1 June 2010
source: reseau Voltaire
The "Cheonan" enigma
A South Korean corvette South Korea, the "Cheonan", was sunk on 26 March 2010. At the request of the South Korean government, Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and Sweden have established, together with South Korea, an international inquiry commission. The experts’ report, issued May 20, concludes that the ship was the target of a torpedo manufactured in North Korea, an allegation that Pyongyang strongly denies.
While the tone mounted on both sides of the line of demarcation, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, himself a South Korean military, has called on the UN Military Command to establish whether or not the incident constituted a violation of the armistice agreement between the two Koreas.
However, the Asian press is showing signs of increasing skepticism:
The corvette was sunk in disputed waters which, if a peace treaty were signed, would be universally recognized as belonging to North Korea.
The "Cheonan" took part in a vast naval military exercise. As such, it was embedded in an operational system that would have detected the presence of an enemy submarine and a torpedo firing.
One of the South Korean committee members was relieved from his duties for having questioned the transparecy of the work done by his colleagues. According to him, in the absence of any signs of an explosion, it is impossible to assert that the ship was torpedoed.
Many experts were puzzled that an identifiable piece of rubble from the tropedo could have been found when, in principle, they disintegrate as soon as used.
At this stage, Korean and Japanese journalists are considering the hypothesis of a provocation: the South Korean Navy executed its maneuvers in disputed territorial waters hoping for a North Korean response. It did not come; the "Cheonan" was sunk and a recognizable piece of debris was planted in the wreckage.
L’énigme du Cheonan
Une corvette sud-coréenne, le Cheonan, a été coulé le 26 mars 2010. Sur requête du gouvernement sud-coréen, l’Australie, le Canada, le Royaume-Uni et la Suède ont mis en place avec lui une commission d’enquête internationale. Le rapport des experts, remis le 20 mai, conclut que le navire a été victime d’une torpille de fabrication nord-coréenne, ce que Pyongyang dément énergiquement.
Le secrétaire général des Nations Unies, Ban Ki-Moon, lui même ressortissant sud-coréen, a saisi le Commandement militaire de l’ONU pour établir s’il s’agit ou non d’une violation de l’armistice entre les deux Corées, tandis que le ton a monté de part et d’autre de la ligne de démarcation.
Cependant, la presse asiatique se montre de plus en plus sceptique :
La corvette a été coulée dans des eaux disputées qui, si un traité de paix était signé, seraient universellement reconnues comme eaux territoriales nord-coréennes.
Le Cheonan participait à un vaste exercice militaire naval. A ce titre, il était inséré dans un dispositif opérationnel qui aurait dû détecter la présence d’un sous-marin ennemi et le tir d’une torpille.
Un des membres sud-coréens de la commission a été démis de ses fonctions après qu’il ait mis en doute la sincérité des travaux de ses collègues. Selon lui, en l’absence de traces d’explosion, il est impossible d’affirmer que le navire a été torpillé.
De nombreux experts se sont étonné que l’on ait pu retrouver un débris identifiable de torpille, alors que celles-ci sont en principe pulvérisées lors de leur utilisation.
A ce stade, des journalistes coréens et japonais envisagent l’hypothèse d’une provocation : la marine sud-coréenne aurait organisé ses manoeuvres dans des eaux territoriales disputées en espérant une réaction nord-coréenne. Celle-ci ne venant pas, le Cheonan aurait été coulé et un débris identifiable posé dans l’épave.
By courtesy of Wayne Madsen
May 26, 2010
Beijing suspects false flag attack on South Korean corvette
One of the main purposes for increasing tensions on the Korean peninsula was to apply pressure on Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama to reverse course on moving the U.S. Marine Corps base off Okinawa. Hatoyama has admitted that the tensions over the sinking of the Cheonan played a large part in his decision to allow the U.S. Marines to remain on Okinawa. Hatoyama's decision has resulted in a split in the ruling center-left coalition government, a development welcome in Washington, with Mizuho Fukushima, the Social Democratic Party leader threatening to bolt the coalition over the Okinawa reversal.
The Cheonan was sunk near Baengnyeong Island, a westernmost spot that is far from South Korean coast, but opposite the North Korean coast. The island is heavily militarized and within artillery fire range of North Korean coastal defenses, which lie across a narrow channel.
The Cheonan, an ASW corvette, was decked out with state-of-the-art sonar, plus it was operating in waters with extensive hydrophone sonar arrays and acoustic underwater sensors. There is no South Korean sonar or audio evidence of a torpedo, submarine or mini-sub in the area. Since there is next to no shipping in the channel, the sea was silent at the time of the sinking.
However, Baengnyeong Island hosts a joint US-South Korea military intelligence base and the US Navy SEALS operate out of the base. In addition, four U.S. Navy ships were in the area, part of the joint U.S-South Korean Exercise Foal Eagle, during the sinking of the Cheonan. An investigation of the suspect torpedo's metallic and chemical fingerprints show it to be of German manufacture. There are suspicions that the US Navy SEALS maintains a sampling of European torpedoes for sake of plausible deniability for false flag attacks. Also, Berlin does not sell torpedoes to North Korea, however, Germany does maintain a close joint submarine and submarine weapons development program with Israel.
The presence of the USNS Salvor, one of the participants in Foal Eagle, so close to Baengnyeong Island during the sinking of the South Korean corvette also raises questions.
The Salvor, a civilian Navy salvage ship, which participated in mine laying activities for the Thai Marines in the Gulf of Thailand in 2006, was present near the time of the blast with a complement of 12 deep sea divers.
Beijing, satisfied with North Korea's Kim Jong Il's claim of innocence after a hurried train trip from Pyongyang to Beijing, suspects the U.S. Navy's role in the Cheonan's sinking, with particular suspicion on the role of the Salvor. The suspicions are as follows:
1. The Salvor engaged in a seabed mine-installation operation, in other words, attaching horizontally fired anti-submarine mines on the sea floor in the channel.
