and secretly work toward the day when they hope to replace our American way of life with a Communist dictatorship.

They utilize cleverly camouflaged movements, such as peace groups and civil rights groups to achieve their sinister purposes. While they as individuals are difficult to identify, the Communist party line is clear.

Its first concern is the advancement of Soviet Russia and the godless Communist cause.

It is important to learn to know the enemies of the American way of life.
The FBI conducted more than 2000 COINTELPRO operations before the programs were officially discontinued in April of 1971, after public exposure, in order to "afford additional security to [their] sensitive techniques and operations."
from COINTELPRO Website

Original Page: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_cointelpro.htm

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

Intelligence Briefs or Disinformation? - How to Tell The Difference

2012-02-19T20:19:00.001-06:00

Intelligence Briefs or Disinformation? - How to Tell The Difference

by Phil Brennan, bibliotecapleyades.net
January 14th 2011

January 14, 2011

from PhilipBrennan Website

Spanish version

Before I go into this subject in any great depth, I would first like to deal with Sorcha Faal, otherwise known as David Booth of the CIA.

David Booth works within the Central Intelligence Agency in COINTELPRO. Other western intelligence agencies known for using COINTELPRO methods include MI5, MI6, GCHQ, and the think-tank, DEMOS. To be quite blunt, all intelligence agencies have their own COINTELPRO departments.

Sorcha Faal does not exist. There is no "spokesperson" within the GRU named Sorcha Faal.

Intelligence agencies rarely make public statements, and when they do, it is always through either someone in the highest echelons of the organization or a government minister with the correct clearances, and never a mere "spokesperson".

Do leaks ever happen through lesser agents? Yes, but those agents if caught are dealt with very strictly, usually with "Holy Orders" to keep their traps shut. By rights, if "Sorcha Faal" was really working within the GRU, she would have been silenced by now. Permanently.

It appears that David Booth is a major thorn in the side of the Alternative Intelligence Community, as well as the Patriot and Truth Movements. This is a gross understatement. Over the past week or two I have had to take aside many people and let them in on the whole Sorcha Faal thing.

Known sites run by Sorcha Faal/David Booth: http://WhatDoesItMean.com/

Known sites that Sorcha Faal/David Booth writes for:

Further Information on Sorcha Faal/David Booth:

So why does David Booth do what he does?

To understand this you have to understand the nature of COINTELPRO, and how it relates to his "work". In order to do this I am going to have to dissect one of Sorcha Faal's articles, and show you how it is used in COINTELPRO.

From "Obama Orders Military To Prepare For Spring Food Riots" on WhatDoesItMean.com, dated 13 January 2011:

"...A grim report prepared by France’s General Directorate for External Security (DGSE) obtained by Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) states that president’s Obama and Sarkozy have “agreed in principal” to create a joint US-European military force to deal exclusively with a Global uprising expected this spring as our World runs out of food.

According to this report, Sarkozy, as head of the G-20 group of developed Nations, called for and received an emergency meeting with Obama this past Monday at the White House wherein he warned his American counterpart that the shock rise in food prices occurring due to an unprecedented series of disasters was threatening the stability of the entire World and could lead to the outbreak of Total Global War.

Just last week French Prime Minister Francois Fillon underlined that one of France's top G-20 priorities was to find a collective response to “excessive volatility” in food prices now occurring, a statement joined by Philippe Chalmin, a top economic adviser to the French government, who warned the World may face social unrest including food riots in April as grain prices increase to unprecedented highs..."

So the "SVR states that..."? Whom within the SVR is making that statement?

As I have already said above, on the rare occasions that an intelligence agency makes a public statement, it will either come through a named official in the higher echelons of the intelligence organization or a government minister with the correct brief and security clearance, and not through a mere, unidentified, "spokesperson".

Notice how Sorcha Faal only links to the Wikipedia entries to the DGSE and SVR, and not their official sites. Why? Because if you followed links to their actual sites you will find no such public statements from them. In fact, you will not find any public statements from them at all.

If I was to write about the Secret Intelligence Service, I would link to their official web site.

If you go over there, you will find no public press statements from them at all on their web site. Why? Because they never make any public statements unless it is through their commander in chief or the Secretary of State through the National Press.

You can see an example of this in an article from The Guardian last year, in an article entitled "MI5 warns Britain facing double terrorism threat" dated the 24^th September 2010:

"...Today's announcement by the home secretary, Theresa May, means MI5 believes the threat is at its highest for at least a decade. Security officials are combating this threat, plus what is assessed to be the greater threat from al-Qaida-inspired terrorists, who remain "highly likely" to stage an attack..."

Notice how the statement from MI5 came through official channels, in this case, through our current Home Secretary, Theresa May.

This does not prove that the information is accurate or truthful, but it does prove the source. The intelligence services are known for giving out false information within the national press in order to fulfill a political agenda. So just because the source is officially verified, does not mean that the information is accurate or truthful...

Now going back to the Sorcha Faal article, you will note that she/he does link back to some mainstream news articles concerning the topic in hand, in order to make what he is saying more plausible. Now let us take a good look at what these articles actually say, because I bet most readers will take "Sorcha Faal's" article at face value without double checking the links.

From "Sarkozy and Obama to discuss soaring food prices" on France24.com (first article link):

"...When French President Nicolas Sarkozy arrives in Washington Monday, he’ll have plenty of ammunition to argue his case for greater global food price and currency stability..."

So far, nothing about crushing food riots in the USA with NATO troops.

More like top level discussions on how to stop the speculative commodities markets from pushing up food prices to incendiary levels. Perfectly sensible.

In fact, the only discussions on NATO mentioned in that article pertain solely to continuing actions in the Middle East and Africa:

"...The two leaders will also discuss a range of security issues such as the NATO-led war against the Taliban in Afghanistan, Iran’s nuclear developments, the increasing terror threat from Pakistan, and the ongoing post-election crisis in Ivory Coast..."

Where, pray tell, does food riots in America or Europe get a mention here? I cannot see it...

The second and third links go back to the first article, and I see no such dire warning within its text. I do see concerns, but no hint of impending doom. This article certainly does not say what he claims it says, but then, who actually bothers to double check the linked sources on what they read?

As for the fourth link, from Bloomberg Business Week, it primarily talks about food riots in poorer nations of the third world, and not the west. Are those food riots going to be severe and see loss of life? Probably. But it is no "national security" concern of the United States.

So where does Sorcha Faal get the idea that both Obama and Sarkozy are going to be talking about Martial Law in the USA due to food riots? From an unquoted source in the SVR. Duh.

In other words, this is a disinformation piece to set up a future straw man argument for if we do get good intelligence about future food shortages in the west and possible food riots.

Let me give a scenario:

A couple of months down the line we get good intelligence about food shortages in the west and start blogging about what information we have been getting.

Then another disinformation agent who is aware of the Sorcha Faal article will come on the message boards posting straw man arguments like:

"...Where did you get that crap from? Sorcha Faal? Har Har... Sorcha Faal is a nut - she's talking out of her arse - ergo, you're a nut who is talking out of your arse..."

This is what Sorcha Faal/David Booth does - he sets up straw man articles in order to discredit any real information we do get.

Does not matter if all our sources that we actually do glean our intelligence from are sound. The Sorcha Faal Straw Man Article exists, and will be used by COINTELPRO to discredit whatever real intelligence we get.

Of course, we all know about how the United States military have been training with foreign troops for a Martial Law situation in the United States, and we know about all the Executive Orders and Acts of Congress which allows them to do that, but what we do not know is how or when such an event could be sparked off.

So be aware of Sorcha Faal/David Booth and his agenda, and steer clear from him at all costs.

¿Informes de Inteligencia o Pura Desinformación?

- Como Saber La diferencia -

por Philip Brennan

17 Enero 2011

del Sitio Web TrinityATierra

traducción de Trinity A Tierra

Versión original

Antes de entrar en materia de forma más profunda, quisiera tratar de Sorcha Faal, también conocido como David Booth de la CIA.

David Booth trabaja en la Agencia de Inteligencia Central en el COINTELPRO. Otras agencias de inteligencia conocidas por usar métodos de COINTELPRO son el MI5, MI6, GCHQ y el think tank ‘Demos’.

Para ser franco, todas las agencias de inteligencia tienen sus departamentos de COINTELPRO.

Esta mujer no existe. No hay ningún “portavoz” dentro del GRU (Servicio de Inteligencia Rusa) llamada Sorcha Faal.

Las agencias de inteligencia rara vez hacen declaraciones públicas y cuando las hacen, es siempre a través de alguien en las más altas esferas de la organización o el gobierno, con el adecuado acceso a la información y no un simple “portavoz”.

¿Tienen lugar filtraciones de vez en cuando por medio de agentes de menor nivel? Sí, pero esos agentes, si se les pilla, tienen que tratar con órdenes muy estrictas, usualmente “Ordenes Supremas” para mantener sus bocas cerradas. Por sentido común, si “Sorcha Faal” estuviera realmente trabajando en el GRU, habría sido silenciada ya. De forma permanente.

Así es como Sorcha Faal, o David Booth, realmente pinta.

Pareciera que David Booth es una espina muy grande en la espalda de la Comunidad de Inteligencia Alternativa, así como los Movimientos Patrióticos y de la Verdad. Esta es una afirmación demasiado grandilocuente. Durante las últimas dos semanas he pedido a mucha gente que me confiara información sobre el asunto Sorcha Faal.

Sitios conocidos dirigidos por Sorcha Faal/David Booth: http://WhatDoesItMean.com/

Sitios conocidos escritos por Sorcha Faal/David Booth:

Más información sobre Sorcha Faal/David Booth:

Así que, ¿por qué David Booth hace lo que hace?

Para entender esto tienes que entender la naturaleza de la COINTELPRO y cómo se relaciona con su “trabajo”. Para ello voy a tener que diseccionar uno de los artículos de Sorcha Faal y les mostraré cómo se usa la desinformación.

Del artículo “Obama ordena a los militares prepararse por protestas sobre los alimentos en primavera - Obama Orders Military To Prepare For Spring Food Riots” de WhatDoesItMean.com, fecha 13 Enero 2011:

“…un pesimista informe preparado por el Directorado General de Francia para Seguridad Externa obtenido por el Servicio de Inteligencia Ruso en el extranjero dice que el presidente Obama y Sarkozy han acordado crear una fuerza militar Europeo-USA para tratar exclusivamente con el levantamiento global esperado esta primavera a medida que nuestro Mundo se quede sin alimentos.

Según este informe, Sarkozy, como cabeza de grupo G20 de las naciones desarrolladas, hizo un llamamiento para recibir una reunión de emergencia con Obama el pasado lunes en la Casa Blanca donde advertía a su contraparte americano que la enorme subida de los precios de los alimentos ocurrida debido a una serie sin precedentes de desastres, estaba amenazando la estabilidad del mundo entero y que podría llevar a una Guerra Global Total.

Ya la pasada semana el primer ministro francés, Francois Fillon subrayaba que una de las prioridades de Francia en el G20 era encontrar una respuesta colectiva a una excesiva volatilidad de los precios de alimentos que se está desatando, una declaración a la que se sumó Philippe Chalmin, un consejero de alto nivel para el gobierno francés, que advertía que el Mundo podría sufrir disturbios sociales y revueltas por alimentos en Abril dado que los precios del grano aumentan hasta cotas sin precedentes.”

Así que el “CRU (servicios de inteligencia rusos) declara que ? ¿Quién dentro de la CRU está haciendo tal declaración?

Como he dicho arriba, en las raras ocasiones que una agencia de inteligencia hace una declaración pública, ésta vendrá o bien a través de un oficial en las esferas más altas de la organización de inteligencia o por medio de un ministro del gobierno con el adecuado nivel de seguridad y acceso a la información y no por medio de una “portavoz” no identificada.

Es fácil percatarse de que Sorcha Faal sólo enlaza en la Wikipedia con el DGSE y el CRU y no con sus sitios oficiales. ¿Por qué? Porque si entras en los sitios verdaderos de estas agencias de inteligencia no encontrarás declaraciones públicas de ellos.

De hecho, no encontrarás declaraciones públicas de ellos en absoluto a menos que sea por medio del comandante en jefe de la Secretaría de Estado por medio de la Prensa Nacional.

Un ejemplo de ello lo tienes en un artículo de “The Guardian” el pasado año titulado “MI5 advierte que Gran Bretaña está afrontando una doble amenaza terrorista - MI5 warns Britain facing double terrorism threat” de fecha 24 de setiembre de 2010.

“…el anuncio hoy por el Secretario de Estado, Theresa May, implica que el MI5 cree que la amenaza se sitúa en su punto más alto en una década. Los agentes de seguridad están combatiendo esta amenaza, además de la que es valorada como la mayor amenaza de los terroristas inspirados en Al Qaeda que siguen siendo los que con mayor probabilidad puedan atacar...”

Note cómo la declaración de MI5 llega de canales oficiales en este caso, por medio de la Secretaria de Estado, Theresa May.

Esto no quiere decir que la información dada sea exacta o verdadera, sino que prueba la fuente. Los servicios de inteligencia son conocidos por dar información falsa a la prensa nacional con objeto de completar su agenda política. Así que sólo porque la fuente sea oficialmente verificada, esto no quiere decir que la información sea verdadera o exacta.

Volviendo ahora al artículo de Sorcha Faal, fíjese que él/ella hace un enlace a algunos artículos de noticias concernientes al tema tratado, con objeto de dar mayor plausibilidad. Vamos a analizar qué dicen realmente estos artículos porque apuesto que la mayor parte de los lectores toman el artículo de "Sorcha Faal” al pie de la letra sin chequear estos enlaces.

Del artículo “Sarkozy y Obama discuten los precios de los alimentos en alza - Sarkozy and Obama to discuss soaring food prices” en France24 (primer enlace):

“…cuando el presidente francés Nicolás Sarkozy llegue a Washington el lunes tendrá mucha munición para plantear el caso por el precio al alza de los alimentos y la estabilidad de las monedas”

Hasta ahora, no dice nada de protestas por alza de precios de alimentos en USA con las tropas de la OTAN.

Es más una discusión a alto nivel sobre cómo frenar los mercados especulativos de los commodities para que dejen de elevar los precios de los alimentos a niveles incendiarios. De hecho, las únicas referencias a la OTAN recogidas en este artículo hablan de acciones en Oriente Medio y África.

“…los dos líderes también discutirán una serie de temas de seguridad tales como la guerra dirigida por la OTAN contra los talibanes en Afganistán, desarrollos nucleares en Irán, amenaza del terror en aumento de Pakistán la crisis post electoral en la Costa de Marfil.”

¿Donde, si se puede saber, se habla de protestas por alimentos en América o Europa? No veo nada…

El segundo y tercer enlace hacen referencia el primer artículo y no veo demasiada alarma dentro del texto. Más allá de preocupaciones, no hay ni rastro del desastre que se anuncia. Este artículo ciertamente no dice lo que asegura que dice, pero ¿a quién le importa chequear las fuentes de los enlaces y lo que dicen de verdad?

Respecto al cuarto enlace, del Bloomberg Business Week, fundamentalmente habla de revueltas por alimentos en naciones más pobres del tercer mundo, y no en occidente. ¿Van a ser estas revueltas por alimentos importantes y verán pérdida de vidas humanas? Probablemente. Pero no es un problema de “seguridad nacional” de Estados Unidos.

Así que ¿de dónde se saca Sorcha Faal que Obama y Sarkozy van a hablar sobre la Ley Marcial en USA debido a las protestas por alimentos?. De una fuente no mencionada del CRU. Vaya.

En otras palabras, este es un artículo desinformativo para establecer un argumento de “hombre de paja” acerca de si en el futuro tendremos o no recortes alimenticios en occidente y posibles desórdenes por alimentos. Déjame que te explique un escenario:

Imagina que dentro de dos meses nos llega información de calidad acerca de recortes alimenticios en occidente y empezamos a blogear sobre esta información que se está recibiendo.

Entonces, otro agente desinformativo que es consciente del trabajo de Sorcha Faal y su artículo sale en los foros y dice:

“..¿De dónde sacaste esta mierda de información? ¿de Sorcha Faal? Sorcha Faal está como una cabra. Dice cosas que se saca de la manga, luego tú, también estás chiflado y hablas sin saber...”

Este es el trabajo al que se dedica Sorcha Faal/David Booth.

Escribe artículos de “hombre de paja” para desacreditar información real que obtenemos. No importa si todas las fuentes de donde obtenemos las conclusiones que sacamos son sólidas y firmes. Como ya existe el artículo del hombre de paja Sorcha Faal, esto será usado por la COINTELPRO para desacreditar cualquier conclusión inteligente a la que podamos llegar.

Por supuesto, todos sabemos cómo los militares de Estados Unidos han estado entrenándose con tropas extranjeras para una situación de Ley Marcial en los Estados Unidos, y sabemos acerca de las Ordenes Ejecutivas y Actas del Congreso que se lo permite hacer, pero lo que no sabemos es cómo o cuándo tal evento podría producirse.

Así que cuidado con Sorcha Faal/David Booth y su agenda y manténgase alejado de él a toda costa.

Original Page: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_cointelpro10.htm

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

Invasive Technologies and Internet Privacy

2012-02-19T20:15:00.001-06:00

Big Brother is only a "ping" or mouse click away...

by Tom Burghardt, bibliotecapleyades.net
October 11th 2010

This page doesn't appear to be an article and therefore may not display well in the Article View. You may want to switch to the Full Web Page view.

If you know there should be an article here, help improve the article parser by reporting this page. Thanks!

Antifascist Calling
October 11, 2010
from GlobalResearch Website

As they walked along the busy, yellow-lit tiers of offices, Anderton said:

"You're acquainted with the theory of precrime, of course. I presume we can take that for granted."

Philip K. Dick

The Minority Report

What do Google, the CIA and a host of so-called "predictive behavior" start-ups have in common?

They're interested in you, or more specifically, whether your online interests - from Facebook to Twitter posts, and from Flickr photos to YouTube and blog entries - can be exploited by powerful computer algorithms and subsequently transformed into "actionable intelligence."

And whether the knowledge gleaned from an IP address is geared towards selling useless junk or entering a name into a law enforcement database matters not a whit. It's all "just data" and "buzz" goes the mantra, along what little is left of our privacy and our rights.

Increasingly, secret state agencies ranging from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to the National Security Agency (NSA) are pouring millions of dollars into data-mining firms which claim they have a handle on who you are or what you might do in the future.

And to top it off, the latest trend in weeding-out dissenters and nonconformists from the social landscape will soon be invading a workplace near you; in fact, it already has.

Welcome to the sinister world of "precrime" where capitalist grifters, drug- and torture-tainted spy shops are all laboring mightily to stamp out every last vestige of free thought here in the heimat.

The CIA Enters the Frame

In July, security journalist Noah Shachtman revealed in Wired that,

"the investment arms of the CIA and Google are both backing a company that monitors the web in real time - and says it uses that information to predict the future."

Shachtman reported that the CIA's semi-private investment company, In-Q-Tel, and Google Ventures, the search giant's business division had partnered-up with a dodgy outfit called Recorded Future (below video) pouring, according to some estimates, $20 million dollars into the fledgling firm.

See Video:

A blurb on In-Q-Tel's web site informs us that,

"Recorded Future extracts time and event information from the web. The company offers users new ways to analyze the past, present, and the predicted future."

Who those ubiquitous though nameless "users" are or what they might do with that information once they "extract" it from the web is left unsaid.

