"Now we are all persons of interest." ---Thomas Drake, NSA whistleblower

"For Thomas Drake, the former National Security Agency employee who blew the whistle on the agency’s expansive post-9/11 surveillance programs in 2006, the latest revelation of blanket surveillance is simply déjà vu.

Drake, who was indicted under the Espionage Act and faced life in prison before federal charges against him were eventually dropped, told Salon Thursday that news that the NSA had a top secret order to retain millions of Americans’ phone records daily came as no surprise.”

More on this story:

http://www.salon.com/2013/06/06/no_surprise_says_nsa_whistleblower_thomas_drake/

NSA leaker: are there serious cracks in Ed Snowden’s story?
Jon Rappoport
Activist Post


First, I’m not doubting the documents Ed Snowden has brought forward. I’m not doubting the illegal reach of the NSA in spying on Americans and the world.

But as to how this recent revelation happened, and whether Ed Snowden’s history holds up…I have questions.

Could Snowden have been given extraordinary access to classified info as part of a larger scheme? Could he be a) an honest man and yet b) a guy who was set up to do what he’s doing now?

If b) is true, then Snowden fits the bill perfectly. He wants to do what he’s doing. He isn’t lying about that. He means what he says.

Okay. Let’s look at his history as reported by The Guardian.

In 2003, at age 19, without a high school diploma, Snowden enlists in the Army. He begins a training program to join the Special Forces. The sequence here is fuzzy. At what point after enlistment can a new soldier start this training program? Does he need to demonstrate some exceptional ability before Special Forces puts him in that program?

Snowden breaks both legs in a training exercise. He’s discharged from the Army. Is that automatic? How about healing and then resuming Army service? Just asking.

If he was accepted in the Special Forces training program because he had special computer skills, then why discharge him simply because he broke both legs?


Circa 2003 (?), Snowden gets a job as a security guard for an NSA facility at the University of Maryland. He specifically wanted to work for NSA? It was just a generic job opening he found out about?

Also in 2003 (?), Snowden shifts jobs. He’s now in the CIA, in IT. He has no high school diploma. He’s a young computer genius?

In 2007, Snowden is sent to Geneva. He’s only 23 years old. The CIA gives him diplomatic cover there. He’s put in charge of maintaining computer-network security. Major job. Obviously, he has access to a very wide range of classified documents. Sound a little odd? Again, just asking. He’s just a kid. Maybe he has his GED by now. Otherwise, he still doesn’t have a high school diploma.

Snowden says that during this period, in Geneva, one of the incidents that really sours him on the CIA is the “turning of a Swiss banker.” One night, CIA guys get a banker drunk, encourage him to drive home, the banker gets busted, the CIA guys help him out, then with that bond formed, they eventually get the banker to reveal deep banking secrets to the Agency.

Snowden is this naïve? He doesn’t know by now that the CIA does this sort of thing all the time? He’s shocked? He “didn’t sign up for this?”

In 2009, Snowden leaves the CIA. Why? Presumably because he’s disillusioned. It should be noted here that Snowden claimed he could do very heavy damage to the entire US intelligence community in 2008, but decided to wait because he thought Obama, just coming into the presidency, might make good changes.

After two years with the CIA in Geneva, Snowden really had the capability to take down the whole US intelligence network, or a major chunk of it? He had that much access to classified data?

Anyway, in 2009, Snowden leaves the CIA and goes to work for a private defense contractor. Apparently, by this time, he knows all about the phony US war in Iraq, and yet he chooses to work for a sector that relentlessly promotes such wars. Go figure.

This defense contractor (unnamed) assigns him to work at an NSA facility in Japan. Surely, Snowden understands what the NSA is. He knows it’s a key part of the whole military-intelligence network, the network he opposes.

But he takes the job anyway. Perhaps he’s doing it so he can obtain further access to classified data, in advance of blowing a big whistle. Perhaps.

Snowden goes on to work for two private defense contractors, Dell and Booz Allen Hamilton. In this latter job, Snowden is again assigned to work at the NSA.