2. The Salvor was doing routine inspection and maintenance on seabed mines, and put them into an electronic active mode (hair trigger release) as part of the inspection program.
3. A SEALS diver attached a magnetic mine to the Cheonan, as part of a covert program aimed at influencing public opinion in South Korea, Japan and China.
The Korean peninsula tensions have conveniently overshadowed all other agenda items on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's visits to Beijing and Seoul.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barack Obama overruled 'no-spying' pact with France
President Barack Obama forced his intelligence chief to resign after a row over whether the US should stop spying on France, it has emerged.
Henry Samuel in Paris
24 May 2010
Dennis Blair stepped down as America's director of national intelligence last Thursday after his call for undercover operations to be halted was ignored.
The proposed pact was overruled by Mr Obama who had concerns that France could elect a future president who undermined America foreign policy.
However, it has now emerged that there was also a major disagreement over plans for a mutual no-spying pact between the US and France.
Mr Blair had argued that the pro-US stance of Nicolas Sarkozy should be seized upon to end decades of espionage between the two countries.
Mr Sarkozy, whose Atlanticism earned him the nickname Sarko l'Américain back home, last year returned France to full Nato membership 60 years after Charles de Gaulle pulled the country out – a highly symbolic rapprochement with America.
Mr Blair proposed an unprecedented written pledge even more binding than the post-war "gentlemen's agreement" between the US, Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand as trusted partners who do not spy on each other. The deal would also have given France access to a highly secure intelligence retrieval and exchange system.
But the proposed pact was ruled out by Mr Obama as too risky. Many Americans still regard the French with suspicion following Jacques Chirac's opposition to the Iraq war.
Mr Sarkozy was said to be angry when Mr Obama pulled the plug on the pledge, which he had been led to believe was a done deal. Officials said the "misunderstanding" damaged ties between the two allies at a time when they were seeking to show a united front over dismantling Iran's nuclear programme.
Mr Sarkozy's chief Elysée adviser confirmed that the deal had been in the offing.
Claude Guéant said: "It was a new and interesting prospect, a sort of conclusive new step in relations,"
The deal was discussed between Mr Blair and Bernard Bajolet, France's new intelligence chief, but then dropped, he said. But Mr Guéant played down Mr Sarkozy's reaction.
"I don't think [the president] took it with a sense of disillusion," said a diplomatic source. "We've lived without it for decades. We were not the askers. It changes nothing in our relationship," he said.
French officials put the aborted pact down to internal turf wars within the US intelligence community.
France and the US have a long history of spying on each other's defence, industrial and technology assets.
The US has long been interested in gleaning information on France's business and diplomatic ties with Iran, Syria, and Lebanon, as well as North African militant groups with operatives in France. In 2007, French government workers were ordered not to use hand-held BlackBerry devices, amid fears that their messages could be intercepted in Britain or the US.
Mr Guéant, however, denied that France spies on its US ally at all.
"We have no espionage in the United States," he said. "We have no service acting on American territory. Co-operation has always been at a very good level in terms of intelligence with the US, whether regarding national security or terrorism," he said.
When asked whether the Americans spied on France, Mr Guéant smiled and said: "Ask them".
domenica 16 maggio 2010
AnnoZero. Attacco ai servizi segreti
Con una breve lettera aperta all'onorevole Veltroni.
Nella puntata di Annozero vengono dette molte delle cose che diciamo in questo blog. Veltroni, in pratica, conferma ciò che diciamo da tempo. Questi i passi salienti del discorso ad Annozero:
1) Esiste un'entità, che ha guidato i principali eventi stragisti italiani, dal delitto Moro ad Ustica.
2) Prendendo ad esempio la sola vicenda di Ustica, colpisce la infinita catena di morti che ha fatto strage di testimoni: suicidi, incidenti, omicidi, ecc..., Veltroni ha anche citato Ramstein (la tragedia aerea in cui si schiantarono due aerei delle Frecce tricolori, i cui piloti guarda caso erano testimoni al processo di Ustica); questa dichiarazione su Ramstein mi ha particolarmente colpito perché anche il giudice Rosario Priore aveva archiviato la questione di Ramstein come un incidente. Quindi Veltroni si è posto in netto contrasto con le fonti ufficiali.
In altre parole il nostro onorevole, in contrasto con la versione ufficiale secondo cui Ramstein sarebbe stato un incidente, ci vede un delitto.
Ora alcune considerazioni sono d'obbligo, perché le parole di Veltroni sono di una gravità senza precedenti.
Punto primo. Veltroni afferma che esiste un'entità unica, dietro ai delitti da Moro, ad Ustica, a Capaci.
Questa affermazione è assolutamente identica alle tesi complottiste sostenute da noi nel blog; e sostenute da personaggi e autori che non trovano spazio, in genere, nei media ufficiali, ma che molti ben conoscono; Pamio, Cosco, Carlizzi, Randazzo, Lissoni...
E' inoltre assolutamente identica alle dichiarazioni del pentito Calcara, nel famoso memoriale Calcara pubblicato da Salvatore Borsellino nel suo sito 19luglio1992. Secondo questo pentito, c'è un'unica forza che manovra Chiesa, Servizi segreti, Mafia, 'ndrangheta e istituzioni.
Insomma: Veltroni conferma le dichiarazioni del pentito Calcara. Ed entrambi confermano ciò che i complottisti dicono da una vita.
Punto secondo. La vicenda di Veltroni non è grave perché conferma in realtà una cosa nota a tutti i "complottisti"; è invece grave, anzi gravissima, per un altro fatto che nessuno ha considerato.