However, judging from the interest that a CIA-connected entity has expressed in funding the company, privacy will not figure prominently in the "new ways" such tools will be used.

Wired reported that the company, founded by former Swedish Army Ranger Christopher Ahlberg,

"scours tens of thousands of websites, blogs and Twitter accounts to find the relationships between people, organizations, actions and incidents - both present and still-to-come."

"The cool thing is" Ahlberg said, "you can actually predict the curve, in many cases."

And as for the search giant's interest in "predicting the future" for the secret state, it wouldn't be the first time that Google Ventures sold equipment and expertise to America's shadow warriors.

While the firm may pride itself on the corporate slogan, "don't be evil," data is a valuable commodity. And where's there value, there's money to be made.

Whether it comes in the form of "increasing share value" through the sale of private information to marketeers or state intelligence agencies eager to increase "situational awareness" of the "battlespace" is a matter of complete indifference to corporate bean counters.

After all, as Google CEO Eric Schmidt told CNBC last year,

"if you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place."

See Video:

But that standard, "only bad people have something to hide," is infinitely mutable and can be stretched - or manipulated as has so often been the case in the United States - to encompass everything from,

"Papist" conspiracies

"illegal" migrants

homosexuality

communism

drug use

America's latest bête noire: the "Muslim threat"

Schmidt went on to say that,

"the reality is that search engines, including Google, do retain this information for some time. And we're all subject, in the U.S., to the Patriot Act, and it is possible that that information could be made available to the authorities."

In February, The Washington Post reported that,

"the world's largest Internet search company and the world's most powerful electronic surveillance organization are teaming up in the name of cybersecurity."

"The alliance" between Google and NSA "is being designed to allow the two organizations to share critical information without violating Google's policies or laws that protect the privacy of Americans' online communications," the Post alleged.

An anonymous source told the Post,

"the deal does not mean the NSA will be viewing users' searches or e-mail accounts or that Google will be sharing proprietary data."

Really?

Last spring it was revealed that Google's Street View cars had been secretly vacuuming up terabytes of private wi-fi data for more than three years across Europe and the United States.

The Sunday Times reported that,

the firm had, "been scooping up snippets of people's online activities broadcast over unprotected home and business wi-fi networks."

In July, The Washington Post's "Top Secret America" investigation disclosed that Google supplies mapping and search products to the U.S. secret state and that their employees, outsourced intelligence contractors for the Defense Department, may have filched their customers' wi-fi data as part of an NSA surveillance project.

See Video:

And what about email and web searches?

Last year, The New York Times revealed that NSA intercepts of,

"private telephone calls and e-mail messages of Americans are broader than previously acknowledged."

In fact, a former NSA analyst described how he was trained-up fierce in 2005,

"for a program in which the agency routinely examined large volumes of Americans' e-mail messages without court warrants."

That program, code-named PINWALE, and the NSA's meta-data-mining spy op STELLAR WIND, continue under Obama.

Indeed, The Atlantic told us at the time that PINWALE,

"is actually an unclassified proprietary term used to refer to advanced data-mining software that the government uses."

But the seamless relationships amongst communications' giants such as Google and the secret state doesn't stop there.

Even before Google sought an assist from the National Security Agency to secure its networks after an alleged breech by China last year, in 2004 the firm had acquired Keyhole, Inc., an In-Q-Tel funded start-up that developed 3-D-spy-in-the-sky images; Keyhole became the backbone for what later evolved into Google Earth.

At the time of their initial investment, In-Q-Tel said that Keyhole's,

"strategic relationship... means that the Intelligence Community can now benefit from the massive scalability and high performance of the Keyhole enterprise solution."

In-Q-Tel's then-CEO, Gilman Louie, said that spy shop venture capitalists invested in the firm,

"because it offers government and commercial users a new capability to radically enhance critical decision making. Through its ability to stream very large geospatial datasets over the Internet and private networks, Keyhole has created an entirely new way to interact with earth imagery and feature data."

Or, as seen on a daily basis in the AfPak "theatre" deliver exciting new ways to kill people.

Now that's innovation!

That was then, now the search giant and the CIA's investment arm are banking on products that will take privacy intrusions to a whole new level.

A promotional offering by the up-and-comers in the predictive behavior marketplace, Recorded Future - A White Paper on Temporal Analytics asserts that,

"unlike traditional search engines which focus on text retrieval and leaves the analysis to the user, we strive to provide tools which assist in identifying and understanding historical developments, and which can also help formulate hypotheses about and give clues to likely future events. We have decided on the term 'temporal analytics' to describe the time oriented analysis tasks supported by our systems."

Big in the hyperbole department, Recorded Future claims to have developed an,

"analytics engine, which goes beyond search, explicit link analysis and adds implicit link analysis, by looking at the 'invisible links' between documents that talk about the same, or related, entities and events. We do this by separating the documents and their content from what they talk about."

According to the would-be Big Brother enablers,

"Recorded Future also analyzes the 'time and space dimension' of documents - references to when and where an event has taken place, or even when and where it will take place - since many documents actually refer to events expected to take place in the future."

Adding to the unadulterated creep factor, the technocratic grifters aver they're,

"adding more components, e.g. sentiment analyses, which determine what attitude an author has towards his/her topic, and how strong that attitude is - the affective state of the author."

Strongly oppose America's imperial project to steal other people's resources in Afghanistan and Iraq, or, crime of crimes, have the temerity to write or organize against it?

Step right this way, Recorded Future has their eye on you and will sell that information to the highest bidder!

After all, as Mike Van Winkle, a California Anti-Terrorism Information Center shill infamously told the Oakland Tribune back in 2003 after Oakland cops wounded scores of peacenik longshoremen at an antiwar rally at the port:

"You can make an easy kind of a link that, if you have a protest group protesting a war where the cause that's being fought against is international terrorism, you might have terrorism at that (protest). You can almost argue that a protest against that is a terrorist act."

And with Recorded Future's "sentiment analyses" such "links" will be even easier to fabricate.

Never mind that the prestigious National Academy of Science's National Research Council issued a scathing 2008 report, Protecting Individual Privacy in the Struggle Against Terrorists: A Framework for Assessment, that debunked the utility of data-ming and link analysis as effective counterterrorism tools.

"Far more problematic," the NRC informs us, "are automated data-mining techniques that search databases for unusual patterns of activity not already known to be associated with terrorists."

Since "so little is known about what patterns indicate terrorist activity" the report avers, dodgy techniques such as link analysis "are likely to generate huge numbers of false leads."

As for Recorded Future's over-hyped "sentiment analyses," the NRC debunked, one might even say preemptively, the dodgy claims of our would-be precrime mavens.

"The committee also examined behavioral surveillance techniques, which try to identify terrorists by observing behavior or measuring physiological states."

Their conclusion?

"There is no scientific consensus on whether these techniques are ready for use at all in counterterrorism."

Damningly, the NRC asserted that such techniques,

"have enormous potential for privacy violations because they will inevitably force targeted individuals to explain and justify their mental and emotional states."

Not that such inconvenient facts matter to Recorded Future or their paymasters in the so-called intelligence community who after all, are in the driver's seat when the firm's knowledge products "make predictions about the future."

After all, as Ahlberg and his merry band of privacy invaders inform us:

"Our mission is not to help our customers find documents, but to enable them to understand what is happening in the world."

The better to get a leg up on the competition or know who to target.

The "Real You"

Not to be outdone by black world spy agencies, their outsourced corporate partners or the futurist gurus who do their bidding, the high-tech publication Datamation, told us last month that the precrime concept,

"is coming very soon to the world of Human Resources (HR) and employee management."

Reporter Mike Elgan revealed that a,

"Santa Barbara, Calif., startup called Social Intelligence data-mines the social networks to help companies decide if they really want to hire you."

Elgan averred that while background checks have historically searched for evidence of criminal behavior on the part of prospective employees,

"Social Intelligence is the first company that I'm aware of that systematically trolls social networks for evidence of bad character."

Similar to Recorded Future and dozens of other "predictive behavior" companies such as Attensity and Visible Technologies, Social Intelligence deploys,

"automation software that slogs through Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, YouTube, LinkedIn, blogs, and 'thousands of other sources,' the company develops a report on the 'real you' - not the carefully crafted you in your resume."

According to Datamation,

"the company also offers a separate Social Intelligence Monitoring service to watch the personal activity of existing employees on an ongoing basis."

Such intrusive monitoring transforms the "workplace" into a 24/7 Orwellian panopticon from which there is no hope of escape.

The service is sold as an exemplary means to "enforce company social media policies."

However, since,

"criteria are company-defined, it's not clear whether it's possible to monitor personal activity."

Fear not, it is.

Social Intelligence, according to Elgan,

"provides reporting that deemphasizes specific actions and emphasizes character. It's less about 'what did the employee do' and more about 'what kind of person is this employee?'"

In other words, it's all about the future; specifically, the grim world order that fear-mongering corporations are rapidly bringing to fruition.

Datamation reports that "following the current trend lines," rooted in the flawed logic of information derived from data-mining and link analysis,

"social networking spiders and predictive analytics engines will be working night and day scanning the Internet and using that data to predict what every employee is likely to do in the future. This capability will simply be baked right in to HR software suites."

As with other aspects of daily life in post-constitutional America, executive decisions, ranging from whether or not to hire or fire someone, cast them into a lawless gulag without trial, or even kill them solely on the say-so of our War-Criminal-in-Chief, are the new house rules.

Like our faux progressive president, some HR bureaucrat will act as judge, jury and executioner, making decisions that can - and have - wrecked lives.

Elgan tells us that unlike a criminal proceeding where you stand before the law accused of wrongdoing and get to face your accuser,

"you can't legally be thrown in jail for bad character, poor judgment, or expectations of what you might do in the future. You have to actually break the law, and they have to prove it."

"Personnel actions aren't anything like this." You aren't afforded the means to "face your accuser."

In fact, based on whether or not you sucked-up to the boss, pissed-off some corporate toady, or moved into the "suspect" category based on an algorithm, you don't have to actually violate company rules in order to be fired "and they don't have to prove it."

Datamation tells us,

"if the social network scanning, predictive analytics software of the future decides that you are going to do something in future that's inconsistent with the company's interests, you're fired."

And, Elgan avers, now that,

"the tools are becoming monstrously sophisticated, efficient, powerful, far-reaching and invasive," the precrime "concept is coming to HR."

Big Brother is only a "ping" or mouse click away...

Original Page: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_internet61.htm

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

Google Partners With NSA, CIA on Intelligence Database

2012-02-19T20:14:00.001-06:00

Google Partners With NSA, CIA on Intelligence Database

by Eric Mayes, bibliotecapleyades.net
March 31st 2008

from RawStory Website

recovered through WayBackMachine Website

Google is selling storage and data searching equipment to U.S. Intelligence agencies giving them the power to create internal searches of government data.

The CIA, FBI and National Security Agency (NSA) have all reportedly banded together to create an internal government intranet - sharing data on a system called Intellipedia.

"Each analyst, for lack of a better term, has a shoe box with their knowledge," Sean Dennehy, chief of Intellipedia development for the CIA, told the San Francisco Chronicle Sunday.

"They maintained it in a shared drive or a Word document, but we're encouraging them to move those platforms so that everyone can benefit."

There are three levels of information available to users:

top secret

secret

sensitive but unclassified

According to numbers provided by the CIA, 37,000 accounts have been established providing access to 200,000 pages of information. Google supplies the software, hardware and tech support.

The software and browsing giant is also licensing its mapping data to government agencies.

"We are a very small group, and even a lot of people in the federal government don't know that we exist," said Mike Bradshaw, who leads Google's federal government sales team and its 18 employees, yesterday to the Chronicle.

Federal agencies are not the only government groups lining up for the Google’s know how.

The U.S. Coast Guard, The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, National Highway Safety Administration and the states of Washington and Alabama have also signed up for similar Google systems.

Google’s transactions with the intelligence community have raised privacy concerns.

Questioned by CNET earlier this year, both Google and Microsoft declined to say if they have provided their users private data to federal authorities under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act - President Bush's warrantless wiretapping program.

In general email and Internet data are not subject to the same privacy rules that wire, telephone and radio transmissions are.

Google told CNET:

"As our privacy policy states, we comply with law enforcement requests made with proper service. We do not discuss specific law enforcement requests and generally do not share aggregate information about them. There are also some legal restrictions on what information we can share about law enforcement requests."

Original Page: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_internetgoogle08.htm

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

The National Security Agency and Fourth Amendment Rights

2012-02-19T20:12:00.001-06:00

The National Security Agency and Fourth Amendment Rights

cryptome.org | Dec 15th 2005

16 December 2005. See also:

NSA Spied Inside the US (December 15, 2005) http://cryptome.org/nsa-spied-us.htm
HPSCI Clashes with NSA On Oversight (1999) http://jya.com/nsa-clash.htm

US Signals Intelligence Directive 18 (1993) http://cryptome.org/nsa-ussid18.htm

4 July 1999. Link to Part 2 of the report.

27 June 1999
Source: Hardcopy of the Senate Report. Thanks to DC.

This document is provided as background for the current dispute between US Representative Porter Goss, Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and the National Security Agency: http://jya.com/nsa-clash.htm. And for public debate on NSA's Echelon and other electronic interception programs: http://jya.com/crypto.htm.

INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES
SENATE RESOLUTION 21

________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

HEARINGS

BEFORE THE

SELECT COMMITTEE TO STUDY
GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS WITH
RESPECT TO INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES

OF THE

UNITED STATES SENATE

NINETY-FOUR CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

_______________

VOLUME 5

_______________

THE NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY AND FOURTH
AMENDMENT RIGHTS

OCTOBER 29 AND NOVEMBER 6, 1975

Printed for the use of the Select Committee To Study Governmental
Operations With Respect to Intelligence Activities

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON: 1976

67-252

________________________________________________________________

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price $2.30

SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE TO STUDY GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS WITH RESPECT TO INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES
FRANK CHURCH, Idaho, Chairman JOHN G. TOWER, Texas, Vice Chairman
PHILIP A. HART, Michigan WALTER MONDALE, Minnesota WALTER D. HUDDLESTON, Kentucky ROBERT MORGAN, North Carolina GARY HART, Colorado	HOWARD H. BAKER, JR.; Tennessee BARRY GOLDWATER, Arizona CHARLES McC. MATHIAS, JR., Maryland RICHARD SCHWEIKER, Pennsylvania
WILLIAM G. MILLER, Staff Director FREDERICK A. O. SCHWARZ, Jr., Chief Counsel CURTIS R. SMOTHERS, Counsel to the Minority AUDREY HATRY, Clerk of the Committee

(II)

CONTENTS _________
HEARING DAYS
	Page
Wednesday, October 29, 1975 Thursday, November 6, 1975	1 57
LIST OF WITNESSES WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 29, 1975
Lieutenant General Lew Allen, Jr., Director, National Security Agency; accompanied by Benson Buffham, Deputy Director, NSA; and Roy Banner, General Counsel

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 1975

[Separate Part 2 of the report (346K)] [Committee debate on SHAMROCK] Edward H. Levi, Attorney General of the United States Philip B. Heymann, Professor of Law, Harvard Law School	57 65 136

HEARINGS EXHIBITS¹
No. 1 -- October 20, 1967 cable from Lieutenant General William Yarborough, ACSI, to Lieutenant General Marshall Carter, Director, NSA	145
No. 2 -- October 21, 1967 cable from Lieutenant General Marshall Carter, Director, NSA to USIB members	147
No. 3 -- July 1, 1969 memo from an Assistant Director, NSA, establishing Project MINARET as a Sensitive SIGINT Operation, and attached MINARET Charter	149
No. 4 -- April 10, 1970 memo from John E. Ingersoll, Director, Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs, to Director, NSA	151
No. 5 -- January 26, 1971 memo from Vice Admiral Noel Gayler, Director, NSA, to the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General	156
No. 6 -- September 17, 1973 letter from Lieutenant General Lew Allen, Jr., Director, NSA, to Clarence M. Kelley, Director, FBI	158
No. 7 -- October 1, 1973 letter from Attorney General Elliot Richardson to Lieutenant General Lew Allen, Jr., Director NSA	160
No. 8 -- October 4, 1973 letter from Lieutenant General Lew Allen, Jr., Director, NSA, to Attorney General Elliot Richardson	162

APPENDIX
[Part 2 attachment] November 10, 1975 letter from Attorney General Levi to Senator Schweiker concerning discussion of FBI Manual of Instructions	164
_________
1 Under criteria determined by the Committee in consultation with the White House, the Departments of Defense and Justice, the National Security Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, certain materials have been deleted from these exhibits, which were previously classified, to maintain the integrity of the internal operating procedures of the agencies involved, and to protect sensitive communications intelligence sources and methods. Further deletions were made with respect to protecting the privacy of certain individuals and groups.

(III)

INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES -- THE NATIONAL SECURITY
AGENCY AND FOURTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS

___________

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 29, 1975

U.S. SENATE,
SELECT COMMITTEE TO STUDY GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS
WITH RESPECT TO INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES

Washington, D.C.

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 :13 a.m., in room 318, Russell Senate Office Building, Senator Frank Church (chairman) presiding.

Present: Senators Church, Tower, Mondale, Huddleston, Morgan, Hart of Colorado, Baker, Goldwater, Mathias and Schweiker.

Also present: William G. Miller, staff director; Frederick A. O. Schwarz, Jr., chief counsel; Curtis R. Smothers, counsel to the minority.

The CHAIRMAN. The hearing will please come to order.

This morning, the committee begins public hearings on the National Security Agency or, as it is more commonly known, the NSA. Actually, the Agency name is unknown to most Americans, either by its acronym or its full name. In contrast to the CIA, one has to search far and wide to find someone who has ever heard of the NSA. This is peculiar, because the National Security Agency is an immense installation. In its task of collecting intelligence by intercepting foreign communications, the NSA employs thousands of people and operates with an enormous budget. Its expansive computer facilities comprise some of the most complex and sophisticated electronic machinery in the world.

Just as the NSA is one of the largest and least known of the intelligence agencies, it is also the most reticent. While it sweeps in messages from around the world, it gives out precious little information about itself. Even the legal basis for the activities of NSA is different from other intelligence agencies. No statute establishes the NSA or defines the permissible scope of its responsibilities. Rather, Executive directives make up the sole "charter" for the Agency. Furthermore. these directives fail to define precisely what constitutes the "technical and intelligence information" which the NSA is authorized to collect. Since its establishment in 1952 as a part of the Defense Department, representatives of the NSA have never appeared before the Senate in a public hearing. Today we will bring the Agency from behind closed doors.

The committee has elected to hold public hearings on the NSA only after the most careful consideration. For 23 years this agency has provided the President and the other intelligence services with communications intelligence vital to decision-making within our Government

(1)

councils. The value of its work to our national security has been and will continue to be inestimable. We are determined not to impair the excellent contributions made by the NSA to the defense of our country. To make sure this committee does not interfere with ongoing intelligence activities, we have had to !be exceedingly careful, for the techniques of the NSA are of the most sensitive and fragile character. We have prepared ourselves exhaustively; we have circumscribed the area of inquiry to include only those which represent abuses of power; and ave have planned the format for today's hearing with great care, so as not to venture beyond our stated objectives.