He’s an outsider, but he claims to have so much sensitive NSA data that he can take down the whole US intelligence network in a single day. Hmm.

These are red flags. They raise questions. Serious ones.

If The Guardian, which has such close access to Snowden, wants to explore these questions, they might come up with some interesting answers.

Again, I’m not doubting that the documents Snowden has brought forward are real. I have to assume they are. I certainly don’t doubt the reach and the power and the criminality of the NSA.

Although I’m sure someone will write me and say I’m defending the NSA. I’M NOT.

But if Snowden was maneuvered, in his career, without his knowing it, to arrive at just this point, then we have a whole new story. We have a story about unknown forces who wanted this exposure to occur.

Who would these forces be? I could make lots of guesses. But they would just be guesses.

Perhaps all the anomalies in the career of Ed Snowden can be explained with sensible answers. I realize that. But until they are, I put the questions forward. And leave them there.

Jon Rappoport is the author of two explosive collections, The Matrix Revealed and Exit From the Matrix, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe

I wonder what is going to happen when the other shoe drops. Apparently, there are additional revelations to be made.

I was thinking the other day (dangerous, I know ), but here is a "what if"

What if all this data was collected and stored for future access but only by a specific court order? Part of what the NSA wants to do is store this info before it gets deleted. Okay, go ahead and store that info, but just don't use it to spy on average citizens.

Sure, to the NSA it wouldn't be as good because undiscovered relationships between terrorists would be more difficult to spot. But, once a person is on the "radar", if data is archived, it will be available for court-ordered investigations.

Many of the terrorists are already on a watch list and (just like the Boston bombers who were on such a list) we don't have the resources to adequately follow up on these suspects already.

Phone tracking is just one small part of a vast network of intelligence gathering. Signals intelligence (SIGINT) and the sub divisions ELINT, COMINT , FISINT are just part of our massive electronic intelligence program. While Cell Phone tracking may be the most obtrusive to us, the citizens, it is really a small player in the scope of things.

An overlapping discipline, signals intelligence (SIGINT) is the related process of analyzing and identifying the intercepted frequencies (e.g. as a mobile phone or RADAR). SIGINT is broken into three categories: ELINT, COMINT, and FISINT. the parameters of intercepted txn are-: communication equipmints-: freq, bandwidth, modulation, polarisation etc. The distinction between intelligence and electronic warfare support (ES) is determined by who tasks or controls the collection assets, what they are tasked to provide, and for what purpose they are tasked.

What if all this data was collected and stored for future access but only by a specific court order?

Problem is that the CIA/NSA doesnt follow the same legal procedures that apply to the rest of our system. .All these revelations are always after the fact, they dont ask permission, they just do it.

Signal intelligence, or intercepting transmitted "radio" signals on allocated terrestrial and satellite radio frequencies, is WAY different to me than collecting computer metadata records.

They say "Any" signal that is transmitted is fair game. Their definition, not mine. Hell they even Monitor airport radio beacons. It is is in the air, there is a good chance some one is coping it. They have been taping Fiber optic line for years. Trans oceanic lines are not immune from their search.

It's the most covert submarine in the American arsenal. Since the sub's 2004 launch, experts have speculated that USS Jimmy Carter was designed with classified spy missions in mind. Allegedly, the sub is able to slip into enemy ports undetected and even tap into the underwater fiber-optics of foes to listen in on undersea chatter. USS Jimmy Carter may have done just that last year, when it was quietly deployed to spy on North Korea -- one of the only known missions the sub has ever taken.

What else can USS Jimmy Carter, one of the Navy's three Seawolf-class Submarines, accomplish? Nobody's quite sure, because Navy officials haven't commented on exactly what kinds of tech the seafarer is equipped with. But the Jimmy Carter does boast unprecedented hull space, to store unmanned aerial and undersea vehicles for whatever deadly missions our former president's namesake needs to embark on.

But a computer file is not a "signal". It is not transmitted and intercepted via the airwaves or even transmitted via a cable as part of normal communication. There is a huge difference here.