La dichiarazione viene infatti da un uomo che è stato - ed è - ai più alti vertici istituzionali dello Stato; ed è tuttora uno dei politici di maggior rilievo. Attenzione allora! Se un politico di questo calibro ammette che queste stragi sono state guidate da un'entità, diversa dallo Stato ovviamente, e anzi, ad esso contrapposta, sta dicendo un'altra cosa. Sta dicendo: signori, lo Stato non conta nulla, perché esiste un potere più forte, in grado di condizionare lo Stato. Noi politici non contiamo nulla, e siamo impotenti di fronte a questa entità. Anzi, siamo ad essa assoggettati.
E' quindi una dichiarazione di assoluta ed inaudita gravità.
Una dichiarazione che nessun anticomplottista prenderà mai in considerazione.
Una dichiarazione che i politici si guarderanno bene dal criticare, confermare e/o smentire, e sulle quali calerà il silenzio.
Punto terzo. Le dichiarazioni di Veltroni sono gravissime per un altro ordine di motivi. Infatti ci sarebbe da domandare all'onorevole in quale momento della sua vita, esattamente, ha avuto questa intuizione geniale secondo cui i politici non contano un cazzo, e sono assoggettati a questa "entità".
Lettera aperta all'onorevole Veltroni.
A questo punto, se potessi scrivere una lettera all'onorevole Veltroni, sapendo che la prenderà in considerazione, ci sarebbero da fare queste altre domande:
1) Caro Veltroni, se se ne era accorto prima dell'esistenza di questa ENTITA', questo filo rosso che lega il delitto Moro con Ustica e Capaci, ma che lega in realtà tutte le stragi italiane, e insieme a lei se ne saranno accorti altri, come mai non avete mai detto queste cose prima?
2) Come mai avete lasciato che uomini dello Stato e delle istituzioni, politici, magistrati, poliziotti, carabinieri, agenti dei servizi segreti, giornalisti, avvocati, funzionari pubblici, semplici cittadini, fossero fatti morire di malori improvvisi, infarti, suicidi, impiccati, in incidenti, ecc., nella vostra indifferenza?
3) Se vi siete accorti da tempo che esiste un'entità al di sopra della politica e delle leggi, perché non ci spiegate cos'è quest'entità? Perché, vede onorevole, noi complottisti lo diciamo da tempo, ma a noi non crede quasi nessuno. Se magari lo spiega lei, la cosa avrebbe un'altra autorevolezza.
4) Lei è un politico, no? Come mai in campagna elettorale non avete mai accennato a queste vicende? Come mai in parlamento non discutete mai di questa Entità? Non le sembra assurdo discutere del crocifisso nelle aule, dell'opportunità di costruire o meno una moschea, e poi lasciare insoluto il problema delle migliaia di morti impiccati, in incidenti, in malori, che i "VOSTRI" servizi segreti si lasciano dietro da una vita? Lo sa onorevole, che una volta ho fatto un rapido conto e sono migliaia le vittime di suicidi in ginocchio, incidenti in auto e aerei, infarto, gente che si spara alla testa oppure al cuore come il carabiniere di Viterbo che è morto a Santa Barbara pochi giorni fa (suicidio ovviamente... e chi ne dubiterebbe)?
Se fossi stato alla trasmissione, onorevole, le avrei fatto una semplice domanda: Onorevole Veltroni... quando pensa che finirà questa scia di sangue che fa, da decenni, più morti di quanti ne fa la mafia? Quanti morti ancora farete?
La realtà è comunque diversa da come sembra. L'onorevole Veltroni, probabilmente non ha detto questo per amore della verità, né la trasmissione di Santoro aveva il fine di "informare" e approfondire.
La trasmissione, probabilmente, è un attacco ai servizi segreti. Un attacco frontale che prelude ad una guerra prossima ventura.
E il discorso di Veltroni era probabilmente un messaggio.
Resta da capire a chi è destinato questo messaggio e perché è stato dato. Noi complottisti, infatti, non crediamo più alla buona volontà dei politici di far venire fuori la verità. Anzi, personalmente, considerando Veltroni una delle persone maggiormente implicate con questa Entità di cui egli stesso ha parlato, credo che questa trasmissione di Santoro abbia dei destinatari, e sia un messaggio ben preciso.
Per leggere il messaggio e capirne la provenienza, probabilmente, occorre considerare l'area "politica" a cui appartengono Santoro e Veltroni. Un'area politica il cui manifesto fondamentale (manifesto che ricorda quello Rosacrociano della Fama Fraternitas del 1600) è quel libro di Cesare Salvi dal titolo "La rosa rossa. Il futuro della sinistra".
Quindi, ipotizzo, un messaggio trasversale diretto ad alcune persone dei servizi, per fargli sapere che hanno mal operato.
Forse una ritorsione della Cia perché a seguito del sequestro Abu Omar, nel processo, sono state condannate solo persone della Cia e nessuno del Sismi?
Forse una ritorsione Cia perchè alcuni settori dei servizi voglio svincolarsi dalla supremazione americana?
Forse altro, chissà...
Una cosa invece è sicura: nei prossimi mesi, assisteremo ad altri incidenti, suicidi, morti di infarto, impiccati in ginocchio. Questa volta però saranno uomini dei servizi, dei carabinieri, della polizia, a cadere, perché sono i servizi segreti stessi ad essere sotto attacco. La particolarità è inoltre che a cadere non saranno solo semplici agenti dei servizi, quelli che sono morti credendo comunque di fare un servizio per uno Stato che pensavano di servire; saranno probabilmente anche personaggi di spicco, vertici dei servizi che in qualcosa devono aver sbagliato per meritarsi un simile attacco frontale dalla trasmissione di Santoro.
In una guerra, che questa volta non è, come in passato, tra massonerie, tra mafie, né dell' ENTITA' contro lo Stato, ma dei servizi segreti contro altri settori dei servizi, o forse, della Cia contro i nostri servizi segreti.