The delicate character of communications intelligence has convinced Congress in the past not to hold public hearings on NSA. While this committee shares the concern of earlier investigative committees, we occupy a different position than our predecessors. We are tasked, by Senate Resolution 21, to investigate "illegal, improper, or unethical activities" engaged in by intelligence agencies, and to decide on the "need for specific legislative authority to govern operations of * * * the National Security Agency." Never before has a committee of Congress been better prepared, instructed, and authorized to make an informed and judicious decision as to what in the affairs of NSA should remain classified and what may be examined in a public forum.

Our staff has conducted an intensive 5-month investigation of NSA, and has been provided access to required Agency files and personnel. NSA has been cooperative with the committee, and a relationship of mutual trust has been developed. Committee members have received several briefings in executive session on the activities of the Agency, including a week of testimony from the most knowledgeable individuals, in an effort to determine what might be made public without damaging its effectiveness. Among others, we have met with the Directors of the NSA and the CIA, as well as the Secretary of Defense. Finally, once the decision was made to hold public hearings on then NSA, the committee worked diligently with the Agency to draw legitimate boundaries for the public discussion that would preserve the technical secrets of NSA, and also allow a thorough airing of Agency practices affecting American citizens.

In short, the committee has proceeded cautiously. We are keenly aware of the sensitivity of the NSA, and wish to maintain its important role in our defense system. Still, we recognize our responsibility to the American people to conduct a thorough and objective investigation of each of the intelligence services. We would be derelict in our duties if we were to exempt NSA from public accountability. The committee must act with the highest sense of responsibility during its inquiry into the intelligence services. But it cannot sweep improper activities under the rug -- at least not if we are to remain true to our oath to uphold the Constitution and the laws of the land.

We have a particular obligation to examine the NSA, in light of its tremendous potential for abuse. It has the capacity to monitor the private communications of American citizens without the use of a "bug" or "tap." The interception of international communications signals sent through the air is the job of NSA; and, thanks to modern technological developments, it does its job very well. The danger lies in the ability of the NSA to turn its awesome technology against domestic communications. Indeed, as our hearing into the Huston plan demonstrated,

a previous administration and a former NSA Director favored using this potential against certain U.S. citizens for domestic intelligence purposes. While the Huston plan was never fully put into effect, our investigation has revealed that the NSA had in fact been intentionally monitoring the overseas communications of certain U.S. citizens long before the Huston plan was proposed-and continued to do so after it was revoked. This incident illustrates how the NSA could be turned inward and used against our own people. It has been the difficult task of the committee to find a way through the tangled webs of classification and the claims of national security -- however valid they may be -- to inform the American public of deficiencies in their intelligence services. It is not, of course, a task without risks. but it is the course we have set for ourselves. The discussions which will be held this morning are efforts to identify publicly certain activities undertaken by the NSA which are of questionable propriety and dubious legality.

General Allen, Director of the NSA, will provide for us today the background on these activities, and he will be questioned on their origins and objectives by the committee members. Like the CIA and the IRS, the NSA, too, had a "watch list" containing the names of U.S. citizens. This list will be of particular interest to us this morning, though we will take up another important subject as well. The dominant concern of this committee is the intrusion by the Federal Government into the inalienable rights guaranteed Americans by the Constitution. In previous hearings, ave have seen how these rights have been violated by the intelligence services of the CIA, the FBI, and the IRS. As the present hearings will reveal, the NSA has not escaped the temptation to have its operations expanded into provinces protected by the law.

While the committee has found the work of the NSA on the whole to be of a high caliber and properly restrained and has tremendous respect for the professional caliber of the people who work there, the topics we shall explore today do illustrate excesses and suggest areas where legislative action is desirable. That is why we are here.

Senator Tower would like to make an opening statement.

Senator TOWER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, I shall be brief. From the very beginning, I have opposed the concept of public hearings on the activities of the NSA. That opposition continues, and I should like to briefly focus on the reasons I believe these open hearings represent a serious departure from our heretofore responsible and restrained course in the process of our investigation.

To begin with, this complex and sophisticated electronic capability is the most fragile weapon in our arsenal; and unfortunately, I cannot elaborate on that, because that would not be proper. Public inquiry on NSA, I believe, serves no legitimate legislative purpose, while exposing this vital element of our intelligence capability to unnecessary risk, a risk acknowledged in the chairman's own opening statement.

S. Res. 21 does authorize the NSA inquiry, and this has been done very thoroughly in closed session. But that same resolution also picks up a recurring theme of the floor debate upon the establishment of this committee. Specifically, we were admonished not to disclose outside

the committee information which would adversely affect intelligence activities. In my view, the public pursuit of this matter does adversely affect our intelligence-gathering capability.

Even if the risks were minimal -- and I do not believe they are minimal -- the NSA is the wrong target. The real quarry is not largely mechanical response of military organizations to orders. The real issues of who told them to take actions now alleged to be questionable should be addressed to the policy level. It is more important to know why names were placed on a watch list than to know what the NSA did after being ordered to do so.

In summary, Mr. Chairman, I believe we have fallen prey to our own fascination with the technological advances of the computer age. We have invited a three-star military officer to come before us to explain the awesome technology and the potential abuses of a huge vacuum cleaner. We have done this despite the fact that our exhaustive investigation has established only two major abuses in 23 years, both of which have been terminated: And despite the obvious risks of this sensitive component of the Nation's intelligence-gathering capacity, I am opposed to a procedure which creates an unnecessary risk of irreparable injury to the public's right to be secure: even if offered under the umbrella of the acknowledged presumption of a citizen's right to know.

In taking such risks we both fail to advance the general legislative purpose and, I believe, transgress the clearly expressed concerns of the Senate requiring us to, if we err at all, err on the side of caution. It is my view that there comes a point when the people's right to know must of necessity be subordinated to the people's right to be secure, to the extent that a sophisticated and effective intelligence-gathering capability makes them secure.

I do not think that any of us here, for example, would want us to sacrifice our capability for verification of Soviet strategic weapons capability. And whether or not that capability was thought posture in a first-strike configuration, I cite it only as an example. Hence, my opposition to the conduct of these public hearings.

I am aware, Mr. Chairman, that through the democratic process, the committee has, by a majority vote, voted to go this route. But I felt a compulsion to state my own reasons for being in opposition.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Tower, I appreciate your statement, and I might say that there are two levels of concern in the committee, and relating to the two different practices that are of questionable legality. And so, we have divided this hearing into two parts, proceeding with the portion that has least objection from members of the committee who feel as Senator Tower does. And then we will have an opportunity to discuss further the second part. after General Allen has left the witness stand. And that is the procedure, that is satisfactory with you?

Senator TOWER. I accept the procedure, and it is totally satisfactory to me.

The CHAIRMAN. Very well.

Now, General Allen has come prepared with his statement, after which, General, there will be questions from the committee. I wish you would identify those who will be sitting with you; and if they

might respond to questions, then I would ask them to stand with you to take the oath. Would you first identify them, please ?

General ALLEN. Yes. On my right is Mr. Benson Buffham, who is the Deputy Director of the National Security Agency. On my left is Mr. Roy Banner, who is the General Counsel of the National Security Agency.

Sir, I suppose -- or at least for our initial purposes -- that I be the only witness.

The CHAIRMAN. Very well. Then you alone may stand and take the oath. Do you solemnly swear that all of the testimony you will give in this proceeding will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

General ALLEN. I do.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

General, I know you have a prepared statement. Will you please proceed with it at this time.

TESTIMONY OF LT. GEN. LEW ALLEN, JR., DIRECTOR, NATIONAL SECURITY
AGENCY, ACCOMPANIED BY BENSON BUFFHAM, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NSA; AND
ROY BANNER, GENERAL COUNSEL, NSA

General ALLEN. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I recognize the important responsibility this committee has to investigate the intelligence operations of the U.S. Government and to determine the need for improvement by legislative or other means. For several months, involving many thousands of man-hours, the National Security Agency has, I believe, cooperated with this committee to provide a thorough information base, including data whose continued secrecy is most important to our Nation.

We are now here to discuss in open session certain aspects of an important and hitherto secret operation of the U.S. Government. I recognize that the committee is deeply concerned that we protect sensitive and fragile sources of information. I appreciate the care which this committee and staff have exercised to protect the sensitive data we have provided.

I also understand that the committee intends to restrict this open discussion to certain specific activities and to avoid current foreign intelligence operations. It may not be possible to discuss all these activities completely without some risk of damage to continuing foreign intelligence capabilities. Therefore, I may request some aspects of our discussion be conducted in executive session where there can be opportunity to continue our full and frank disclosure to the committee of all the information you require. The committee may then develop an appropriate public statement. We are therefore here, sir, at your request, prepared to cooperate in bringing these matters before your committee.

In the interest of clarity and perspective, I shall first review the purpose of the National Security Agency and the authorities under which it operates. Next, I will describe the process by which requirements for information are levied on NSA by other Government agencies. And finally, I will give a more specific description of an operation conducted in 1967-73 in response to external requirements, which I will refer to as "the watch list activity." This activity

has been subject to an intensive review by this committee and staff in closed session.

Under the authority of the President, the Secretary of Defense has been delegated responsibility for both providing security of U.S. governmental communications and seeking intelligence from foreign electrical communications. Both functions are executed for the Secretary of Defense by the Director, National Security Agency, through a complex national system which includes the NSA as its nucleus. It is appropriate for the Secretary of Defense to have these executive agent responsibilities, since the great majority of the effort to accomplish both of these missions is applied to the support of the military aspects of the national security.

The communications security mission is directed at enhancing the security of U.S. Government communications whenever needed to protect those communications from exploitation by foreign governments -- a complex undertaking in today's advanced electronic world.

The United States, as part of its effort to produce foreign intelligence, has intercepted foreign communications, analyzed, and in some cases decoded these communications to produce such foreign intelligence since the Revolutionary War. During the Civil War and World War I these communications were often telegrams sent by wire. In modern times, with the advent of wireless communications, particular emphasis has been placed by the Government on the specialized field of intercepting and analyzing communications transmitted by radio. Since the 1930's, elements of the military establishment have been assigned tasks to obtain intelligence from foreign radio transmissions.

In the months preceding Pearl Harbor and throughout World War II, highly successful accomplishments were made by groups in the Army and the Navy to intercept and analyze Japanese and German coded radio messages. Admiral Nimitz is reported as rating its value in the Pacific to the equivalent of another whole fleet. According to another official report, in the victory in the Battle of Midway, it would have been impossible to have achieved the concentration of forces and the tactical surprise without communications intelligence. A congressional committee in its investigation of Pearl Harbor, stated that the success of communications intelligence "contributed enormously to the defeat of the enemy, greatly shortened the war, and saved many thousands of lives." General George C. Marshall commented that they-- communications intelligence -- had contributed "greatly to the victories and tremendously to the savings of American lives."

Following World War II, the separate military efforts were brought together and the National Security Agency was formed to focus the Government's efforts. The purpose was to maintain and improve this source of intelligence which was considered of vital importance to the national security, to our ability to wage war, and to the conduct foreign affairs.

This mission of NSA is directed to foreign intelligence, obtained from foreign electrical communications and also from other foreign signals such as radars. Signals are intercepted by many techniques and processed, sorted and analyzed by procedures which reject inappropriate or unnecessary signals. The foreign intelligence derived from these signals is then reported to various agencies of the Government in response to their approved requirements for foreign intelligence.

The NSA works very hard at this task and is composed of dedicated, patriotic citizens, civilian and military, most of whom have dedicated their professional careers to this important and rewarding job. They are justifiably proud of their service to their country and fully accept the fact that their combined remarkable efforts can be appreciated only by those few in Government who know of their great importance to the United States.

Congress, in 1933, recognized the importance of communications intelligence activities and acted to protect the sensitive nature of the information derived from those activities by passing legislation that is now 18 U.S.C. 952. This statute prohibits the divulging of the contents of decoded foreign diplomatic messages, or information about them.

Later, in 1950, Congress enacted 18 U.S.C. 798, which prohibits the unauthorized disclosure, prejudicial use, or publication of classified information of the government concerning communications intelligence activities, cryptologic activities, or the results thereof. It indicates that the President is authorized: (1) to designate agencies to engage in communications intelligence activities for the United States; (2) to classify cryptologic documents and information; and (3) to determine those persons who shall be given access to sensitive cryptologic documents and information. Further, this law defines the term "communication intelligence" to mean all procedures and methods used in the interception of communications and the obtaining of information from such communications by other than the intended recipients.

After an intensive review by a panel of distinguished citizens, President Truman in 1952 acted to reorganize and strengthen communications intelligence activities. He issued in October 1952 a Presidential memorandum outlining in detail how communications intelligence activities were to be conducted, designated the Secretary of Defense to be his executive agent in these matters, directed the establishment of the NSA, and outlined the missions and functions to be performed by the NSA.

The Secretary of Defense, pursuant to the congressional authority delegated to him in section 133(d) of title 10 of the United States Code, acted to establish the National Security Agency. The section of the law cited provides that the Secretary may exercise any of these duties through persons or organizations of the Department of Defense. In 1962 a Special Subcommittee on Defense Agencies of the House Armed Services Committee concluded, after examining the circumstances leading to the creation of defense agencies, that the Secretary of Defense had the legal authority to establish the National Security Agency.

The President's constitutional and statutory authorities to obtain foreign intelligence through signals intelligence are implemented through National Security Council and Director of Central Intelligence Directives which govern the conduct of signals intelligence activities by the executive branch of the Government.

In 1959, the Congress enacted Public Law 86-36 which provides authority to enable the NSA as the principal agency of the Government responsible for signals intelligence activities, to function without the disclosure of information which would endanger the accomplishment of its functions.

In 1964 Public Law 88-290 was enacted by the Congress to establish a personnel security system and procedures governing persons employed by the NSA or granted access to its sensitive cryptologic information. Public Law 88-290 also delegates authority to the Secretary of Defense to apply these personnel security procedures to employees and persons granted access to the National Security Agency's sensitive information. This law underscores the concern of the Congress regarding the extreme importance of our signals intelligence enterprise and mandates that the Secretary of Defense, and the Director, National Security Agency, take measures to achieve security for the activities of the NSA.

Title 18 U.S.C. 2511(3) provides as follows:

Nothing contained in this chapter or in Section 605 of the Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. 605, shall limit the constitutional power of the President to take such measures as he deems necessary to protect the nation against actual or potential attack; or other hostile acts of a foreign power, to obtain foreign intelligence information deemed essential to the security of the United States or to protect national security information against foreign intelligence activities.

In United States v. Brown, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, decided August 22, 1973, the court discussed this provision of the law as follows:

The constitutional power of the President is adverted to, although not conferred by, Congress in Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968.

While NSA does not look upon section 2511(3) as authority to conduct communications intelligence, it is our position that nothing in chapter 119 of title 18 affects or governs the conduct of communications intelligence for the purpose of gathering foreign intelligence.

Finally, for the past 29 years, Congress has annually appropriated funds for the operation of the NSA, following hearings before the Armed Services and Appropriations Committees of both Houses of Congress in which extensive briefings of the NSA's signals intelligence mission have been conducted. We appear before both the House and the Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittees to discuss and report on the U.S. signals intelligence and communications security programs, and to justify the budgetary requirements associated with these programs. We do this in formal executive session, in which we discuss our activities in whatever detail required by the Congress.

In considering the fiscal year 1976 total cryptologic budget now before Congress, I appeared before the Defense Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee on two separate occasions for approximately 7 hours. In addition, I provided follow-up response to over 100 questions of the subcommittee members and staff. We also appeared before armed services subcommittees concerned with authorizing research, development, test and evaluation, construction and housing programs and also before the appropriations subcommittees on construction and housing.

In addition to this testimony, congressional oversight is accomplished in other ways. Staff members of these subcommittees have periodically visited the Agency for detailed briefings on specific aspects of our operations. Members of investigations staff of the House Appropriations Committee recently conducted an extensive investigation

of this Agency. The results of this study, which lasted over a year, have been provided to that committee in a detailed report. Another feature of congressional review is that since 1955 resident auditors of the General Accounting Office have been assigned at the Agency to perform on-site audits. Additional GAO auditors were cleared for access in 1973 and GAO, in addition to this audit, is initiating a classified review of our automatic data processing functions. NSA's cooperative efforts in this area were noted by a Senator in February of this year. In addition, resident auditors of the Office of Secretary of Defense, Comptroller, conduct indepth management reviews of our organization.

A particular aspect of NSA authorities which is pertinent to today's discussion relates to the definition of foreign communications. Neither the Presidential directive of 1952 nor the National Security Council directive No. 6 defines the term foreign communications. The NSA has always confined its activities to communications involving at least one foreign terminal. This interpretation is consistent with the definition of foreign communications in the Communications Act of 1934.

There is also a directive of the Director of Central Intelligence dealing with security regulations which employs a definition which excludes communications between U.S. citizens or entities. While this directive has not been construed as defining the NSA mission in the same sense as has the National Security Council directive, in the past this exclusion has usually been applied and is applied now. However, we will describe a particular activity in the past when that exclusion was not applied.

NSA does not now, and with an exception to be described has not in the past conducted intercept operations for the purpose of obtaining the communications of U.S. citizens. However, it necessarily occurs that some circuits which are known to carry foreign communications necessary for foreign intelligence will also carry personal communications between U.S. citizens, one of whom is at a foreign location.

The interception of communications, however it may occur, is conducted in such a manner as to minimize the unwanted messages. Nevertheless, many unwanted communications are potentially available for selection. Subsequent processing, sorting, and selecting for analysis is conducted in accordance with strict procedures to insure immediate and, wherever possible, automatic rejection of inappropriate messages. The analysis and reporting is accomplished only for those messages which meet specified conditions and requirements for foreign intelligence. It is certainly believed by NSA that our communications intelligence activities are solely for the purpose of obtaining foreign intelligence in accordance with the authorities delegated by the President stemming from his constitutional power to conduct foreign intelligence.

NSA produces signals intelligence in response to objectives, requirements and priorities as expressed by the Director of Central Intelligence with the advice of the U.S. Intelligence Board. There is a separate committee of the Board which develops the particular requirements against which the NSA is expected to respond.

The principal mechanism used by the Board in formulating requirements for signals intelligence information has been one of listing areas of intelligence interest and specifying in some detail the signals intelligence

needed by the various elements of Government. This listing, which was begun in 1966 and fully implemented in 1970, is intended to provide guidance to the Director of the National Security Agency, and to the Secretary of Defense, for programing and operating NSA activities. It is intended as an expression of realistic and essential requirements for signals intelligence information.

This process recognizes that a single listing, updated annually, needs to be supplemented with additional detail and time-sensitive factors, and it establishes a procedure whereby the USIB agencies can express directly to the NSA information needs which reasonably amplify requirements approved by USIB or higher authority.

In addition, there are established procedures for non-Board members, the Secret Service, and the BNDD at the time in question, to ask the NSA for information. The NSA does have operational discretion in responding to requirements, but we do not generate our own requirements for foreign intelligence. The Director, NSA is directed to be responsive to the requirements formulated by the Director of Central Intelligence. However, I clearly must not respond to any requirements which I feel are not proper.

In 1975 the USIB signals intelligence requirements process was revised. Under the new system, all basic requirements for signals intelligence information on U.S. Government agencies will be reviewed and validated by the Signals Intelligence Committee of USIB before being levied on the NSA. An exception is those requirements which are highly time-sensitive; they will continue to be passed simultaneously to us for action and to USIB for information. The new system will also attempt to prioritize signals intelligence requirements. The new requirements process is an improvement in that it creates a formal mechanism to record all requirements for signals intelligence information and to establish their relative priorities.

Now to the subject which the committee asked me to address in some detail -- the so-called watch list activity of 1967 to 1973.

The use of lists of words, including individual names, subjects, locations, et cetera, has long been one of the methods used to sort out information of foreign intelligence value from that which is not of interest. In the past such lists have been referred to occasionally as watch lists, because the lists were used as an aid to watch for foreign activity of reportable intelligence. interest. However, these lists generally did not contain names of U.S. citizens or organizations. The activity in question is one in which U.S. names were used systematically as a basis for selecting messages, including some between U.S. citizens, when one of the communicants was at a foreign location.

The origin of such activity is unclear. During the early sixties, requesting agencies had asked the NSA to look for reflections in international communications of certain U.S. citizens traveling to Cuba. Beginning in 1967, requesting agencies provided names of persons and organizations, some of whom were U.S. citizens, to the NSA in an effort to obtain information which was available in foreign communications as a by-product of our normal foreign intelligence mission.

The purpose of the lists varied, but all possessed a common thread in which the NSA was requested to review information available through our usual intercept sources. The initial purpose was to help determine the existence of foreign influence on specified activities of

interest to agencies of the U.S. Government, with emphasis then on Presidential protection and on civil disturbances occurring throughout the Nation.

Later, because of other developments, such as widespread national concern over such criminal activity as drug trafficking and acts of terrorism, both domestic and international, the emphasis came to include these areas. Thus, during this period, 1967-73, requirements for which lists were developed in four basic areas: international drug trafficking; Presidential protection; acts of terrorism; and possible foreign support or influence on civil disturbances.

In the sixties there was Presidential concern voiced over the massive flow of drugs into our country from outside the United States. Early in President Nixon's administration, he instructed the CIA to pursue with vigor intelligence efforts to identify foreign sources of drugs and the foreign organizations and methods used to introduce illicit drugs into the United States. The BNDD, the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs, in 1970 asked the NSA to provide communications intelligence relevant to these foreign aspects, and BNDD provided watch lists with some U.S. names [exhibit 4].¹ International drug trafficking requirements were formally documented in USIB requirements in August 1971.

As we all know, during this period there was also heightened concern by the country and the Secret Service over Presidential protection because of President Kennedy's assassination. After the Warren Report, requirements lists containing names of U.S. citizens and organizations were provided to NSA by the Secret Service in support of their efforts to protect the President and other senior officials. Such requirements were later incorporated into USIB documentation. At that time, intelligence derived from foreign communications was regarded as a valuable tool in support of Executive protection.

About the same time as the concern over drugs, or shortly thereafter, there was a committee established by the President to combat international terrorism. This committee was supported by an interdepartmental working group with USIB representatives. Requirements to support this effort with communications intelligence were also incorporated into USIB documentation.

Now let me put the watch list in perspective regarding its size and the numbers of names submitted by the various agencies:

The BNDD submitted a watch list covering their requirements for intelligence on international narcotics trafficking. On September 8, 1972, President Nixon summarized the efforts of his administration against drug abuse. The President stated that he ordered the Central Intelligence Agency, early in his administration, to mobilize its full resources to fight the international drug trade. The key priority, the President noted, was to destroy the trafficking through law enforcement and intelligence efforts. The BNDD list contained the names of suspected drug traffickers. There were about 450 U.S. individuals and over 3,000 foreign individuals.

The Secret Service submitted watch lists covering their requirements for inteLligence relating to Presidential and Executive protection.

_______________

1 See p. 151.

Public Law 90-331 of June 6, 1968, made it mandatory for Federal agencies to assist the Secret Service in the performance of its protective duties. These lists contained names of persons and groups who, in the opinion of the Secret Service, were potentially a threat to Secret Service protectees, as well as the names of the protectees themselves. On these lists were about 180 U.S. individuals and groups and about 525 foreign individuals and groups.

The Brownell Committee, whose report led to the creation of NSA stated that communications intelligence should be provided to the Federal Bureau of Investigation because of the essential role of the Bureau in the national security.

The FBI submitted watch lists concerning their requirements of foreign ties and support to certain U.S. persons and groups. These lists contained names of "so-called" extremist persons and groups individuals and groups active in civil disturbances, and terrorists. The lists contained a maximum of about 1,000 U.S. persons and groups and about 1,700 foreign persons and groups.

[JYA Note: See omitted CIA note here in Allen's prepared statement.]

The DIA submitted a watch list covering their requirements on possible foreign control of, or influence on, U.S. antiwar activity. The list contained names of individuals traveling to North Vietnam. There were about 20 U.S. individuals on this list. DIA is responsible under DOD directives for satisfying the intelligence requirements of the major components of the DOD and to validate and assign to NSA requirements for intelligence required by DOD components.

Between 1967 and 1973 there was a cumulative total of about 450 U.S. names on the narcotics list, and about 1,200 U.S. names on all other lists combined. What that amounted to was that at the height of the watch list activity, there were about 800 U.S. names on the watch list and about one-third of these 800 were from the narcotics list.

We estimate that over this 6-year period, 1967-1973, about 2,000 reports were issued by the NSA on international narcotics trafficking and about 1,900 reports were issued covering the three areas of terrorism, Executive protection and foreign influence over U.S. groups. This would average about two reports per day. These reports included some messages between U.S. citizens with one foreign communicant, but over 90 percent had at least one foreign communicant and all messages had at least one foreign terminal. Using agencies did periodically review, and were asked by the NSA to review, their watch lists to insure inappropriate or unnecessary entries were promptly removed.

I am not the proper person to ask concerning the value of the product from these four special efforts. We are aware that a major terrorist

___________________

1 See p. 145.
2 See p. 147.

act in the United States was prevented. In addition, some large drug shipments were prevented from entering the United States because of our efforts on international narcotics trafficking. We have statements from the requesting agencies in which they have expressed appreciation for the value of the information which they had received from us. Nonetheless, in my own judgment, the controls which were placed on the handling of the intelligence were so restrictive that the value was significantly diminished.

Now let me address the question of the watch list activity as the NSA saw it at the time.

This activity was reviewed by proper authority within NSA and by competent external authority. This included two former Attorneys General and a former Secretary of Defense.

The requirements for information had been approved by officials of the using agencies and subsequently validated by the United States Intelligence Board. For example, the Secret Service and BNDD requirements were formally included in USIB guidance in 1970 and 1971, respectively.

In the areas of narcotics trafficking, terrorism and requirements related to the protection of the lives of senior U.S. officials, the emphasis placed by the President on a strong, coordinated government effort was clearly understood. There also was no question that there was considerable Presidential concern and interest in determining the existence and extent of foreign support to groups fomenting civil disturbances in the United States.

From 1967 to 1969 the procedure for submitting names was more informal, with written requests following as the usual practice. Starting in 1969 the procedure was formalized and the names for watch lists were submitted through channels in writing [exhibit 3].¹ The Director and Deputy Director of the NSA approved certain categories of subject matter from customer agencies. and were aware that U.S. individuals and organizations were being included on watch lists. While they did not review and approve each individual name there were continuing management reviews at levels below the Directorate.

NSA personnel sometimes made analytic amplifications on customer watch list submissions in order to fulfill certain requirements. For example, when information was received that a name on the watch list used an alias, the alias was inserted; or when an address was uncovered of a watch list name, the address was included. This practice by analysts was done to enhance the selection process, not to expand the lists.

The information produced by the watch list activity was, with one exception, entirely a byproduct of our foreign intelligence mission. All collection was conducted against international communications with at least one terminal in a foreign country, and for purposes unrelated to the watch list activity. That is, the communications were obtained, for example, by monitoring communications to and from Hanoi.

All communications had a foreign terminal and the foreign terminal or communicant, with the one exception to be described, was the initial object of the communications collection.

The watch list activity specifically consisted of scanning international communications already intercepted for other purposes to derive

____________________

1 See p. 149.

information which met watch list requirements. This scanning was accomplished by using the entries provided to NSA as selection criteria. Once selected, the messages were analyzed to determine if the information therein met those requesting agencies' requirements a

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

ORDINANCE NO. BL2007-1318

2012-02-19T20:06:00.001-06:00

ORDINANCE NO. BL2007-1318

nashville.gov | Feb 6th 2007

This page doesn't appear to be an article and therefore may not display well in the Article View. You may want to switch to the Full Web Page view.

If you know there should be an article here, help improve the article parser by reporting this page. Thanks!

ORDINANCE NO. BL2007-1318

An ordinance amending the Metropolitan Code of Laws relative to Audits.

Whereas, on November 7, 2006, the voters of Davidson County, Tennessee, approved an amendment to the Charter of the Metropolitan Government by adding a new Section 8.121 thereto to establish a new and independent Department of Audit directed by the newly-created position of Metropolitan Auditor and generally overseen by a newly created Metropolitan Audit Committee; and

Whereas, the Metropolitan Code of Law contains several provisions relating to internal audits and the Council Audit Committee; and

Whereas, certain of those provisions of the Metropolitan Code now conflict in whole or in part with the Metropolitan Charter amendment and should be repealed in order to avoid confusion.

Now, therefore, be it enacted by the Council of The Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County:

Section 1. That Sections 2.24.100, 2.24.101 and 2.24.102 of the Metropolitan Code of Laws are hereby repealed and should be deleted from the Metropolitan Code.

Section 2. That Chapter 2.24 of the Metropolitan Code of Laws be and the same is hereby amended by adding the following new Article IV:

Sec. 2.24.300. Division of Metropolitan Audit.

A. There shall be, as an independent agency of the metropolitan government, a division of metropolitan audit, the director of which is designated as the metropolitan auditor. The metropolitan auditor shall be a person:

1. with a well founded reputation in government or public finance and the audit function as may be exhibited by a record of exceptional performance for at least five (5) years as a financial officer of a government or business;

2. who has, through education and experience as an accountant, auditor, CFO, controller or principal accounting officer of a governmental entity or private business an understanding of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, Governmental Auditing Standards Board standards, financial statements, internal controls and procedures for financial reporting, and the audit functions of a governmental entity.

B. The metropolitan auditor shall be appointed by a majority vote of the council from a list of three (3) persons recommended by the audit committee whom the audit committee deems best qualified and available to fill the position. If the council deems that the persons recommended by the audit committee to serve as metropolitan auditor are not suitable and/or qualified, the council shall reject the names submitted and the audit committee shall recommend three additional persons deemed qualified and available to fill the position. The metropolitan auditor shall serve a term of eight (8) years but shall be subject to removal for cause during the term by a vote of four members of the audit committee. The first term of the metropolitan auditor will end on June 30, 2014, regardless of whether the full eight years has been served. A vacancy occurring during a term shall be filled temporarily with a qualified acting metropolitan auditor by the majority vote of the audit committee. The filling of the vacancy for the remainder of a term and for any new term shall be filled by a majority vote of the council through the process provided in this section. The compensation for the metropolitan auditor shall be established as part of the general pay plan provided by section 12.10 of the Metropolitan Charter.

C. The metropolitan auditor shall conduct, or cause to be conducted financial, performance and other audit services following Government Auditing Standards established by the United States Government Accountability Office, and the metropolitan auditor shall follow the independent and other professional standards established and published under Government Auditing Standards.

D. The metropolitan auditor shall appoint and remove, subject to the civil service provisions of article 12 of this Charter, all officers and employees of the division.

E. There shall be a metropolitan audit committee which shall be composed of six (6) members, as follows: The vice mayor and the director of finance shall be members by virtue of their official positions. Two (2) members of the metropolitan county council shall be selected by that body from its membership to serve a two (2) year term. One (1) member shall be selected by the Nashville Area Chamber of Commerce to serve a four (4) year term. One (1) member shall be selected by the Nashville Chapter of the Tennessee Society of Certified Public Accountants to serve a four (4) year term except that the member first selected shall serve a two year term. Members shall be eligible to succeed themselves. The General Provisions of Article 11, Chapter 1, of this Charter shall be applicable to the audit committee unless otherwise specified in this section.

F. The audit committee will oversee the annual audit plan, fix the compensation of the metropolitan auditor, and review and evaluate at least annually the performance of the metropolitan auditor.

G. All audit reports issued by the metropolitan auditor are public documents and shall at all times, during business hours, be open for personal inspection by any citizen of Tennessee.

Section 3. That nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to conflict with the duties and the responsibilities of the director of finance as set out in state law, the Metropolitan Charter, including but not limited to Section 8.103 of the Metropolitan Charter, or other provisions of the Metropolitan Code of Laws.

Section 4. That the two (2) members appointed by the Metropolitan County Council to the Metropolitan Audit Committee created by Section 8.121 of the Metropolitan Charter shall be Councilmember Michael Craddock and Councilmember Jim Gotto, each to serve a two (2) year term.

Section 5. That this Ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage, the welfare of The Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County requiring it.

Sponsored by: Michael Craddock, Jim Gotto, Jim Shulman, Eric Crafton, Vivian Wilhoite, Billy Walls, Rip Ryman, Brenda Gilmore, Greg Adkins

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
Introduced:	February 6, 2007
Passed First Reading:	February 6, 2007
Referred to:	Budget & Finance Committee
Passed Second Reading:	February 20, 2007
Passed Third Reading:	March 20, 2007
Approved:	March 21, 2007
By:

Metro Home Page | Metro Department Listings

Send comments or suggestions to the metro_clerk@metro.nashville.org
Send error reports to webmaster@nashville.gov
� 2005, Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County

Original Page: http://www.nashville.gov/mc/ordinances/term_2003_2007/bl2007_1318.htm

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

Jewel v. NSA

2012-02-19T20:03:00.001-06:00

Jewel v. NSA

eff.org | Sep 1st 2011

In Jewel v. NSA EFF is suing the NSA and other government agencies on behalf of AT&T customers to stop the illegal unconstitutional and ongoing dragnet surveillance of their communications and communications records.

Jewel v. NSA is aimed at ending the NSA’s dragnet surveillance of millions of ordinary Americans and holding accountable the government officials who illegally authorized it. Evidence in the case includes undisputed documents provided by former AT&T telecommunications technician Mark Klein showing AT&T has routed copies of Internet traffic to a secret room in San Francisco controlled by the NSA. That same evidence is central to nsa/hepting">Hepting v. AT&Ta class-action lawsuit filed by EFF in 2006 to stop the telecom giant’s participation in the illegal surveillance program.

In addition to suing the government agencies involved in the domestic dragnet Jewel v. NSA also targets the individuals responsible for creating authorizing and implementing the illegal program including former President George W. Bush former Vice President Dick Cheney Cheney’s former chief of staff David Addington former Attorney General and White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales and other individuals who ordered or participated in the warrantless domestic surveillance.

In April the Obama administration moved to dismiss Jewel claiming that litigation over the wiretapping program would require the government to disclose privileged "state secrets ” and that they were immune from suit. These are essentially the same or worse arguments than those made by the Bush administration when it first set out to dismiss EFF’s case against the AT&T back in 2006. On July 15 2009 the court heard arguments on the government's motion to dismiss Jewel.

For the full complaint in Jewel v. NSA

Original Page: https://www.eff.org/cases/jewel

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

EFF to Court: Don't Let Government Hide Illegal Surveillance

2012-02-19T20:02:00.001-06:00

EFF to Court: Don't Let Government Hide Illegal Surveillance

eff.org | Oct 15th 2011

Seattle - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) urged the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals today to preserve lawsuits challenging the government's illegal mass surveillance of millions of ordinary Americans. In oral arguments today, EFF asked the court to block the government's attempt to bury the suits with claims of state secrecy and an unconstitutional "immunity" law for telecoms that participated in the spying.

Appearing before the court in Seattle, EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn and Senior Staff Attorney Kevin Bankston argued against the dismissal of EFF's two lawsuits, Hepting v. AT&T and Jewel v. NSA, along with the 32 other cases against various telecommunications carriers. At stake is whether the courts can judge the legality and constitutionality of the National Security Agency's (NSA's) bulk interception of Americans' phone calls and emails, accomplished through back-door access to AT&T's domestic telecom network and its databases of communications records.

"The scope and legality of the NSA program has been the subject of widespread reporting and debate for half a decade -- it is hardly a secret. And Congress long ago crafted balanced and comprehensive security procedures to govern courts' handling of secret evidence about electronic surveillance to ensure that the Judicial Branch is always able to watch over Executive Branch spying while preserving national security," said Bankston. "Yet the government still claims that any judicial scrutiny of the NSA program would disclose 'state secrets' and harm national security. It's time for these lawsuits to proceed and for the courts to be allowed to do their job and determine the legality of the NSA program."

EFF also argued that the FISA Amendments Act (FAA) -- the 2008 legislation aimed at getting telecoms participating in the NSA program off the hook for breaking the law -- violates the Constitutional separation of powers.

"The FAA effectively allows the President to grant favored companies a 'get out of jail free' card even though the law prohibits telecoms from violating their customers' privacy," said Cohn. "We can't allow the government to stack the deck against ordinary Americans. We need to protect against officials who overstep limits on their power."

More than five years ago, EFF filed Hepting v AT&T, the first lawsuit against a telecom aimed at stopping the government's dragnet domestic wiretapping. In 2008, when Congress passed legislation that threatened to end the Hepting case, EFF filed Jewel v. NSA -- a case directly against the government and government officials.

Original Page: https://www.eff.org/press/archives/2011/08/30

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

EFF Unveils New Project: Bloggers Under Fire | Electronic Frontier Foundation

2012-02-19T20:01:00.001-06:00

EFF Unveils New Project: Bloggers Under Fire

by Jillian C. York, eff.org
February 13th 2012

This page doesn't appear to be an article and therefore may not display well in the Article View. You may want to switch to the Full Web Page view.

If you know there should be an article here, help improve the article parser by reporting this page. Thanks!

Deeplinks Topics

Original Page: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/02/eff-unveils-new-project-bloggers-under-fire

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

Electronic Frontier Foundation | Defending your rights in the digital world

2012-02-19T20:00:00.001-06:00

Defending your rights in the digital world

eff.org | Feb 11th 2012

Hamza Kashgari is under threat. The blogger and journalist fled to Malaysia from Saudi Arabia on February 8 after tweets he wrote about the Prophet Mohammed provoked clerics to demand he be tried for apostasy and members of the public to call for his murder. After arriving in Malaysia on his way to a third country, however, he was arrested by security officials at Kuala Lumpur airport, according to a report from Human Rights Watch. Kashgari is currently under threat of extradition to Saudi Arabia. The Guardian has reported Malaysian sources as stating that the request for extradition came from Interpol, a charge that Interpol denies.

Ethiopian blogger smacked with life sentence

According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, Ethiopian blogger Elias Kifle was handed a life sentence in absentia this week for his coverage of banned opposition groups. Kifle, who lives in the United States, is editor of the Washington-based opposition website Ethiopian Review and was previously handed a life sentence, in 2007, on charges of treason. Kifle was sentenced along with columnist Reeyot Alemu and editor Woubshet Taye, both of whom live and work in Ethiopia and received 14-year prison sentences.

EFF condemns the decision by the Addis Ababa court and echoes CPJ's call to the Supreme Court to reverse the convictions.

Tunisian fight for Internet freedom continues

Chinese netizen slapped with ten year sentence

China's repression of online dissent is no secret. The country leads the way in both sophistication and extent of its online censorship, and tops the list of countries that jail bloggers by a landslide. In 2012, it would seem things are only getting worse.