Stralci delle dichiarazioni del memoriale Calcara.
“…Una nobile Idea Madre…che racchiude al suo interno le cinque idee corrispondenti alle cinque entità…”. Le cinque entità a cui fa riferimento Calcara, sarebbero la già citata Cosa Nostra, la ‘Ndrangheta, e pezzi deviati di Istituzioni, Massoneria e Vaticano, quantificabili gli ultimi, in un dieci per cento dell’organico.
“Queste cinque Entità…”, prosegue il pentito, “… sono intimamente legate le une alle altre, come se fossero gli organi vitali di uno stesso corpo. Hanno gli stessi interessi. Prima di tutto, la loro sopravvivenza. E per sopravvivere e restare sempre potenti si aiutano l’una con l’altra usando qualsiasi mezzo, anche il più crudele… …Sono state e rappresentano tuttora una potenza economica incredibile, capace di condizionare in alcuni casi il potere politico italiano, anche quello rappresentato da persone pulite. Purtroppo si sono create delle situazioni tali che il potere politico italiano non può fare a meno di questi poteri occulti. Queste cinque Entità occulte si fondono soprattutto quando ci sono in gioco interessi finanziari ed economici condizionando così l’Italia a livello di politica e istituzioni…”
La porzione dei servizi deviati delle Istituzioni sarebbe radicata in tutto il territorio italiano e “…composta da uomini politici, servizi segreti, magistrati, giudici e sottufficiali dei carabinieri, polizia ed esercito. Le idee di Cosa Nostra e dei pezzi deviati delle Istituzioni sono da sempre collegate… Questa Entità ha in seno uomini di grandissima qualità, preparati, addestrati e pronti a causare danni enormi a chiunque. Questi uomini non sono secondi ai Soldati di Cosa Nostra e vengono chiamati Gladiatori.
Sono uomini riservatissimi e di grandissima importanza, in quanto hanno giurato di servire fedelmente lo Stato, ma in realtà il loro giuramento è assolutamente falso. Agli occhi dei loro colleghi puliti, che per fortuna sono in maggioranza, appaiono anche loro puliti e, con inganno, dimostrano lealtà verso le Istituzioni…Sono a tutti gli effetti uno Stato dentro lo Stato.”
La Massoneria viene definita “…anch'essa strettamente collegata all'Entità dei pezzi deviati delle Istituzioni… Questa Entità della Massoneria deviata, all'interno della Massoneria pulita, ha un grande potere ed enormi ricchezze e, per forza di cose, chi gestisce il potere in Italia deve venire a patti con la Massoneria…”
Inside the Ring
13 may 2010
Polish president Lech Kaczynski. Associated Press.
NATO code compromise
The recent crash of a Polish military transport that killed most of Warsaw's senior civilian and military leaders was not only a human catastrophe for a key U.S. ally. NATO sources said that, in addition to the loss of nearly 100 pro-U.S. Polish leaders, the crash provided Moscow with a windfall of secrets.
The crash killed Polish President Lech Kaczynski in western Russia on April 10 and decapitated Poland's military, killing two service chiefs, key military aides and several national security officials, many of whom were carrying computers and pocket memory sticks that contained sensitive NATO data.
Perhaps the most significant compromise, according to a NATO intelligence source, is that the Russians are suspected of obtaining ultrasecret codes used by NATO militaries for secure satellite communications.
The compromise of the codes is considered what electronic spies call a "break" for Moscow code-breakers. New NATO codes almost certainly were issued to allied militaries immediately after the crash.
But if the Russian electronic intelligence service, known as the Federal Agency of Government Communications and Information, was able to recover and use the communication key code from the wreckage, electronic spies will be able to decode months' or perhaps years' worth of scrambled communications that are routinely gathered electronically for just such an occasion.
The coded communications, if decrypted, would reveal some of NATO's most intimate secrets, such as plans for defenses and even the identities of agents or allied eavesdropping sources.
Other Polish and NATO secrets also were believed to be aboard the jet, and so far Russia's government is refusing to cooperate fully with Poland's government in providing details on the cause of the crash, or even to turn over the Polish jet's black boxes.
Additionally, Poland's interim government has not pressed the Russians for answers to questions about the crash, such as why Russian aviation authorities, without any investigation, ruled that pilot error caused the crash minutes after the jet crashed short of the runway in fog at Russia's Smolensk airport. Polish security and aviation authorities also were denied access to the crash site.
Public pressure is mounting on Warsaw to call for an international commission to investigate the crash. Tens of thousands of Poles already have signed a petition calling for the international probe.
Many Poles, who need little encouragement to be critical of the Russians based on past enmity, have taken to calling the crash the "second Katyn," after the 1940 Katyn Forest massacre when Russian agents killed more than 21,000 Polish officers in an effort to decimate the Polish military.
Mr. Kaczynski, who was viewed as politically more anti-Russian than current leaders, was on his way to Katyn, about six miles from Smolensk, to mark the anniversary of the massacre.
Amid the glad-handing and friendly atmospherics surrounding this week's meeting between President Obama and Afghan President Hamid Karzai, a senior military officer in Afghanistan provided Inside the Ring with a situation report on the conflict that presents a sober background assessment.
The officer said the biggest problem in Afghanistan remains corruption within the Kabul government, a problem that if left unaddressed "will defeat our mission there faster than the Taliban."
The U.S. strategy for stabilizing the war-torn country is developing legitimacy for the Afghan government, the officer said.
Gen. Stanley McChrystal, commander of U.S. forces in the country, is banking on a major shift of focus, from establishing national institutions to working at the district and local level to create government organs that are pro-U.S. and anti-Taliban.
As for the enemy Taliban forces, "They are there, they are fighting and they have [improvised explosive devices] networks as their biggest weapon," the officer said.