When Hosni Mubarak was ousted from the Egyptian presidency in February, Egypt's revolutionaries saw a new beginning: an Egypt in which individual rights--including the right to free expression--would be respected. Just nine months later, with several prominent bloggers languishing in prison and countless other civilians tried by military courts for protesting, the future looks bleak.

In terms of numbers, Egypt ranks third--behind only China and Iran--for threatened and jailed bloggers. Throughout the past decade numerous well-known bloggers were imprisoned, sometimes without trial, and in many cases subjected to torture, for the crime of speaking out. Despite hopes that Mubarak's ouster would put a stop to restrictions on free expression, under military rule, the crackdown continues.

Today, EFF joined nine human rights and digital freedom organizations from around the world in sending a letter to the government of Vietnam calling for the release of blogger and human rights defender Pham Minh Hoang.

Readers may remember Pham Minh Hoang from a blog post we wrote in August. Mr. Hoang is a university professor with dual French and Vietnamese citizenship who has been sentenced to three years in prison and an additional three years under house arrest, for trying to "overthrow the government." His crime was exercising a right held dear by much of the world: using the Internet to speak out. EFF, the Committee to Protect Journalists, ARTICLE 19, Reporters without Borders, and the other rights organizations are calling for the Vietnamese government to recognize Mr. Hoang's rights to free expression and release him.

This week's news roundup takes us to Iran, where censorship is getting worse, Turkey, where it might be getting better, and Zimbabwe, where a blogger is under threat.

Iran sets out to build ‘national Internet’

Iran already ranks amongst the world’s worst when it comes to online censorship. The country's censors target a variety of content, including political opposition, human rights and news sites, and a range of 'offensive' sites.

Pakistan

In Pakistan, where substantial online and offline censorship already exist, reports have emerged that users of the ISP Mobilink must add proxy 10.215.2.32 port 3128 to browse the Internet, resulting in censorship of key words and phrases in search engines, as well as several individual web pages, mostly related to Balochistan.

According to Shahzad Ahmad at the OpenNet Initiative, “Mobilink’s new filtering system will directly affect a large portion of Pakistan’s online community, which comprises 17 percent of the country’s population, or around 28 million people.”

Ahmad also notes that there is “no public knowledge of new legislation” that would have caused Mobilink to implement the new filtering.

Original Page: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/bloggers-under-fire

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

EFF tests agree with AP: Comcast is forging packets to interfere with user

2012-02-19T19:58:00.001-06:00

EFF tests agree with AP: Comcast is forging packets to interfere with user traffic

by Seth Schoen, eff.org
October 19th 2007

This morning the Associated Press reported that Comcast is interfering with users' ability to run file sharing applications over its network.

Since we spoke to Comcast last month and understood them to deny that they are doing this, we've been running our own tests.

The results of our tests have agreed with AP's. Comcast is forging TCP RST packets which cause connections to drop (a technique also used by Internet censorship systems in China). These packets cause software at both ends to believe, mistakenly, that the software on the other side doesn't want to continue communicating.

The TCP RST packet forging seems to be protocol-specific: as AP reported, it at least sometimes happens directly in response to specific BitTorrent protocol events. This contradicts Comcast's statement to us that their network management does not target or discriminate against particular protocols. The timing of the injected packets suggests that something on Comcast's network understands the BitTorrent protocol and treats it differently from other protocols.

We confirmed this by trying to download files from Comcast subscribers using BitTorrent. We disabled any firewall or NAT software and connected the machines at both ends directly to the Internet, and ran Wireshark, a packet capture tool. This allows us to see exactly what packets each end sent and exactly what packets each end receives. If ISPs between both points were not forging packets, no packets should have been received by one end that bear the other end's IP address but were not sent by it(*). (This is comparable to recording a telephone conversation at both ends and then comparing the recordings to see whether the phone company sent the conversation through faithfully and unmodified.)

Unfortunately, the resulting packet traces look drastically different from one another: each user routinely receives huge numbers of TCP RST packets that appear to have been sent by the other user. But the packet trace at the other end confirms that these packets were never transmitted; they must have been generated and injected by an ISP along the way.

How do we know that Comcast is responsible? Apart from the large number of reports accusing Comcast, increasingly accompanied by packet traces showing suspicious RST packets, we repeated the experiment with two different Comcast connections (one in San Francisco, and one in Oregon) and saw the RST packets appear in both cases. When the Comcast user in Oregon -- Robb Topolski, a source for the AP story and one of the first to carefully document the RST forging phenomenon -- switched on a VPN connection that caused his communications to be encrypted and routed through a different ISP, the RST packets completely disappeared.

Comcast keeps telling its users that the problems they're seeing are not its fault. It's time for Comcast to come clean about what it's doing and take its users' reports seriously.

(*) Note to network experts: IP fragmentation does allow for the possibility that a single packet sent by one end could arrive in multiple fragments, none of which was originally sent in fragmented form. However, we did not observe any fragmentation at all during our experiments and, in particular, the forged RST packets are clearly not fragments of packets sent by the other end.

Original Page: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2007/10/eff-tests-agree-ap-comcast-forging-packets-to-interfere

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

Foreign Intelligence and Terrorism Investigations | EFF Surveillance Self-Defense Project

2012-02-19T19:55:00.001-06:00

Foreign Intelligence and Terrorism Investigations

by Third Parties, ssd.eff.org
November 30th -0001

All of the government surveillance tactics and standards discussed in previous sections relate to law enforcement investigations — that is, investigations for the purpose of gathering evidence for criminal prosecution. However, the government also engages in surveillance in order to combat foreign threats to national security. When it comes to foreign spies and terrorists, the government uses essentially the same tools — searches, wiretaps, pen/traps, subpoenas — but operates under much lower legal standards and in much greater secrecy. It's important that you understand these foreign intelligence surveillance authorities such as the government's access to records using National Security Letters and its wiretapping powers under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) so that you can evaluate the risk of such surveillance to you or your organization and defend against it.

Original Page: https://ssd.eff.org/foreign

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

Threats | EFF Surveillance Self-Defense Project http://t.co/WlxMjTc

2012-02-19T19:54:00.001-06:00

Threats

by Third Parties, ssd.eff.org
November 30th -0001

A threat is something bad that can happen to an asset. Security professionals divide the various ways threats can hurt your data assets into six sub-areas that must be balanced against each other:

Confidentiality is keeping assets or knowledge about assets away from unauthorized parties.
Integrity is keeping assets undamaged and unaltered.
Availability is the assurance that assets are available to parties authorized to use them.
Consistency is when assets behave and work as expected, all the time.
Control is the regulation of access to assets.
Audit is the ability to verify that assets are secure.

Threats can be classified based on which types of security they threaten. For example, someone trying to read your email (the asset) without permission threatens its confidentiality and your control over it. If, on the other hand, an adversary wants to destroy your email or prevent you from getting it, the adversary is threatening the email's integrity and availability. Using encryption, as described later in this guide, you can protect against several of these threats. Encryption not only protects the confidentiality of your email by scrambling it into a form that only you or your intended recipient can descramble, but also allows you to audit the emails — that is, check and see that the person claiming to be the sender is actually that person, or confirm that the email wasn't changed between the sender and you to ensure that you've maintained the email's integrity and your control over it.

Original Page: https://ssd.eff.org/risk/threats

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

Wi-Fi | EFF Surveillance Self-Defense Project

2012-02-19T19:53:00.001-06:00

Wi-Fi

by Third Parties, ssd.eff.org
November 30th -0001

Wireless networking is now a ubiquitous means of connecting computers to each other and to the Internet. The primary privacy concern with Wi-Fi is the interception of the communications you send over the air. In some cases, wireless routers might also store a small amount of information about your computer, such as its name and the unique number assigned to its networking card (MAC address).

Wireless networks are particularly vulnerable to eavesdropping — in the end, "wireless" just means "broadcasting your messages over the radio," and anyone can intercept your wireless signal unless you use encryption. Listening in on unencrypted Wi-Fi communications is easy: almost any computer can do it with simple packet-sniffing software. Special expertise or equipment isn't necessary.

Even worse, the legal protections for unencrypted wireless communications are unclear. Law enforcement may be able to argue that it does not need a wiretap order to intercept unencrypted wi-fi communications because there is an exception to the rules requiring such orders when the messages that are being intercepted are "readily accessible to the public." Basically, any communication over the radio spectrum that isn't transmitted by your phone company and isn't scrambled or encrypted poses a privacy risk.

Encrypting a Wireless Network

If you want to protect your wireless communications from the government or anyone else, you must use encryption! Almost all wireless Internet access points come with WEP (Wired Equivalent Privacy) or WPA (Wi-Fi Protected Access) encryption software installed to encrypt the messages between your computer and the access point, but you have to read the manual and figure out how to use it. WEP is not great encryption (and we recommend strong, end-to-end encryption for sensitive communications regardless of the transmission medium), and practiced hackers can defeat it very quickly, but it's worth the trouble to ensure that your communications will be entitled to the legal protections of the Wiretap Act. WPA is much stronger than WEP, but it still only covers the first step your packets will take across the Internet.

When Using Open Wi-Fi

If you're using someone else's "open" — unencrypted — wireless access point, like the one at the coffee shop, you will have to take care of your own encryption using the tools and methods described in other sections. Tor is especially useful for protecting your wireless transmissions. If you don't use Tor, and even if you do, you should also always use application-level encryption over open wireless, so no one can sniff your passwords.

Because of the threat of password sniffing, it is crucially important that you do not use the same password for all your accounts! For example, http://www.nytimes.com/ requires a username and password to log in, but the site does not use encryption. However, web sites for banks, like https://www.wellsfargo.com/, always use encryption due to the sensitive nature of the transactions people make with banks. If you use the same passwords for the two sites, an eavesdropper could see your unencrypted password traveling to the newspaper site, and guess that you were using the same password for your bank account.

Original Page: https://ssd.eff.org/tech/wifi

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

Secure Deletion | EFF Surveillance Self-Defense Project

2012-02-19T19:52:00.001-06:00

Secure Deletion

by Third Parties, ssd.eff.org
November 30th -0001

Secure deletion involves the use of special software to ensure that when you delete a file, there really is no way to get it back again.

When you "delete" a file — for instance, by putting the file in your computer's trash folder and emptying the trash — you may think you've deleted that file. But you really haven't. Instead, the computer has just made the file invisible to the user, and marked the part of the disk drive that it is stored on as "empty," meaning that it can be overwritten with new data. But it may be weeks, months, or even years before that data is overwritten, and the computer forensics experts can often even retrieve data that has been overwritten by newer files. Indeed, computers normally don't "delete" data; they just allow it to be overwritten over time, and overwritten again.

The best way to keep those "deleted" files hidden, then, is to make sure they get overwritten immediately. Your operating system probably already includes software that can do this for you, and overwrite all of the "empty" space on your disk with gibberish (optionally multiple times), and thereby protect the confidentiality of deleted data. Examples include GNU Shred (Linux), Secure Delete (Mac OS X), and cipher.exe (Windows XP Pro and later).

Windows Secure Deletion

Without Installing New Software: Use Cipher.exe

Update: Cipher.exe is no longer recommended

We previously discussed using a program called Cipher.exe to clear free space on Windows systems, without having to install any new software on the machine. However, people have written in to inform us about a grievous design flaw in Cipher.exe that could cause unintended deletion of entire drives of data.

We recommend using Eraser instead.

A Better Option: Install Eraser

Eraser is a free/open source secure deletion tool for Windows, and is much more sophisticated than the built in cipher.exe. It can be used to quickly and easily target individual files for secure deletion, or to implement periodic secure deletion policies. You can get a copy of Eraser here and some tips on how to use it here.

Secure Deletion on Mac OS X

Secure Deletion of Individual Files

On OS X 10.4 an above, you can securely delete files by moving them to the Trash, and then selecting Finder > Secure Empty Trash.

Ensuring Previously Deleted Data Cannot be Recovered

Apple's advice on preventing forensic undeletion on Mac OS X is as follows:

To prevent the recovery of files you deleted previously, open Disk Utility (in Applications/Utilities), choose Help > Disk Utility Help, and search for help on erasing free disk space.

Secure Deletion on *nix Operating Systems

Secure Deletion of Individual Files

Linux, FreeBSD and many other UNIX systems have a command line tool called shred installed on them. Shred works quite differently to the Windows cipher.exe program; rather than trying to prevent previously deleted files from being recoverable, it singles out specified files and repeatedly overwrites them and their names with random data.

If you are comfortable using a terminal or command line, secure deletion of files with shred is simple. Just run the following command:

shred -u

Ensuring Previously Deleted Data Cannot be Recovered

Unfortunately we are not aware of any standard Linux/UNIX tools for overwriting previously deleted files to prevent undeletion.

A hack solution that may work is to write zeroes or random data to a file on the drive until it fills up all of the available space, then delete it. Unfortunately, this will fill up the filesystem and may therefore make the system unstable while it is in progress. Caveat emptor.

On Linux systems, you could try to achieve this by running the following command as root:

dd if=/dev/zero of=/directory/junkfile ; rm /directory/junkfile

Replace /directory/ with a directory that is within the mounted partition within which you wish to ensure that forensic undeletion is impossible. The dd command will take a long time to run and will finish with an error saying the disk is full; the rm will then delete the huge file full of random junk.

Replacing /dev/zero with /dev/urandom uses random data instead of zeroes; that will result in slightly more secure erasure, but can take much longer.

A Warning About the Limitations of Secure Deletion Tools

Even if you follow the advice above, there is a chance that certain traces of deleted files may persist on your computer, not because the files themselves haven't been properly deleted, but because some part of the operating system or some other program keeps a deliberate record of them.

There are many ways in which this could occur, but two examples should suffice to convey the possibility. On Windows, a copy of Microsoft Office may retain a reference to the name of a file in the "Recent Documents" menu, even if the file has been deleted (office might sometimes even keep temporary files containing the contents of the file). On a Linux or other *nix system, a user's shell history file may contain commands that include the file's name, even though the file has been securely deleted. And OpenOffice may keep as many records as Microsoft Office. In practice, there may be dozens of programs that behave like this.

It's hard to know how to respond to this problem. It is safe to assume that even if a file has been securely deleted, its name will probably continue to exist for some time on your computer. Overwriting the entire disk is the only way to be 100% sure the name is gone. Some of you may be wondering, "Could I search the raw data on the disk to see if there are any copies of the data anywhere?" The answer is yes and no. Searching the disk (eg by using a command like grep -ab /dev/ on Linux) will tell you if the data is present in plaintext, but it won't tell you if some program has compressed or otherwise coded references to it. Also be careful that the search itself does not leave a record! The probability that the file's contents may persist is lower, but not impossible. Overwriting the entire disk and installing fresh operating system is the only way to be 100% certain that records of a file have been erased.

Secure Deletion When Discarding Old Hardware

If you want to finally throw a piece of hardware away or sell it on eBay, you'll want to make sure no one can retrieve your data from it. (Studies have repeatedly found that computer owners usually fail to do this — and hard drives are resold chock-full of highly sensitive information.) So, before selling or recycling a computer, be sure to overwrite its storage media with gibberish first. (Even if you're not getting rid of it right away, if you have a computer that's reached the end of its useful life and is no longer in use, it's also safer to wipe the hard drive before stashing the machine in a corner or a closet.) Darik's Boot and Nuke is an excellent free tool for this purpose.

Some full-disk encryption software has the ability to destroy the master key, rendering a hard drive's encrypted contents permanently incomprehensible. Since the key is a tiny amount of data and can be destroyed almost instantaneously, this represents a much faster alternative to overwriting with software like Darik's Boot and Nuke, which can be quite time-consuming for larger drives. However, this option is only feasible if the hard drive was always encrypted. If you weren't using full-disk encryption ahead of time, you'll need to overwrite the whole drive before getting rid of it.

Discarding CD-ROMS

When it comes to CD-ROMs, you should do the same thing you do with paper — shred'em. There are inexpensive shredders that will chew up CD-ROMs. Never just toss a CD-ROM out in the garbage unless you're absolutely sure there's nothing sensitive on it.

Original Page: https://ssd.eff.org/tech/deletion

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

File and Disk Encryption | EFF Surveillance Self-Defense Project

2012-02-19T19:51:00.001-06:00

File and Disk Encryption

by Third Parties, ssd.eff.org
November 30th -0001

Modern operating systems allow you to use a system of accounts and passwords to limit access to data on a computer. This may be useful when adversaries have casual passing access to your machine, but those accounts and passwords will not protect your data if your computer is stolen or seized — or if the adversaries have more than a minute or two alone with your computer. There are many ways (such as plugging your hard disk into another computer, or booting another operating system using a CD or USB key) that would allow files to be read off the disk. Even deleted files may be recoverable.

The theft or seizure threats can be mitigated by encrypting the data on the disk. Some sort of mitigation is especially important for laptops, which are at high risk of being lost or stolen, but the same measures can be useful for improving the security of any client or workstation-type computer.

Full-disk encryption is meant to protect stored data against this sort of exposure, if the computer is stolen or seized when it is powered off. If the computer is seized while running, there are tricks that sophisticated adversaries could use to read the data regardless of encryption.

File encryption is disk encryption that only applies to certain specific files on your computer. It may be easier to deploy but is vulnerable to several threats that do not apply to full disk encryption.

Hard disk passwords are a feature offered by many laptop manufacturers. These can be enabled within the BIOS of your computer. Hard disk passwords don't encrypt any data on your drive, they just prevent the drive from cooperating with the computer until the password is supplied. There are numerous commercial services which will disable these passwords for about $100 per drive. So a hard disk password is useful against a casual thief, but of no use against law enforcement or other non-casual adversaries.

Should I Encrypt My Drive?

Everybody should use either disk encryption or a hard disk password (possibly augmented with file encryption) on their laptops. If your laptop has personal data but you would not regard any of it as sensitive, a hard disk password may be quick and easy, and sufficient protection in case of theft.

If your computer contains a very small and easily quantified set of somewhat sensitive documents, it may be sufficient to use file encryption for those documents, alongside a hard disk password.

If you computer contains a larger (or harder to quantify) set of sensitive documents, or any documents which might be considered highly sensitive, it is best to use full disk encryption. In such cases the threat posed by malware should also be taken into account.

Disk Encryption Is Of Little Use in Civil Lawsuits

It is extremely important to note that disk encryption is unlikely to offer much protection against civil litigation. Many of the procedural obstacles which might apply to law enforcement attempts to obtain encrypted data during a criminal investigation would not apply in a civil case. If an adversary in a civil case persuades a judge to issue a subpoena for your data, a failure to decrypt and disclose the data would be held against you in the case.

If your threat model involves civil litigation, it is essential to simply not have the data on a computer in the first place, or to have secure deletion practices in place long before any lawsuit is filed. Once a lawsuit is filed, you will be obliged to preserve any pertinent documents, and the presence of forensic evidence that you deleted data after a suit was filed would have dire consequences.

Choosing Disk Encryption Software

There are many full-disk encryption tools. Using a mainstream one is probably safer than an obscure one, since mainstream disk encryption products have usually received more expert review. Leading disk encryption programs include BitLocker, PGPDisk, FileVault, TrueCrypt, and dm-crypt (LUKS); some of these come with the operating system, while others are third-party add-ons. You can read a detailed comparison of these and many other disk encryption products from a comparison at Wikipedia. This comparison may help you select a disk encryption product to meet your needs, but any of these systems can protect your data better than having no disk encryption
at all.