To limit IED attacks, the Afghan government recently banned the importation of ammonium nitrate, the key ingredient in homemade bombs, mainly from Pakistan. Replacement fertilizers have been brought in for Afghan farmers.
According to the officer, the problem in the past was that U.S. and allied forces conceded too much freedom of movement to the Taliban at the local level, as national institutions were set up.
"The focus has now shifted to the local, tactical level," the officer said. "If we can win at the local level and bring legitimacy to local government, the Taliban will become weaker."
The Taliban does not enjoy widespread popular support, and local Afghans are "hedging their bets" by tacitly supporting the Taliban at the same time expressing support for the Afghan national government and the allied coalition.
"There are lots of Afghans sitting on the fence," the officer said. "They'll do their smiley face with us, but if it looks like the Taliban are ahead, they'll do the smiley face with them."
As for efforts to convert some Taliban to support Kabul, the officer said there are some enemy groups that want to demobilize, but at a high price.
"The Taliban leaders [who want to switch sides] want to bring their organizations and clans over but they want to be placed in positions of political or security influence, such as positions within the police forces," the officer said, noting that any such move might actually create more problems for the Afghan government....
un attacco terroristico al web avrebbe esiti disastrosi su trasporti e industria
«Usa troppo esposti alla cyber war»
Secondo il noto consulente Richard Clarke, la rete internet degli Stati Uniti è troppo vulnerabile
MILANO, 2 maggio 2010
Una «Pearl Harbor elettronica» che in meno di 15 minuti porterebbe morte e distruzione in tutto il paese. Questo il rischio concreto a cui sarebbero esposti gli Stati Uniti in caso di cyber attacco terroristico su larga scala, stante l’incapacità del sistema informatico di far fronte alla minaccia. La prima rete a crollare sarebbe quella del Pentagono, seguita subito dopo dagli altri provider. Si scatenerebbero poi delle esplosioni nelle maggiori raffinerie di Philadelphia e Houston e il malfunzionamento degli impianti chimici porterebbe al rilascio di gas letali come il cloro. Paralizzato pure il traffico aereo come pure quello delle metropolitane di New York, Washington e Los Angeles, con numerose collisioni in volo e scontri fra treni, mentre più di 150 città resterebbero senza elettricità. Risultato: decine di migliaia di cittadini morti in un attacco paragonabile alla devastazione di una bomba nucleare e il tutto in nemmeno 15 minuti e senza che un singolo terrorista o soldato metta piede sul suolo americano.
SCENARIO APOCALITTICO - A dipingere l’apocalittico scenario non è un fanatico di Al-Qaeda in vena di minacce ma, nientemeno, che Richard Clarke, già consulente di Bill Clinton e George W. Bush e conosciuto come «lo zar dell’antiterrorismo», che nel libro «Cyber War: The Next National Security Threat» («Cyber war: la prossima minaccia alla sicurezza nazionale»), scritto con Robert Knake (membro anziano del «Council on Foreign Relations»), ha messo in guardia gli Stati Uniti dal cyber-rischio di una catastrofe di proporzioni inimmaginabili. E come sottolinea il «Daily Telegraph», già nel 2004 Clarke ci aveva visto giusto sulla mancanza di preparazione americana nei confronti di Al-Qaeda nel libro «Against All Enemies» («Contro tutti i nemici»). E a finire nel mirino è proprio l’espansione di internet, perchè ora i computer dominano quasi ogni aspetto del settore produttivo americano e questo ha portato ad un pericoloso livello di dipendenza. «Gli Stati Uniti stanno preparando l’offensiva alla guerra informatica ma, al tempo stesso, la politica del paese rende impossibile difendersi efficacemente da questi attacchi», è il giudizio comune di Clarke e Knake, che puntano il dito anche contro le successive amministrazioni, inclusa quella attuale del Presidente Obama, che non sarebbero riuscite a quantificare le dimensioni del problema. In altre parole, gli Stati Uniti possono aver inventato la Rete, ma almeno 30 nazioni sono oggi in grado di scatenare una guerra informatica che metta in ginocchio i sistemi economici, militari e finanziari degli altri paesi. E, ironia della sorte, proprio gli Usa sono adesso i più «cyber vulnerabili» rispetto a Russia, Cina e persino Corea del Nord, perché queste ultime hanno sempre fatto molto meno affidamento su Internet, sviluppando, al contempo, una miglior offensiva informatica.
VANTAGGIO ASIMETTRICO - «Dobbiamo poter chiudere la nostra connessione ed essere comunque in grado di operare – ha spiegato Knake al quotidiano inglese – perché basarsi su un sistema precario come è, appunto, quello di Internet è davvero un grosso errore. Si tratta di un ecosistema fondamentalmente insicuro, pronto a scatenare conflitti e che dà un vantaggio asimmetrico alle nazioni svantaggiate per quanto riguarda le armi tradizionali». Nel recente passato, gli Stati Uniti hanno già avuto a che fare con i pirati informatici: la prima volta furono gli hacker russi o cinesi (o forse entrambi) ad inserirsi con successo sulla rete elettrica americana e a lasciarvi un software che si sarebbe potuto usare successivamente per sabotare l’intero sistema; la seconda, giusto l’anno scorso, quando degli hacker nordcoreani hanno fatto cadere i server del Dipartimento della Sicurezza Interna e del Tesoro insieme con quelli di normali provider, inondandoli di richieste dati. A farne le spese di quell’attacco fu anche un server del Pentagono e in quel caso le conseguenze sarebbero potute essere ben più drammatiche, visto che i militari si affidano proprio a quel server per le comunicazioni in un conflitto armato. «Abbiamo scritto il libro per dare il via ad un confronto – ha concluso Knake – ma credo sia necessario ripensare alla premessa iniziale secondo la quale, trattandosi di bits e bytes, non è un’azione pericolosa e destabilizzante».Simona Marchetti
Cyber attack 'could fell US within 15 minutes'
The US must prepare itself for a full-scale cyber attack which could cause death and destruction across the country in less than 15 minutes, the former anti-terrorism Tsar to Bill Clinton and George W Bush has warned.