Things To Know When Using Disk Encryption

Generally, disk encryption software will require you to enter a separate disk password when you turn the computer on or start using the disk (some systems can use a smartcard instead of or in addition to a password). To be effective, this password must be resistant to all forms of automated guessing. Remember that the disk encryption is fully effective at preventing access to the disk when the computer is turned off (or the encrypted disk is entirely unmounted or removed from use); to get the full benefit, you should unmount the encrypted disk or turn the computer off in any situation where the risk of compromise is especially high, such as a computer left unattended overnight or a laptop being carried from place to place. (Using disk encryption without following this precaution scrupulously will still provide more protection against some attackers than not using disk encryption.)

Finally, full-disk encryption can also be used on servers, providing some protection against seizure of the servers. However, even servers with encrypted hard drives could be vulnerable to attackers with specialized techniques if they're seized while they're operating. Proper use of disk encryption on servers can also be a nuisance because the server can't do a fully unattended automatic reboot. (It's not safe to store the password for the disk on the server itself, so an administrator will have to enter the disk password whenever the computer is restarted.)

Plausible Deniability

One interesting property which some disk encryption developers are working towards is plausible deniability. The goal of these efforts is to offer users a way to not only encrypt their files, but to prevent an attacker from being able to even deduce the existence of some of the encrypted files. The user will have a way to "plausibly deny" that the files exist.

One example of this concept is TrueCrypt's ability to have an encrypted partition (which can be hidden as any file on your hard drive) and within that partition hide another partition. One password will reveal the outer partition and another separate password will reveal the inner one. Because of the way TrueCrypt encrypts the partition table itself, an observer cannot detect a hidden partition even if she has access to the "regular" encrypted share. The idea is to give the user something to decrypt if a law enforcement officer or Customs official asks, while keeping the rest of their information secure.

In practice, TrueCrypt's first attempt to implement this feature was shown to be ineffective because operating systems and applications leave so many traces of the files they work with, that a forensic investigator would have many avenues by which to determine that the inner partition existed. The TrueCrypt developers have responded to this research by offering a way to install and boot from an entire separate operating system within the inner partition. It is too soon to know whether their new approach will turn out to offer secure plausible deniability.

Technical issues aside, remember that lying to a federal law enforcement officer about material facts is a crime, so if a person chose to answer a question about whether there were additional encrypted partitions on a computer, they would be legally obligated to answer truthfully.

Original Page: https://ssd.eff.org/tech/disk-encryption

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

Mobile Devices | EFF Surveillance Self-Defense Project

2012-02-19T19:49:00.001-06:00

Mobile Devices

by Third Parties, ssd.eff.org
November 30th -0001

This article discusses privacy implications of cell phones and other devices that communicate with large scale wireless voice and data networks.

This page doesn't discuss Wi-Fi. If you have a mobile device that uses Wi-Fi but not GSM, CDMA 2000, or any of the other cellular networks, you should follow the same steps that you would for a laptop with Wi-Fi. If you have a cell phone that also connects to Wi-Fi networks, you should read the Wi-Fi article as well as the material below.

Problems with Cellular Device Privacy

Cell phones pose several privacy problems.

No Anonymity. Every cell phone has several unique identifying numbers. For a GSM phone these include the IMEI number for the handset itself and the IMSI in the SIM card. Unless you have purchased your handset and account anonymously, these will be linked to your real identity. Even if you have an anonymous handset and account, the typical use pattern of a phone is almost always enough to link it to your identity.

Location tracking. Cell phones communicate with transmission towers. The strength of the signal received by these towers from a phone is a measure of distance, and this allows the phone network to know where its users are. Many if not all networks log approximate location on a regular basis. These records may be subject to subpoena. If your adversary is law enforcement and has probable cause for a warrant, they could receive continuous triangulation location surveillance data from the network.

Easy interception. Cell phone communications are sent through the air like communications from a walkie-talkie, and encryption is usually inadequate or absent. Although there are substantial legal protections for the privacy of cell phone calls, it's technologically straightforward to intercept cell phone calls on many cell networks without the cooperation of the carrier, and the technology to do this is only getting cheaper. Such interception without legal process could be a serious violation of privacy laws, but would be immensely difficult to detect. U.S. and foreign intelligence agencies have the technical capacity to intercept unencrypted and weakly encrypted cell phone calls on a routine basis.

Lack of user control. Cell phones tend to run proprietary operating systems, and the operating systems on different devices tend to be different from each other. This means for instance that on most cell phones:

it's impossible to guarantee that the phone is using secure encryption for its transmissions, or determine whether it's using encryption at all
it's very difficult for the user to gain access to and control over the data recorded by the phone's operating system

However, because cell phones do not create stored records of the contents of your communications, telephonic communication has certain privacy advantages over other modes of communication, like email, instant messaging or text messaging which do create such records.

Data Stored by Your Phone

Your phone will store the contents of the text messages you send and receive, the times and numbers of the calls you make and receive, and possibly other information such as location-related data. Secure deletion of this data poses a challenge. On most mobile devices your best strategy is to manually delete these records using the phone's user interface, and then hope that new records will overwrite them. If you have deleted all your text messages and calls, and waited long enough for the phone's memory to fill, there is a chance that later forensic investigation would not find the original data.

There are a couple of drive encryption programs available for devices that run the Windows Mobile operating system. Proprietary drive encryption that has not been audited by the computer security community should always be treated with caution; it is probably better than no protection at all, although even that is not guaranteed.

We are hopeful that the arrival of open Linux-based phones (notably OpenMoko and those using the Google Android code) will offer users better control over stored data in the future.

The undeleted data could be accessible to anyone who takes physical possession of the phone, including thieves or an arresting officer.

Transmitted Data

The control data and actual voice conversations sent by cellular devices may be encrypted using various standard encryption protocols. There is no guarantee that this will occur — phones do not usually offer users a way to refuse to operate in unencrypted mode, and many don't indicate whether they are using encryption. As a result, it is largely up to the network operator to decide if its users will receive any cryptographic defense against eavesdropping.

Carrier-provided encryption can be good protection against eavesdropping by third parties. However, if it is the carrier that wants to listen in, or the government with a warrant ordering the carrier to allow wiretapping access to your calls, then that encryption will not protect you because the carrier has the means to decrypt.

Even if your cell phone is communicating in an encrypted fashion, it turns out that most of the standard cryptography used in cell networks has been broken. This means that an adversary that is motivated and able to intercept radio communications and cryptanalyze them will be able to listen to your phone calls.

It would be technologically possible to use strong end-to-end encryption with voice calls, but this technology is not yet widely available. The German company GMSK has begun selling a GSM-based "Cryptophone"; as with computer encryption, both users would need to be using the technology in order to make it work. Some third parties have produced software to encrypt SMS text messages; here, again, both the sender and recipient of a message would need to use compatible software.

Data Stored by Other Parties

A great deal of data pertaining to your use of your phone will be stored by the telephone company or companies that are providing you with service. A more diffuse set of records will also be stored by the phones of the people you communicate with.

Expect your telephone company to keep a record of: who you talk to and when; who you exchange messages with and when; what data you send and receive using wireless data services; information revealing your physical location at any time when your phone is on; and whether your phone is on or off.

The text messages exchanged by your phone — as well as summary information for the calls you sent and receive from other cell phones — are likely to be stored by those other cell phones. As anyone who follows celebrity gossip should know, the people you are communicating with can disclose the contents of your communications. Other adversaries may use subpoenas or other legal process to obtain text messages or call information.

Malware for Phones

If you face a determined adversary such as federal law enforcement with a warrant, assume that your phone could be reprogrammed with malware to assist in their investigations; there are reports of the FBI doing this.

Under these extreme circumstances, it is possible for your phone to be turned into a remote bugging device. It is possible for a phone to remain on even when you press the "off" button, but not if you remove the battery.

If you have a pair of speakers that crackle when your phone is nearby, you can check that the phone is actually off / not transmitting continuously by placing it near those speakers.

Original Page: https://ssd.eff.org/tech/mobile

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

Defensive Technology | EFF Surveillance Self-Defense Project http://t.co/0u

2012-02-19T19:48:00.001-06:00

Defensive Technology

by Third Parties, ssd.eff.org
November 30th -0001

If you are looking for basic technical information on how to protect the privacy of your data — whether it's on your own computer, on the wire, or in the hands of a third party — you've come to the right place. Although we hope you'll have the time to review all of the information in the SSD guide, if you're in a hurry to get to the technical details, this is where you can read articles that will explain:

the basics of the relevant technologies, such as the Internet Basics and Encryption Basics articles
how to improve the security of different communication applications, such as your web browsers, email systems and IM clients
how to protect your privacy by using defensive technologies such as secure deletion software, file and disk encryption software, and virtual private networks
the overarching security threat posed by malware, how to evaluate that threat, and how to reduce it

Just remember: technology changes quickly. We'll be doing our best to keep these articles updated to reflect current developments, but in the meantime, you should take the time to review information from multiple sources before making any serious security decisions.

Original Page: https://ssd.eff.org/tech

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

Master the Basics of Data Protection | EFF Surveillance Self-Defense Project

2012-02-19T19:12:00.003-06:00

Master the Basics of Data Protection

by Third Parties, ssd.eff.org
November 30th -0001

We're not going to lecture you on how to physically secure your office, because as we've said before, if the government has permission from a court to bust in, they are going to bust in regardless of what you do. We're more concerned here about what they can do to your computers once they are inside. Here are some steps to ensure that just because someone has physical access to your machine it doesn't mean they'll be able to get at all the data inside of it:

Require logins! Operating systems can be set to automatically log into a user account when the machine boots. Disable this feature! Require that the user provide a username and password before the machine will allow access to a user account.

Require screensaver logins too! Set the screensaver on your system to start automatically after a short time (such as 2 or 5 minutes) and to require that the user supply their password again before the screensaver will unlock. All operating systems support a feature like this, and it makes no sense not to use it.

Access controls are only as strong as your authentication mechanism. In other words, if your password is "12345" or your dog's name, or if you keep your password in a drawer next to your computer, your files may be accessible to anyone who has access to your computer and has a couple minutes to guess some passwords or look through your desk. Follow the next section's advice to generate and manage strong passwords effectively.

Choose your sysadmin wisely. In mainstream operating systems, the systems administrator must be "trusted" – that is, he or she is always able to circumvent access controls. Therefore, your organization's management must take care when selecting and training systems administrators, to ensure that he or she is worthy of trust. Trustworthy administrators will adhere to a code of professional ethics such as that published by the Systems Administrators Guild.

Guest accounts. To provide availability for unauthorized users, if that is desired, create a guest account for general use, and make sure that it cannot modify the operating system or cause other damage to the system. Ensure that the guest account does not have the privilege to read or modify sensitive files.

Original Page: https://ssd.eff.org/your-computer/protect/basics

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

Develop a Data Retention and Destruction Policy | EFF Surveillance Self-Defense Project

2012-02-19T19:12:00.001-06:00

Develop a Data Retention and Destruction Policy

by Third Parties, ssd.eff.org
November 30th -0001

The best defense against a search or a subpoena is to minimize the amount of information that it can reach. Every organization should have a clear policy on how long to keep particular types of information, for three key reasons:

It’s a pain and an expense to keep everything.
It’s a pain and an expense to have to produce everything in response to subpoenas.
It’s a real pain if any of it is used against you in court — just ask Bill Gates. His internal emails about crushing Netscape were not very helpful at Microsoft’s antitrust trial.

Think about it — how far back does your email archive go? Do you really need to keep every email? Imagine you got a subpoena tomorrow — what will you wish you’d destroyed?

Establish a retention policy. Your organization should review all of the types of documents, computer files, communications records, and other information that it collects and then develop a policy defining whether and when different types of data should be destroyed. For example, you may choose to destroy case files six months after cases are closed, or destroy Internet logs showing who visited your website immediately, or delete emails after one week. This is called a "document retention policy," and it’s your best defense against a subpoena — they can’t get it if you don’t have it. And the only way to make sure you don’t have it is to establish a policy that everyone follows. Set a clear written policy for the length of time documents are kept (both electronic and paper documents). Having a written policy and following it will help you if you are accused of destroying documents to hide evidence.

Do not destroy evidence. You should never destroy anything after it has been subpoenaed or if you have reason to believe you are under investigation and it is about to be subpoenaed — destruction of evidence and obstruction of justice are serious crimes that carry steep fines and possible jail time, even if you didn’t do the original crime. Nor should you selectively destroy documents — for example, destroying some intake files or emails but not others — unless it’s part of your policy. Otherwise, it may look like you were trying to hide evidence, and again might make you vulnerable to criminal charges. Just stick to your policy.

Destroying paper documents. Remember, your trash is fair game under the Fourth Amendment, so just tossing your old membership rolls in the garbage is not the way to go.

If you are concerned about the privacy of the documents that you throw away (and you should be!), you should destroy them before they go in the trash. At the very least you should run documents through a "cross-cut" paper shredder that will cut them in two directions and turn them into confetti, and then mix up the shreds from different documents to make them harder to put back together (documents cut in one direction by "strip-cut" shredders are very easy to put back together). If you have evidence giving you reason to believe that your trash is being or is about to be searched, you should also completely burn all of the shreds. Even if you’re not particularly worried about someone searching your trash, you should still destroy or thoroughly erase any computer equipment or media that you throw out.

If you destroy any of your papers and disks before throwing them out, you should try to destroy all of them, even the ones you don’t need to keep private. If you don’t destroy everything, anyone with access to your trash can will be able to quickly isolate the shreds of your private documents and focus on reconstructing them. Both government investigators and identity thieves often have the manpower and time necessary to reconstruct your shredded documents — even the burned ones, in some crime labs.

Your web browser's watching you, so you have to watch your browser. In a recent trial, government forensics experts were able to retrieve web pages of Google search results that the suspect downloaded years ago — his web browser had "cached" copies of the pages. It was a murder trial, and the suspect had Googled for information about breaking necks and the depth of the local lake, where he ended up dumping the body. The suspect was convicted.

Hopefully, you have much more innocent things you’d like to keep private, but the point is that your browser is a security hole that needs to be plugged. You need to take regular steps to clear out all the stuff it’s been storing, such as a history of the web sites you’ve visited and the files you’ve downloaded, cached copies of web pages, and cookies from the web sites you visit (which we will talk more about later). In particular, it’s a bad idea to have the browser save your passwords for web sites, and it’s a bad idea to have it save the data you’ve entered into web forms. If your computer is seized or stolen, that information will be compromised. So consider turning these features off completely. Not having these features is less convenient — but that’s the security trade-off. Are you worried enough about your computer’s security that you’re willing to type a few extra times each day to enter a password or a web address?

Visit our Defensive Technology article on web browsers for help with browser hygiene and other recommendations to improve security.

Your instant messenger software is probably watching you too. Many instant messaging (IM) clients are set by default to log all of you IM conversations. You should check the software's preferences so you know what it's doing, and figure out how these logs fit into your retention policy. Will you clean them out every month? Every week? Or will you take the simple route and just set the preferences so that your IM client doesn't log any messages at all? The choice is up to you, but because people often treat IM like an in-person conversation and often say things they normally wouldn't in an email, you should consider such logs very sensitive. If you do insist on logging your IMs, all the more reason to make sure they are protected by encryption. For more information, check out our Defensive Technology article about instant messaging.

Minimize computer logging. If you run a network, an email server or a web server, you should consider reducing or eliminating logging for those computer and network services, to protect the privacy of your colleagues and your clients. For more information, refer to EFF’s "Best Data Practices for Online Service Providers."

When you delete computer files, really delete them. When you put a file in your computer’s trash folder and empty the trash, you may think you’ve deleted that file — but you really haven’t. Instead, the computer has just made the file invisible to the user, and marked the part of the disk drive that it is stored on as "empty" — meaning, it can be overwritten with new data. But it may be weeks, months, or even years before that data is overwritten, and the government’s computer technicians can often retrieve data that has been overwritten by newer files. Indeed, no data is ever really deleted, just overwritten over time, and overwritten again.

The best way to keep those "deleted" files hidden, then, is to make sure they get overwritten immediately, and many times. Your operating system probably already includes software that will do this, and overwrite all of the "empty" space on your disk with gibberish, dozens or hundreds of times, and thereby protect the confidentiality of deleted data. Visit the secure deletion article to learn more about how to do this in various operating systems.

In addition to using a secure deletion tool, you should consider using encrypted storage. Visit the disk encryption article for more information.

Destroying hardware and electronic media. When it comes to CD-ROMs, you should do the same thing you do with paper — shred 'em. There are inexpensive shredders that will chew up CD-ROMs. Never just toss a CD-ROM out in the garbage unless you’re absolutely sure there’s nothing sensitive on it.

If you want to throw a piece of hardware away or sell it on EBay, you’ll want to make sure no one can retrieve your data from it. So, before selling or recycling a computer, be sure to overwrite its storage media with gibberish first. Darik's Boot and Nuke is an excellent free tool for this purpose.

Make data hygiene a regular habit, like flossing. The easiest way to keep this all straight is to do it regularly. If you think you face a high risk of government seizure, or carry a laptop around with you and therefore face a high risk of theft or loss, perhaps you should do it at the end of each day. If not, you might want to do it once a week.

For example, at the end of each week you could:

Shred any paper documents or electronic media that are scheduled for destruction under your policy.
Delete any emails or other documents that are scheduled for deletion under your policy.
Clear your browser of all logs.
Run your secure-deletion software to overwrite all of the newly deleted stuff.

Have your organization put this weekly ritual or something like it in its written policy. You’ll be glad you did.

Original Page: https://ssd.eff.org/your-computer/protect/retention

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

Surveillance Self-Defense

2012-02-19T18:35:00.001-06:00

The SSD Project

by Third Parties, ssd.eff.org
November 30th -0001

Surveillance Self-Defense (SSD) exists to answer two main questions: What can the government legally do to spy on your computer data and communications? And what can you legally do to protect yourself against such spying?

After an introductory discussion of how you should think about making security decisions — it's all about risk management — we'll be answering those two questions for three types of data:

First, we're going to talk about the threat to the data stored on your computer posed by searches and seizures by law enforcement, as well as subpoenas demanding your records.

Second, we're going to talk about the threat to your data on the wire — that is, your data as it's being transmitted — posed by wiretapping and other real-time surveillance of your telephone and Internet communications by law enforcement.

Third, we're going to describe the information about you that is stored by third parties like your phone company and your Internet service provider, and how law enforcement officials can get it.

In each of these three sections, we're going to give you practical advice about how to protect your private data against law enforcement agents.

In a fourth section, we'll also provide some basic information about the U.S. government's expanded legal authority when it comes to foreign intelligence and terrorism investigations.

Finally, we've collected several articles about specific defensive technologies that you can use to protect your privacy, which are linked to from the other sections or can be accessed individually. So, for example, if you're only looking for information about how to securely delete your files, or how to use encryption to protect the privacy of your emails or instant messages, you can just directly visit that article.

Legal disclaimer: This guide is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. EFF's aim is to provide a general description of the legal and technical issues surrounding you or your organization's computer and communications security, and different factual situations and different legal jurisdictions will result in different answers to a number of questions. Therefore, please do not act on this legal information alone; if you have any specific legal problems, issues, or questions, seek a complete review of your situation with a lawyer licensed to practice in your jurisdiction.