Alex Spillius in Washington
07 May 2010
Richard Clarke claims that America's lack of preparation for the annexing of its computer system by terrorists could lead to an "electronic Pearl Harbor".
In his warning, Mr Clarke paints a doomsday scenario in which the problems start with the collapse of one of Pentagon's computer networks.
Soon internet service providers are in meltdown. Reports come in of large refinery fires and explosions in Philadelphia and Houston. Chemical plants malfunction, releasing lethal clouds of chlorine.
Air traffic controllers report several mid-air collisions, while subway trains crash in New York, Washington and Los Angeles. More than 150 cities are suddenly blacked out. Tens of thousands of Americans die in an attack comparable to a nuclear bomb in its devastation.
Yet it would take no more than 15 minutes and involve not a single terrorist or soldier setting foot in the United States.
The scenario is contained the pages of his book, Cyber War: The Next National Security Threat, written with Robert Knake.
And Mr Clarke has been right before.
As anti-terrorism tsar under Mr Clinton and then Mr Bush, he issued dire warnings of the need for better defences against al-Qaeda, and wrote about his futile campaign in the 2004 book Against All Enemies.
Now he argues that a similar lack of preparation could exact a tragic price.
"The biggest secret about cyber war may be that at the very same time the US prepares for offensive cyber war, it is continuing policies that make it impossible to defend effectively from cyber attack," says the book.
In part, the US has been hampered by the unforeseeable success of the internet and expansion of computerised networks, which are now used in almost every aspect of industry but have led to a hazardous degree of over-dependence.
The belief in the internet as the freewheeling, free-spirited epitome of American free speech has made government intrusion politically difficult, leaving the private sector particularly vulnerable to well-trained hackers.
Successive administrations, including President Barack Obama's, have failed to get to grips with the scale of the problem, believe Clarke and Knake, though they have kindred spirits dotted around the establishment.
The military has yet to open its new Cyber Command centre, amid disagreements about what role different agencies will play.
Meanwhile America may have invented the internet, but at least 30 nations have created offensive cyber-war capabilities, which aim to plant a variety of viruses and bugs into key utility, military and financial systems of other states.
The authors are convinced that there will at some point be a cyber-war between two nations and are concerned that such a conflict would "lower the threshold" for a war with bombs and bullets.
Ironically, the United States is currently far more vulnerable to cyberwar than Russia or China, or even North Korea, because those countries have not only concentrated on their cyber defences but are less reliant on the internet.
"We must have the ability to turn off our connection to the internet and still be able to continue to operate," Mr Knake, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, told the Daily Telegraph. "Relying on a system as precarious as the internet is a big mistake.
"It is a fundamentally insecure ecosystem that is ripe for conflict and gives countries with disadvantages in conventional weapons an asymmetrical advantage." Britain, as a nanny state more tolerant of government interference, is far better prepared than its giant ally across the Atlantic.
The US has already experienced two major cyber warning shots. Hackers from Russia or China or both successfully planted software in the US electricity grid that left behind software that could be used to sabotage the system at a later date.
The North Koreans may not be able to feed their people but in 2009 they succeeded in bringing down the servers of the Department of Homeland Security, the US Treasury and several other government departments, along with regular internet providers, by flooding them with requests for data.
Most dramatically, it saturated the internet connections of a Pentagon server that the military would rely for logistical communications in an armed conflict.
"We need to rethink the premise that just because this took place with bits and bytes it wasn't a dangerous and destabilising action," said Mr Knake, who said they wrote the book "to start a conversation".---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Judge Finds N.S.A. Wiretaps Were Illegal
CHARLIE SAVAGE and JAMES RISEN
March 31, 2010
WASHINGTON — A federal judge ruled Wednesday that the National Security Agency’s program of surveillance without warrants was illegal, rejecting the Obama administration’s effort to keep shrouded in secrecy one of the most disputed counterterrorism policies of former President George W. Bush.
In a 45-page opinion, Judge Vaughn R. Walker ruled that the government had violated a 1978 federal statute requiring court approval for domestic surveillance when it intercepted phone calls of Al Haramain, a now-defunct Islamic charity in Oregon, and of two lawyers representing it in 2004. Declaring that the plaintiffs had been “subjected to unlawful surveillance,” the judge said the government was liable to pay them damages.
The ruling delivered a blow to the Bush administration’s claims that its surveillance program, which Mr. Bush secretly authorized shortly after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, was lawful. Under the program, the National Security Agency monitored Americans’ international e-mail messages and phone calls without court approval, even though the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, required warrants.
The Justice Department said it was reviewing the decision and had made no decision about whether to appeal.
The ruling by Judge Walker, the chief judge of the Federal District Court in San Francisco, rejected the Justice Department’s claim — first asserted by the Bush administration and continued under President Obama — that the charity’s lawsuit should be dismissed without a ruling on the merits because allowing it to go forward could reveal state secrets.
The judge characterized that expansive use of the so-called state-secrets privilege as amounting to “unfettered executive-branch discretion” that had “obvious potential for governmental abuse and overreaching.”
That position, he said, would enable government officials to flout the warrant law, even though Congress had enacted it “specifically to rein in and create a judicial check for executive-branch abuses of surveillance authority.”
Because the government merely sought to block the suit under the state-secrets privilege, it never mounted a direct legal defense of the N.S.A. program in the Haramain case.