Original Page: https://ssd.eff.org/

Shared from Read It Later

אל

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

Spies For Hire

2012-02-19T17:53:00.001-06:00

Spies For Hire - Who's Who in Intelligence Contactors

by Tim Shorrock, bibliotecapleyades.net
November 16th

by
November 16, 2009

from Crocodyl Website

Contents

SI International/Serco

Author/Researcher
Tim Shorrock

Headquarters
1818 Library Street, Suite 1000 Reston, VA 20190

Principal Agencies
National Security Agency (NSA), National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA)
Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA), Office of Naval Intelligence
Air Force Information Warfare Center, Department of Defense

Top Executives
Edward J. Casey, Jr., Chairman and CEO
Harry Gatanas – Senior VP, Defense and Intelligence Group (former NSA director of Acquisitions)

Annual Revenue
$510 million (2006)

Intelligence Percent of Revenue
48 percent

Summary

Ratings

Washington Technology Top 100: #44 (Note: last listing before Serco acquisition)

SI International, Inc. of McLean, Va., is a key NSA contractor now owned by Serco Inc. of the UK, the world’s largest outsourcing company. SI runs some of the NSA’s support and management functions. Its niche is advising intelligence and defense agencies on their acquisition and outsourcing strategies.

It also helps intelligence agencies as they shift from proprietary “stove-pipes” to integrating their IT systems with sister agencies and the Pentagon’s evolving Global Information Grid. GIG is the Internet-like system that will theoretically link military commanders, warfighters, and national collection agencies into a single classified network.

In August 2008, SI was acquired by Serco Inc., which describes itself as a “a leading provider of professional, technology, and management services focused on the federal government.” SI International is now part of Serco’s North American division. See Serco’s press release.

SI bought into many of its contracts by acquiring smaller companies holding specialized NSA contracts. Of particular importance was SI’s $30 million acquisition in 2004 of Bridge Technology Corporation, which had extensive contracts with defense intelligence agencies.

Bridge “really gave us name-brand recognition within the intelligence community,” S. Bradford “Bud” Antle, SI’s former president and CEO, told investors during a 2006 Washington conference on defense investing sponsored by the Friedman Billings Ramsey investment firm.

“The IC wants other players. They get a bit in-bred because they have a set of contractors that are clean with capabilities they’ve known forever.”

For that reason, agencies are pleased when they “see an acquisition like us buying Bridge.”

Corporate Information
According to SI’s old website, the company specializes in “mission critical outsourcing.”

That means SI International,

“is an expert in putting together mission-critical business process outsourcing (BPO) solutions for record management and processing, case management, workflow management, human resource services, and logistics operations.

These outsourcing arrangements increase efficiency, productivity and quality of service, lower administrative costs, reduce office supply costs, enhance supervisory oversight over personnel, minimize time spent on unnecessary research and statistical analysis, and enable civilian agency and Department of Defense personnel to take on higher priority assignments.

Given today’s global environment, government employees are routinely asked to take on more and more tasks with increasingly finite resources, which makes the need for these BPO arrangements even more acute.”

CorpWatch Analysis
Because of its high-visibility role as an adviser for the NSA, SI has filled its management team and board of directors with former high-ranking intelligence officials.

Harry Gatanas, SI’s executive vice president for strategic programs, oversees the company’s business with the Pentagon and its intelligence agencies and remains with the company as Serco’s Senior Vice President, Defense & Intelligence Group. Gatanas came to SI directly from the NSA, where he was the agency’s senior acquisition executive and the contracting manager for Project Groundbreaker, one of the largest outsourcing projects ever undertaken by a federal government agency.

Prior to coming to the NSA, Gatanas spent 30 years in military intelligence, where his duties included managing contracts for the Army.

Recent Contracts/Events
In April 2008, SI announced that it was a member of an SAIC team that won a multi-award, indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract supporting the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA).

Under the contract, SAIC wrote in a press release,

“SAIC will support the DIA mission with services in areas including foreign cultures, regional dynamics, illicit drugs, infectious disease and health, and emerging and disruptive technologies to provide effective analysis for the Defense Intelligence Enterprise.”

SI’s latest contract with the NSA was signed in April 2008, when it won three “Enterprise Program Management” contracts with a potential value of more than $300 million. Under the contracts, SI will help NSA “upgrade its acquisition management services” and “modernize its information technology, systems and programs” (major subcontractors on the project include Booz Allen Hamilton and Lockheed Martin).

In 2005, SI signed a three-year contract with the NSA to provide training in financial management, and in 2006 added a five-year $6.9 million “task order” to run the NSA’s human resources “welcome center” in Fort Meade.

SOURCES
Primary sourcing for this profile came from Tim Shorrock, ''Spies for Hire: The Secret World of Intelligence Outsourcing'' (Simon & Schuster/2008) and from DIA and company press releases.

Email - Info@si-intl.com
Phone - +1-703.939-6000
Website - http://www.serco-na.com/

Back to Contents

Boeing Integrated Defense Systems

Author/Researcher
Tim Shorrock

Headquarters
100 North Riverside, Chicago, Illinois 60606 (Boeing HQ), P. O. Box 516, St. Louis, Missouri 63166 (Integrated Defense Systems)

Principal Agencies
National Security Agency (NSA)
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA)
National Reconnaissance Office (NRO)
Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA)
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

Top Executives
W. James McNerney, Jr., chairman of the board, president and CEO of The Boeing Company
Jim Albaugh, executive vice president, Boeing; president and CEO, Boeing Integrated Defense Systems (member, National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee)

Annual Revenue
$66.4 billion (Boeing corporate)

Intelligence Percent of Revenue
Not Disclosed

Summary

BOEING’S NICHE

Boeing Integrated Defense Services (IDS) is the intelligence unit of the Boeing Company. Based in Chicago, Boeing is a $61.5 billion aerospace company with more than 161,000 employees, and makes commercial jetliners and military aircraft, satellites, and advanced information and communications systems.

IDS has close ties with the NSA and the intelligence community’s signals intelligence units. It has an important office about a mile from the agency’s headquarters in Fort Meade, Maryland, in an industrial park filled with NSA contractors. Boeing was involved in some of the Bush administration’s most secretive programs: Jeppesen International Trip Planning, a Boeing subsidiary, handled computerized flights plans for the CIA when it kidnapped (rendered) suspected terrorists and flew them to secret prisons around the world.

Boeing also has a major stake in domestic intelligence as the prime contractor for the DHS surveillance system, SBInet, which is designed to monitor the U.S.-Mexico border with a “virtual fence” network of surveillance systems and communications towers.

FINANCES

Boeing IDS, with $32.1 billion in revenues, earns slightly more than half of Boeing’s total annual revenues. Its 71,000-person business unit provides solutions “to meet the enduring needs of defense, space, and intelligence customers in the United States and around the world,” according to the company’s website.

The division is headquartered in St. Louis, and has “concentrated operations” in Southern California; Seattle; Houston; Philadelphia; Mesa, Arizona; Huntsville, Alabama; the Space Coast of Florida; San Antonio; and Washington, D.C.

Corporate Information

INTELLIGENCE MISSION

According to Boeing’s website, its most important intelligence unit is its Mission System Group.

This organization,

“provides the subject matter expertise, technical excellence, and operational experience required to lead Boeing's effort to support the horizontal integration of the Intelligence Community (IC).

We are organized, not by customer, but by capability to provide the NGA, CIA, DIA and NSA an enterprise level approach to global situational awareness, content management and knowledge capture. Our architectural solutions facilitate the seamless integration of military and intelligence missions by leveraging open standards and commercial technology.”

Capabilities include:

Mission Infrastructure (“providing secure, integrated network solutions that support intelligence and command systems”)

Intelligence Analysis & Services (“integrated, analytical intelligence support to the warfighter”)

commercial imagery solutions to “produce, manage and visualize geospatial information.”

Key customers of the unit, the company says, include the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency.

Boeing’s geospatial intelligence offerings are provided through Boeing’s Space and Intelligence Systems unit, which also holds contracts with the NSA. It allows agencies and military units to map global shorelines and create detailed maps of cities and battlefields, complete with digital elevation data that allow users to construct three-dimensional maps.

Other agencies are served through Boeing’s Advanced Information Systems (AIS) unit headquartered in Anaheim, California.

AIS is part of the company’s Intelligence and Security Systems, the Boeing division,

“that is dedicated to providing ground-based and other integrated intelligence and security solutions for a variety of U.S. government customers. More than half of the work performed by AIS supports classified government programs.”

In December 2007, Boeing formed a new Intelligence and Security Systems (I&SS) division that appears to combine many of the company’s services for foreign and domestic intelligence.

Based in Washington, D.C., I&SS has a workforce of about 2,000 people at nine locations nationwide, and includes four program areas:

Advanced Information Systems

Mission Systems

Security Solutions, which includes SBInet (the electronic wall being built on the US-Mexico border)

Advanced I&SS

According to a company press release, the new division,

“enables increased focus on the complex challenges faced by our homeland security and intelligence community customers… I&SS will improve our ability to bring comprehensive, net-enabled capabilities to meet our customers' dynamic requirements."

DOMESTIC SECURITY

AIS is also home to Boeing’s SBINet contract for the US government’s Secure Border Initiative.

As described by the company, SBI is,

“a comprehensive plan by the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to gain operational control of the US borders through the integration of increased staffing; interior enforcement; detection technology and infrastructure; and coordination on federal, state, local, and international levels.”

Boeing’s contribution, through a contract worth at least $2.5 billion, is SBINet,

“a program focused on transforming border control through technology and infrastructure. SBINet will provide frontline personnel advantages in securing the nation's land borders through the most effective integration of current and next generation technology, infrastructure, staffing, and response platforms.”

SBINet is managed and executed by the US Customs and Border Protection agency and contracted out to the Boeing team, which includes key intelligence contractors DRS Technologies, L-3 Communications, Unisys Global Public Sector, and USIS (formerly a Carlyle Group company).

The Boeing consortium, the company says,

“will detect, monitor, and classify potential and actual crossers [of the border]. At that point, the system will enable sector command centers to dispatch the right agents and resources to respond to the scene.”

The equipment will include ground-based and tower-mounted sensors, cameras and radars; fixed and mobile telecommunications systems; ground-penetrating detecting systems; command and control center equipment; and information database and intelligence analysis systems.

CorpWatch Analysis

SUMMARY

Boeing’s intelligence division, while little known outside of the military establishment, plays a critical role in the so-called war on terror.

In 2006, IDS began testing for its defense and intelligence clients a new product that downloads signals and imagery from military satellites and sends the data instantly to analysts in ground stations.

“For the first time,” said Boeing, “signal intelligence receivers proved that they could automatically identify the target -- a mock terrorist -- and trigger airborne surveillance assets to track the target on the ground, while capturing full-motion imagery and broadcasting it instantly to analysts several hundred miles away.” ^[1]

The system will eventually become part of the US Army’s array of high-tech weaponry.

One of IDS’s most important units is its Mission Systems group, which supports the national collection agencies “with solutions that allow them to acquire, manage, visualize and communicate intelligence from multiple sources.”

CIA OPERATIONS

A Boeing subsidiary played a key role in the secret “extraordinary rendition” program that sent many terrorist suspects to CIA-operated interrogation cells outside the United States.

According to New Yorker reporter Jane Mayer, Jeppesen International Trip Planning, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Boeing, handled,

“many of the logistical and navigational details for these trips, including flight plans, clearance to fly over other countries, hotel reservations, and ground-crew arrangements.” ^[2]

In her 2008 book The Dark Side (Doubleday/2008), Mayer added details.

Quoting Sean Belcher, a former Jeppesen employee, she reported that,

“while the Bush administration was insisting that it did not render suspects to be tortured, executives at Jeppesen had no such illusions. [Belcher] described a meeting in which one of his bosses, Bob Overby, the managing director of Jeppesen International Trip Planning, said, ‘We do all of the extraordinary-rendition flights – you know, the torture flights. Let’s face it, some of these flights end up that way.’” (Mayer, page 129).

Jeppesen is also involved as a contractor in geospatial intelligence.

A Boeing handout at a 2007 intelligence symposium in San Antonio lists “Jeppesen Government and Military Services” as one of four subsidiaries of Boeing’s Space and Intelligence Systems unit, which provides “prime contractor support to government customers that require diverse geospatial intelligence services.”

That designation could include the CIA as well as the NGA and other Pentagon agencies. Jeppesen and the other subsidiaries, Boeing says, work “in specialized organizations with broad resources to meet the time-critical requirements of today’s warfighter.”

At GEOINT 2007, Boeing, one of the intelligence community’s biggest suppliers of satellites, displayed its “information sharing environment” software.

It is designed to meet the Office of the Director of National Intelligence’s new requirements that agencies stop buying “stovepiped” systems that cannot talk to each other and start focusing on products that allow the NGA and other agencies to easily share their classified imagery with the CIA and other sectors of the community.

“To ensure freedom in the world, the United States continues to address the challenges introduced by terrorism,” a Boeing handout said. Its new software, the company said, will allow information to be “shared efficiently and uninterrupted across intelligence agencies, first responders, military and world allies.”

Recent Contracts/Events
In April 2008, Boeing and CSC, another major intelligence contractor, joined forced to pursue a multi-billion dollar contract with the US Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) “to execute the Special Operations Forces' global mission.”

"The combined technical, integration, and sustainment strengths of Boeing and CSC offer the best possible team to support USSOCOM worldwide, and to bring SOFSA new capabilities that offer enhanced performance while establishing cost-saving efficiencies for operations," Jim Sheaffer, president of CSC's North American Public Sector, wrote in a press release.

SOURCES

[1] “Boeing Demonstrates Anti-Terrorism Integrated Tactical Solutions,” Boeing company press release, June 22 2006.
[2] Jane Mayer, “The CIA’s Travel Agent,” The New Yorker, October 30, 2006.

Email - forrest.s.gossett@boeing.com (Boeing media relations)
Phone - +1-314-363-0650
Website - Boeing Integrated Defense Systems

Back to Contents

BAE Systems/Global Analysis Unit

Author/Researcher
Tim Shorrock

Headquarters
1601 Research Blvd., Rockville MD 20850

Principal Agencies
Central Intelligence Agency, National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency
Office of the Director of National Intelligence, National Counter-Terrorism Center
Department of Defense

Top Executives
Walter P. Havenstein, president and CEO
John Gannon, vice president of Global Analysis (former deputy director for Intelligence at the Central Intelligence Agency)

Annual Revenue
$28.2 billion (BAE U.S. parent)

Intelligence Percent of Revenue
Not disclosed

Summary

Rankings (BAE Systems Inc.)

Washington Technology Top 100: #12

Defense News Top 100: #3

BAE Systems Inc., is the U.S. subsidiary of the British defense giant BAE. It is the sixth-largest U.S. defense contractor and a major player in the U.S. intelligence market.

Its rise was fueled by a string of strategic acquisitions of American companies, the largest of which was United Defense Industries (UDI).

BAE bought UDI in 2005 for $4.2 billion from the Carlyle Group, the well-connected Washington-based private equity fund. UDI, which makes the Bradley Fighting Vehicle and other weapons systems used by U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, was a huge money-maker for Carlyle, and its acquisition helped catapult BAE into third place in the global defense market, just behind Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman.

Corporate Information
BAE Systems' website explains how its Global Analysis intelligence unit operates:

“[It] is a leading provider of skilled, fully cleared, and experienced intelligence and geospatial analysts working directly with Government agencies and U.S. military commands to satisfy regular and surge requirements. Policymakers, intelligence officers, war fighters, and law enforcement officers have come increasingly to rely on the sophisticated intelligence analysis provided by Global Analysis to help them understand the threats, risks, and opportunities generated by today’s rapidly evolving international environment.

“Along with this on-site support, Global Analysis offers outsourced studies and assessments. Through its own group of ‘in-house’ senior analysts, Global Analysis is prepared to provide the intelligence community, the wider U.S. Government, U.S. military commands, and the U.S. private sector with customized strategic assessments and analysis on political, economic, and security issues.

“Our sophisticated, all-source analysis program is led by Dr. John Gannon, vice president of Global Analysis and former deputy director for intelligence at the Central Intelligence Agency. Dr. Gannon is ably supported by a range of seasoned senior analysts and managers from the intelligence community as well as by analytic support specialists. …”

The unit provides professional and analytic staffing; workforce development; technical and tradecraft training; advanced analytic tools; strategic studies and assessments; design, construction, and management of analytic facilities.

BAE Systems has extensive operations throughout the Washington, D.C. area and operates numerous Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities (SCIF) for intelligence agencies.

These facilities have special windows that prevent outside infiltration of electronic spying devices.

According to BAE,

“Our newest facility in Herndon, Virginia, known as the Information Analysis Center (IAC) is a state-of-the-art workspace, built to stringent…customer security, communications, and analytic requirements. This facility, which was opened in July, 2005, provides over 150,000 square feet of accredited SCIF space accommodating over 700 personnel.

In addition to workspace, BAE Systems provides the IAC with a 24 x 7 cleared armed guard force, and an array of security services, including badging, holding and passing clearances, and escorting.”

BAE’s contractor staff at the IAC specialize in counter-terrorism, counter-insurgency, counter-proliferation, leadership analysis, electronic warfare, infrastructure vulnerabilities analysis, medical intelligence, underground facilities assessments and open-source intelligence analysis training for the private sector.

CorpWatch Analysis
BAE Systems is one of the prime beneficiaries of an outsourcing agenda under which the U.S. Intelligence Community spent 70 percent of its estimated $60 billion annual budget on contracts with private companies.

BAE’s services to U.S. intelligence - including the CIA and the National Counter-Terrorism Center - are provided through its Global Analysis Business Unit, located in McLean, Va., a stone’s throw from the CIA. The unit is headed by Dr. John Gannon, a 25-year veteran of the CIA who reached the agency’s highest analytical ranks as deputy director of intelligence and chairman of the National Intelligence Council.

Today, as a private sector contractor for the Intelligence Community, Gannon manages a staff of more than 800 analysts with security clearances.

In 2008 BAE added considerable depth to its intelligence offerings by acquiring MTC Technologies, a Dayton-based supplier of intelligence and technology systems to the NSA and other agencies.

It also acquired Detica Group, another British intelligence consulting company that has been making deep inroads into the U.S. defense intelligence market and the CIA.

FOREIGN REQUIREMENTS

As a subsidiary of a foreign corporation, BAE Systems Inc. operates under a Special Security Agreement with the US government that requires the company to appoint outside directors who are American citizens to a Government Security Committee.

These board members are responsible for overseeing BAE’s compliance with US national security and export regulations and vouch for the company before US officials.

According to BAE,

“Our long history of successful compliance with the SSA allows BAE Systems to supply products and services to the Department of Defense, Intelligence Community and Homeland Security on some of the Nation’s most sensitive programs.”

BAE Systems’ outside directors all have extensive experience inside the American intelligence and national security communities.

They include:

Lee H. Hamilton, former Speaker of the House and co-chair of the 9/11 Commission

Richard J. Kerr, former deputy director of Central Intelligence

Gen. Kenneth A. Minihan, former director of the NSA

Gen. Anthony C. Zinni (USMC, retired), former commander-in-chief U.S. Central Command

BAE SYSTEMS AND THE CIA

BAE’s role in U.S. national security and, in the process, underscores the degree of outsourcing in U.S. intelligence.