Judge Walker did not directly address the legal arguments made by the Bush administration in defense of the N.S.A. program after The New York Times disclosed its existence in December 2005: that the president’s wartime powers enabled him to override the FISA statute. But lawyers for Al Haramain were quick to argue that the ruling undermined the legal underpinnings of the war against terrorism.
One of them, Jon Eisenberg, said Judge Walker’s ruling was an “implicit repudiation of the Bush-Cheney theory of executive power.”
“Judge Walker is saying that FISA and federal statutes like it are not optional,” Mr. Eisenberg said. “The president, just like any other citizen of the United States, is bound by the law. Obeying Congressional legislation shouldn’t be optional with the president of the U.S.”
A Justice Department spokeswoman, Tracy Schmaler, noted that the Obama administration had overhauled the department’s procedures for invoking the state-secrets privilege, requiring senior officials to personally approve any assertion before lawyers could make it in court. She said that approach would ensure that the privilege was invoked only when “absolutely necessary to protect national security.”
The ruling is the second time a federal judge has declared the program of wiretapping without warrants to be illegal. But a 2006 decision by a federal judge in Detroit, Anna Diggs Taylor, was reversed on the grounds that those plaintiffs could not prove that they had been wiretapped and so lacked legal standing to sue.
Several other lawsuits filed over the program have faltered because of similar concerns over standing or because of immunity granted by Congress to telecommunications companies that participated in the N.S.A. program.
By contrast, the Haramain case was closely watched because the government inadvertently disclosed a classified document that made clear that the charity had been subjected to surveillance without warrants.
Although the plaintiffs in the Haramain case were not allowed to use the document to prove that they had standing, Mr. Eisenberg and six other lawyers working on the case were able to use public information — including a 2007 speech by an F.B.I. official who acknowledged that Al Haramain had been placed under surveillance — to prove it had been wiretapped.
Judge Walker’s opinion cataloged other such evidence and declared that the plaintiffs had shown they were wiretapped in a manner that required a warrant. He said the government had failed to produce a warrant, so he granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs.
But Judge Walker limited liability in the case to the government as an institution, rejecting the lawsuit’s effort to hold Robert S. Mueller III, the F.B.I. director, personally liable.
Mr. Eisenberg said that he would seek compensatory damages of $20,200 for each of the three plaintiffs in the case — or $100 for each of the 202 days he said they had shown they were subjected to the surveillance. He said he would ask the judge to decide how much to award in punitive damages, a figure that could be up to 10 times as high. And he said he and his colleagues would seek to be reimbursed for their legal fees over the past five years.
The 2005 disclosure of the existence of the program set off a national debate over the limits of executive power and the balance between national security and civil liberties. The arguments continued over the next three years, as Congress sought to forge a new legal framework for domestic surveillance.
In the midst of the presidential campaign in 2008, Congress overhauled the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to bring federal statutes into closer alignment with what the Bush administration had been secretly doing. The legislation essentially legalized certain aspects of the program. As a senator then, Barack Obama voted in favor of the new law, despite objections from many of his supporters. President Obama’s administration now relies heavily on such surveillance in its fight against Al Qaeda.
The overhauled law, however, still requires the government to obtain a warrant if it is focusing on an American citizen or an organization inside the United States. The surveillance of Al Haramain would still be unlawful today if no court had approved it, current and former Justice Department officials said.
But since Mr. Obama took office, the N.S.A. has sometimes violated the limits imposed on spying on Americans by the new FISA law. The administration has acknowledged the lapses but said they had been corrected.
Former NSA official allegedly leaked material to media
Greg Miller, Spencer S. Hsu and Ellen Nakashima
April 16, 2010; A01
The indictment of a former U.S. intelligence official accused of leaking secrets to the media marks an attempt by the Obama administration to disrupt a type of transaction that has persisted for decades in Washington, routinely triggering criminal referrals but rarely ending up in court.
The case disclosed Thursday involves a former senior executive at the nation's most secretive spy service. He has been charged with 10 felony counts of mishandling classified information from the National Security Agency and trying to obstruct authorities' investigation of his alleged actions.
Thomas A. Drake, 52, has not been accused of sharing the most sensitive of the NSA's secrets: the means it uses to intercept e-mails and phone calls around the world, or the tools it employs to crack adversaries' codes. Instead, Drake appears to have provided a steady stream of documents and information to a Baltimore Sun reporter whose work exposed NSA system failures and mismanaged programs.
Drake's lawyer said Thursday that his client had cooperated with authorities but would now mount a vigorous defense against the charges.
Prosecutions -- let alone convictions -- of leaks cases have been rare. Many result in efforts to compel journalists to reveal their sources, but in this case the government appears to have identified an alleged leaker directly.
Federal prosecutors dropped charges last year against two former lobbyists for a pro-Israeli advocacy group accused of conspiring to obtain classified information on al-Qaeda and Iraq and provide it to news organizations, including The Washington Post. That effort, launched during the Bush administration, included allegations of espionage, a charge prosecutors have not made against Drake.
The most prominent case in recent years, involving I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the former chief of staff to Vice President Richard B. Cheney, showed the flip side of the issue -- instances in which senior government officials sanction leaks to advance their political aims. Libby was convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice after being accused of providing secret information about Iraq to a reporter.
In its indictment of Drake, the Justice Department portrayed him as a longtime consultant and executive at the world's premier code-breaking agency who nevertheless relied on relatively unsophisticated methods to give away NSA secrets. Those methods allegedly included copying and pasting documents in order to remove classification markings, as well as using a widely available encrypted e-mail service.
Drake "exchanged hundreds of e-mails" and met with a reporter, whom the indictment did not name. Drake also "reviewed, commented on, and edited . . . final drafts" of the reporter's articles, according to the indictment. It accused Drake of shredding documents and wiping computer hard drives when he suspected authorities were on his trail.
The case could create new tensions between the government and the media, putting pressure on reporters and the sources they rely on in some cases to highlight government waste and abuse.