“The demand for experienced, skilled, and cleared analysts - and for the best systems to manage them - has never been greater across the Intelligence and Defense Communities, in the field and among federal, state and local agencies responsible for national and homeland security,” according to a Global Analysis unit brochure distributed in October at GEOINT 2007, an annual symposium sponsored by the prime contractors for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency.

The mission of the Global Analysis unit,

“is to provide policymakers, warfighters, and law enforcement officials with analysts to help them understand the complex intelligence threats they face, and work force management programs to improve the skills and expertise of analysts,” the brochure states.

At the bottom of the brochure is a series of photographs illustrating BAE’s broad reach:

a group of analysts monitoring a bank of computers

three employees studying a map of Europe, the Middle East and the Horn of Africa

the outlines of two related social networks that have been mapped out to show how their members are linked

a bearded man, apparently from the Middle East and, presumably, a terrorist

the fiery image of a the aftereffects of a car bomb explosion in Iraq

four white radar domes (known as radomes) of the type used by the National Security Agency to monitor global communications from dozens of bases and facilities around the world

BAE AND HOMELAND SECURITY

The brochure may look and sound like typical corporate PR.

But amidst BAE’s spy talk, strategically placed phrases alert intelligence officials to BAE's active presence inside the United States.

The tip-off language was,

“federal, state and local agencies”

“law enforcement officials”

“homeland security”

By including them, BAE was broadcasting that it is not only a contractor for agencies involved in foreign intelligence, but also for domestic security agencies - a category that includes the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the FBI, as well as local and state police forces stretching from Maine to Hawaii.

One of BAE’s newest products is specifically tailored for the homeland security market. “Geospatial Operations for a Secure Homeland – Awareness, Workflow, Knowledge” (GOSHAWK) is designed to provide geospatial intelligence – the computerized mapping and imagery tools managed by the NGA – to help law enforcement and state and local emergency agencies prepare for, and respond to, “natural disasters and terrorist and criminal incidents.”

Under the GOSHAWK program, BAE supplies “agencies and corporations” with data providers and information technology specialists “capable of turning geospatial information into the knowledge needed for quick decisions.”

A typical operation might involve acquiring data from satellites, aircraft, and sensors in ground vehicles, and integrating those data to support an emergency or security operations center.

One of the program’s special attributes, the company says, is its ability to “differentiate levels of classification,” meaning that it can deduce when data are classified and meant only for use by analysts with security clearances.

BAE IN IRAQ

During GEOINT 2007, three BAE Systems employees, newly returned from a three-week tour of Iraq and Afghanistan with the NGA, demonstrated a new software package.

SOCET GXP uses Google Earth software as a basis for creating three-dimensional maps that U.S. commanders and soldiers use to conduct intelligence and reconnaissance missions.

Eric Bruce, one of the BAE employees back from the Middle East, said in the fall of 2007 that his team trained U.S. forces to use the GXP software “to study routes for known terrorist sites” as well as to locate opium fields.

“Terrorists use opium to fund their war,” he said. Bruce also said Iraqi citizens helped his team locating targets. “Many of the locals can’t read maps, so they tell the analysts, ‘There is a mosque next to a hill,’” he explained.

The U.S. Army’s Topographic Engineering Center bought earlier versions of the software and used them to collect data on more than 12,000 square kilometers of Iraq, primarily in urban centers and over supply routes.

Bruce said BAE’s new package is designed for defense forces and intelligence agencies, but can also be used for homeland security and by highway departments and airports.

Recent Contracts/Events
In July 2008, Nicole Suveges, a BAE Systems political scientist working in Iraq as an intelligence contractor for the US 4th Infantry Division, was killed in a bombing in Sadr City, Baghdad.

Suveges had a masters degree in political science from George Washington University, where she had written a dissertation on “Markets and Mullahs: Global Networks, Transnational Ideas and the Deep Play of Political Culture.”

She was working under a BAE contract to the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command to provide “training, programmatic, and staffing support” to the Army’s Human Terrain System program. (“BAE Systems statement regarding the loss of employee in Iraq,” BAE Systems News Release, June 25, 2008).

SOURCES
Primary sourcing for this profile came from Tim Shorrock, ''Spies for Hire: The Secret World of Intelligence Outsourcing'' (Simon & Schuster/2008) and from company press releases.

Email - greg.caires@baesystems.com (Greg Caires, director of Media Relations, BAE Systems Inc.)
Phone - +1 (703) 907-8261, +1 (301) 738-4000
Website - http://www.baesystems.com/ProductsServices/bae_prod_eis_global_analysis.html

Back to Contents

Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and its Primary Contractors

Author/Researcher
Tim Shorrock

Headquarters
The Pentagon/Department of Defense, Virginia; Bolling Air Force Base, Washington, D.C.

Principal Agencies
Pentagon
Joint Chiefs of Staff

Top Executives
Lieutenant General Ronald L. Burgess, Jr, Director

Annual Revenue
$1 billion (estimated 2009)

Intelligence Percent of Revenue
(N/A - DIA is a contracting agency)

Summary

The Defense Intelligence Agency has an estimated budget of $1 billion and employs more than 11,000 military and civilian personnel, 35 percent of whom are contractors.

It is the primary intelligence agency for the Pentagon and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, integrates all information available from intelligence units of the unified combatant commands, and ensures delivery of intelligence from spy satellites and surveillance planes to war-fighters on the ground in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other battlegrounds.

Despite DIA's recent award to a private consortium of a contract worth more than $1 billion, the agency's officials insist:

“We are not outsourcing intelligence analysis,” says Donald Black, DIA chief of public affairs. “A full-time government employee maintains authority, direction, and control over the process and a senior analyst/leader reviews all analytical products.” ^[1]

Several former high-ranking DIA officials have left government to work for contractors (for examples, see the CACI profile).

Corporate Information

Principal contractors: BAE Systems; Booz Allen Hamilton; SAIC, Inc.; CACI International, Inc.; and L-3 Communications Inc.

Percent of workforce employed by contractors: 35

CorpWatch Analysis
The Defense Intelligence Agency was organized in 1961 to create a unified voice for the intelligence branches within the armed forces, and is the nation’s primary producer of foreign military intelligence.

The DIA has a budget of about $1 billion and employs more than 11,000 military and civilian personnel, many of whom work overseas as defense attachés at US embassies. Its current director, Army Lt. Gen. Michael Maples, previously served as director of management of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Historically, the DIA director has answered directly to the military brass and then to the secretary of defense.

The DIA describes its primary mission as providing,

“timely, objective, all-source military intelligence to policy makers, war fighters, and force planners to meet a variety of challenges across the spectrum of conflict.”

One of its most significant assignments is to provide centralized management for all national and defense activities related to MASINT, or measures and signatures intelligence – the “sniffing” by sensors that measures, detects, identifies, and tracks what the DIA calls “unique characteristics of fixed and dynamic targets.”

MASINT and its related disciplines is one of the most highly classified projects within the intelligence community.

It is,

“particularly important for detecting ballistic missiles, directed energy weapons, and weapons of mass destruction,” Maples told a defense publication in 2006.

“We’ve got to have the right kinds of signature databases that we can compare against, and the right kinds of collection capabilities to look into those three areas.”

The DIA’s requirements for information technology and skilled analysts have made the agency a major employer of contractors.

According to DIA officials who spoke to a May 2007 Defense Intelligence Acquisition Conference in Colorado, DIA contractors are filling a “workforce gap” that exists at DIA and most of the other agencies. During the 1990s, as intelligence budgets contracted, hundreds of career DIA officers retired and left the intelligence community.

When the DIA began hiring new people after 9/11, the veteran officers who should have been around to train and mentor them were gone. But because it takes five to seven years to train a new officer, there was a “generational hole” that could only be filled by former intelligence officers with security clearances; and most of them were working in the private sector.

Contractors were the only solution, officials said, to carry the agency through.

“Although we continuously review our mix of government and contractor personnel to ensure we have the right resources to accomplish our missions, contractors are an integral part of our DIA team,” DIA Director Maples, told the Washington Post in an August 2007 letter to the editor.

Previous DIA contracting: BPAs
The DIA’s latest “Solutions for Intelligence Analysis” (SIA) contract is the successor to a series of Blanket Purchase Agreements (BPAs) through which the DIA has historically done most of its contracting.

A blanket purchase agreement is a simplified acquisition method that allows government agencies to fill anticipated repetitive needs for analytical services and other supplies.

According to FedMarket.com, an Internet site for government contractors,

“BPAs are like ‘charge accounts’ set up with trusted suppliers. Both agencies and vendors like BPAs because they help trim the red tape associated with repetitive purchasing. Once set up, repeat purchases are easy for both sides.”

Under the BPA system that it established in 2003, DIA selected seven teams of vendors to compete against each other for outsourced work with the agency.

Each agreement was worth about $300 million to the individual vendor teams, which were led by,

BAE Systems North America

Booz Allen Hamilton

Computer Sciences Corporation

Lockheed Martin

Northrop Grumman

SRA International

Titan Corporation, now a subsidiary of L-3 Communications Inc.

Contrary to Maples’ assertion to the Post, the agreements do incorporate analysis: A 2005 DIA report says the BPAs,

“provide the full spectrum of Information Technology (IT) planning, design, implementation, Intelligence Analysis support services.”

A similar system of BPAs was established by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) after Michael McConnell was sworn in as DNI in February 2007.

The DIA’s blanket purchase agreements are known collectively as DIESCON 3, and are also open for bidding to other agencies in the intelligence community. (If the NSA is looking for IT expertise in a certain area, for example, it can ask for bids from the DIA’s bidding consortiums.) Each team in the DIESCON 3 system has a specific focus.

The Booz Allen team, for example, includes 10,000 analysts with top secret, sensitive, compartmentalized information (TS/SCI) security clearances, and its consortium includes Accenture, a major outsourcing consultant to government agencies and private corporations, as well as Attensity Inc., a data analysis company initially funded by In-Q-Tel, the CIA’s venture capital firm.

The Booz Allen team works closely on issues related to MASINT for the DIA; another important line of work, according to the Booz Allen BPA website, is data mining and link analysis for the CIA, the NSA, and the FBI.

BAE Systems, which captured 41 orders worth $105 million during the first year of its agreement with the DIA, leads an industry team that specializes in analyzing enemy military forces, providing mapping and 3-D imagery to Pentagon intelligence teams, and preparing finished intelligence on paramilitary forces and insurgent and terrorist organizations operating in Iraq and other countries of interest.

BAE’s BPA team includes SAIC, Booz Allen, Intellibridge Corporation, General Dynamics, Advanced Concepts Inc., SpecTal, and 41 other companies (the last two were acquired in 2007 by L-1 Identity solutions, the intelligence conglomerate where George Tenet is a director).

The Lockheed Martin BPA team claims to have the largest cleared workforce in the nation and, according to its DIESCON 3 website, provides,

“exceptional depth to respond to both surge requirements and planned customers tasks.”

Its forte seems to be providing large, agency-wide IT systems for the DIA and other agencies.

The team includes three of the top U.S. IT firms, Hewlett-Packard, Oracle, and Sun Microsystems, as well as the consulting firm BearingPoint, which helped plan the U.S. occupation of Iraq for the Department of Defense.

Another member of the team is The Analysis Corporation, the intelligence contractor run by CIA veteran John Brennan.

Northrop Grumman, meanwhile, has put together a powerful combination of companies that have made their way up the federal contracting chain by managing the oversight of other contractors. They manage the DIA’s system for processing bids and awarding contracts. It includes CACI International, AT&T, Mantech International, and four small, high-tech companies that provide contract analysts to the CIA.

A fifth consortium is managed by Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC), one of the NSA’s most important contractors. It manages global information networks, and produces and disseminates intelligence products, including specialized expertise in the area of imagery processing and archiving.

The CSC team includes CACI International and L-3 MPRI.

This last company is one of the largest private armies in the world, and would have at its disposal hundreds of paramilitary officers who would fit in exceedingly well with the DIA’s secret intelligence teams in the Middle East and North Africa.

Recent Contracts/Events
In April 2008, the DIA awarded prime contracts to eight companies, giving them the right to bid on $1 billion worth of work over a five-year period.

Companies hired under the “Solutions for Intelligence Analysis” (SIA) contract will provide intelligence analysis support to the DIA as well as to the Armed Forces and the intelligence units of the military’s combatant commands, such as the U.S. Central Command.

According to SAIC, the intent of the SIA contract is “to streamline the process of acquiring new contractors for the Defense Intelligence Enterprise.” That “enterprise,” it said, consists of the DIA, the intelligence units of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines, as well as the Combatant Commands. ^[2]

These companies will perform the work:

BAE Systems (the U.S. subsidiary of the British defense giant BAE)

Booz Allen Hamilton

CACI International

Concurrent Technologies Corp. - http://www.ctc.com

L-3 Communications Inc.

Northrop Grumman Corp.

Science Applications International Corp. (SAIC)

SRA International Inc. ^[3]

SOURCES
Primary sourcing for this profile came from Tim Shorrock, ''Spies for Hire: The Secret World of Intelligence Outsourcing'' (Simon & Schuster/2008) and from DIA and company press releases.

[1] Email interview with Tim Shorrock, December 2007.
[2] SAIC, “Solutions for Intelligence Analysis,” http://www.saic.com/contractcenter/sia.
[3] SRA International specializes in providing engineering and IT services to the Pentagon and intelligence agencies. Through its Orion Center for Homeland Security, it provides counterintelligence, counterterrorism, and analytical services to the Department of Homeland Security and various military intelligence units.

Email - DIA-PAO@dia.mil (Public affairs)
Phone - +1-703-695-0071 (Public affairs)
Website - http://www.dia.mil

Back to Contents

The Analysis Corporation (TAC)

Author/Researcher
Tim Shorrock

Headquarters
1501 Farm Credit Drive, Suite 2300, McLean, VA 22102-5000

Principal Agencies
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), Department of State
National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI)

Top Executives
Alexander Drew, President

Annual Revenue
Not disclosed (privately owned)

Intelligence Percent of Revenue
Not disclosed

Summary

The Analysis Corporation (TAC) specializes in providing counterterrorism analysis and watchlists to U.S. government agencies.

It is best known for its connection to John O. Brennan, its former CEO, a 35-year veteran of the CIA and currently President Obama’s chief counterterrorism adviser. Brennan, the first director of the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), retired from government in November 2005 and immediately joined TAC.

TAC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the defense and intelligence contractor, Global Strategies Group/North America. As of 2008, it employed more than 140 people who, according to company literature, support the work of intelligence, law enforcement, and homeland security agencies “with heavy emphasis on counterterrorism.”

Much of TAC’s business is with the NCTC itself. In fact, the NCTC is one of the company’s largest customers, and TAC provides counterterrorism (CT) support to “most of the agencies within the intelligence community,” according to a company press release.

One of its biggest customers is the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which manages the NCTC.

Corporate Information
On its website, TAC states:

“TAC is at the forefront of the effort to safeguard U.S. national security interests. Since its start in 1990, TAC has provided mission critical intelligence support and technical solutions to the U.S. Government and non-governmental clients.

Each and every day, TAC makes important contributions in the counterterrorism (CT) and national security realm by supporting national watch-listing activities as well as other CT requirements.”

An earlier posting said that TAC,

“has a strong cadre of cleared intelligence analysts and specialists who have extensive experience in CT and related fields.

With a demonstrated record of retaining quality CT analysts in a dynamic market, TAC consistently provides skilled analysts intimately familiar with the missions, roles, and responsibilities of the Government's multifaceted CT Community.

TAC employees are integrated into intelligence, law enforcement, defense, and homeland security work units, serve in Government operations centers, and play a critical role in watch-listing efforts… TAC staff consists of subject matter experts with extensive expertise in a wide range of disciplines.

This expertise is available to assist clients in business process re-engineering, program management, strategic planning, applied technology, facilitation, and governance challenges.”

CorpWatch Analysis
During the 1990s, TAC developed the U.S. government’s first terrorist database, “Tipoff,” on behalf of the State Department.

The database was initially conceived as a tool to help U.S. consular officials and customs i

Posted via email from DailyDDoSe

DailyDDoSe™ by @ELyssaD™

PROMIS Software evolution to Ptech

PROMIS Software evolution to Ptech

Illuminati Created the US to Advance NWO

Illuminati Created the US to Advance NWO

Gang Stalking, An Overview

Gang Stalking, An Overview (Sep. 15, 2006)

Translate this page:

An Explanation of the New World Order.

New World Order Definition

Introduction

Why the Conspiracy is Unknown

The NWO Modus Operandi

Who is the NWO?

The NWO's Role in Shaping History

Project Monarch: The Tangled Web

Project Monarch: The Tangled Web

Project Monarch: The Tangled Web

by Martin Cannon

Notable Names Project Monarch #Nashville

Notable Names

A Brief History of Control

The Anglo Alliance

Nazi party and British aristocracy.

The Evolution of Project MKULTRA

Definition and Description

Alters and Triggers

Bloodlines and Twinning

Levels of MONARCH Programming12

Method and Components

Programmers and Places

Notable Names

Deprogrammers and Exposers

Conclusion

Information About Cathy O'Brien #Nashville

Cathy O'Brien

Shocking Menace of Satellite Surveillance

Shocking Menace of Satellite Surveillance

How to Spot COINTELPRO Agents

COINTELPRO - Counterintelligence Program

Intelligence Briefs or Disinformation? - How to Tell The Difference

Intelligence Briefs or Disinformation? - How to Tell The Difference

Invasive Technologies and Internet Privacy

Big Brother is only a "ping" or mouse click away...

Google Partners With NSA, CIA on Intelligence Database

Google Partners With NSA, CIA on Intelligence Database

The National Security Agency and Fourth Amendment Rights

The National Security Agency and Fourth Amendment Rights

INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES SENATE RESOLUTION 21

HEARINGS

SELECT COMMITTEE TO STUDY GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS WITH RESPECT TO INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES

UNITED STATES SENATE

VOLUME 5

THE NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY AND FOURTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS

ORDINANCE NO. BL2007-1318

ORDINANCE NO. BL2007-1318

Jewel v. NSA

Jewel v. NSA

EFF to Court: Don't Let Government Hide Illegal Surveillance

EFF to Court: Don't Let Government Hide Illegal Surveillance

EFF Unveils New Project: Bloggers Under Fire | Electronic Frontier Foundation

EFF Unveils New Project: Bloggers Under Fire

Deeplinks Topics

Electronic Frontier Foundation | Defending your rights in the digital world

Defending your rights in the digital world

EFF tests agree with AP: Comcast is forging packets to interfere with user

EFF tests agree with AP: Comcast is forging packets to interfere with user traffic

Foreign Intelligence and Terrorism Investigations | EFF Surveillance Self-Defense Project

Foreign Intelligence and Terrorism Investigations

Threats | EFF Surveillance Self-Defense Project http://t.co/WlxMjTc

Threats

Wi-Fi | EFF Surveillance Self-Defense Project

Wi-Fi

Encrypting a Wireless Network

When Using Open Wi-Fi

Secure Deletion | EFF Surveillance Self-Defense Project

Secure Deletion

Windows Secure Deletion

Without Installing New Software: Use Cipher.exe

A Better Option: Install Eraser

Levels of MONARCH Programming¹²

INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES
SENATE RESOLUTION 21

SELECT COMMITTEE TO STUDY
GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS WITH
RESPECT TO INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES

THE NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY AND FOURTH
AMENDMENT RIGHTS