Bruce W. Sanford, a First Amendment lawyer in Washington, called the Justice Department's explanation of the case "prosecutorial pabulum." He said that "leak prosecutions against people trying to improve national security are absurd. What is not at stake here are sources and methods of intelligence-gathering. . . . This fellow is clearly a whistle-blower."
The indictment could also discourage government employees from speaking to reporters and would-be whistle-blowers from coming forward, said Lucy Dalglish, executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. "I do think there are some people who will be enormously 'chilled,' " she said.
But U.S. intelligence officials have expressed growing concern that the release of unauthorized information was undermining national security, and that not prosecuting such actions has left the impression that those who leak will not pay a price.
"Our national security demands that the sort of conduct alleged here . . . be prosecuted and prosecuted vigorously," Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer said in a statement.
Drake could not be reached to comment. James Wyda, the federal public defender in Baltimore assigned to the case, said Drake had been "extraordinarily cooperative" with authorities and had held important government jobs over many years.
"Mr. Drake loves his country," Wyda said. "He's very disappointed that criminal charges were brought and we were not able to resolve this matter in another way."
Drake faces 10 felony charges, each carrying a maximum penalty of five to 20 years in prison and up to a $250,000 fine.
Drake had served as a contractor to the NSA before becoming a full-time employee in 2001 assigned to its signals intelligence and engineering directorates, according to the indictment. It said his contacts with the reporter began in late 2005 or early 2006.
The contacts were encouraged by a former congressional aide with whom Drake had a self-described "close, emotional friendship," according to the document. The former aide had retired from congressional staff in 2002 and was not identified.
Drake subsequently set up an account with Hushmail, a secure online e-mail service based in Vancouver, B.C., that offers what it calls "near military grade" encryption, and encouraged the reporter to do the same, according to the indictment.
Hushmail Director Steven Youngman said the firm will provide the encrypted content of e-mails and other information to law enforcement authorities when they produce a court order.
Speculation about the identity of the reporter focused on Siobhan Gorman, an intelligence correspondent then working for the Baltimore Sun who has since joined the Wall Street Journal. Gorman was among a small circle of journalists who covered the NSA closely, publishing a string of stories in 2006 and 2007 that spotlighted management lapses, technical problems and budget shortfalls at an agency known for its aversion to the press.
Her stories included references to sources who appear to match prosecutors' descriptions. A Jan. 17, 2007, story on budget woes at the NSA, for example, refers to "a senior intelligence official speaking on condition of anonymity" and "a former congressional aide" in successive paragraphs.
Drake's security clearance was suspended in 2007, and he resigned from the NSA a year later "in lieu of termination," the indictment said.
It was unclear whether Gorman had cooperated, or been asked to do so, in the case against Drake. Editors at the Sun referred calls to a spokeswoman, who declined to comment, as did a spokesman for the Wall Street Journal.
When the indictment was announced, Gorman was covering the Senate confirmation hearing of Lt. Gen. Keith B. Alexander, the NSA director, who is President Obama's pick to head the military's new computer security and cyberwar command. She declined to comment when approached by a reporter from The Post.
U.S. intelligence agencies are required to notify the Justice Department when classified material appears in the press. Former U.S. officials said such referrals have increased in recent years.
"There were scores, if not hundreds, of such reports sent over to Justice" each year from the NSA and CIA, said a former high-ranking U.S. intelligence official. "They generally ended up not getting anywhere near a courtroom."
Staff writers Carol D. Leonnig and Howard Kurtz and staff researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
April 16-18, 2010
The hidden hands behind the Thomas Drake indictment
There is much more to the Obama administration's indictment on April 15 of former NSA senior executive Thomas Drake by the US Attorney for Maryland, Rod Rosenstein, a Bush holdover who has brought similar politically-motivated criminal charges against other NSA personnel. Drake is charged with ten criminal counts, including leaking classified information to a newspaper. WMR can confirm the paper is The Wall Street Journal and the reporter at the Journal who received Drake's information is Siobhan Gorman, who was also subject to electronic surveillance by the NSA and FBI while she was with the Journal and previously, The Baltimore Sun. Other charges brought against Drake, who continued to work for the NSA as a contractor after stepping down as an NSA executive, include obstruction of justice and making false statements to a federal law enforcement official.
Since leaving his executive position with the NSA, Drake has served as President and Chief Operating Officer of National Technologies Associates, Inc. of Alexandria, Virginia. The firm has revenues of $50 million and employs 600 people. Before NSA, Drake was an information technology and management consultant with Coastal Research & Technology, Inc. (CRTI).
While at NSA, Drake worked in the Signals Intelligence Division (SID), the group responsible for eavesdropping on foreign communications and, since the advent of warrantless domestic surveillance, domestic U.S. communications, as well.
WMR can report that as part of the Drake investigation, Gorman and the Wall Street Journal were subject to STELLAR WIND, warrantless wiretapping, as late as last year. The surveillance began when Gorman wrote a series of articles between 2006 and 2007 on NSA contracting cost overruns and mismanagement, information that was first reported by WMR in 2005.
From WMR, May 27, 2005: Up to now, little has been reported on how the Bush administration’s disastrous intelligence policies have affected the super secret National Security Agency (NSA). According to NSA insiders, the chief U.S. signals intelligence (SIGINT) collection agency has been wracked by much of the same internal feuding, senior management failures, and external political pressure that have plagued other U.S. intelligence agencies, including the CIA, FBI, Defense Intelligence Agency, National Geo-spatial Intelligence Agency, and National Reconnaissance Office.
Drake's prosecution by the Obama administration represents a continuation of a "witch hunt" by NSA and its Stasi-like Security unit, the "Q Group," to plug all leaks from the signals intelligence and cyber-warfare agency even if the information provided to the media concerns criminal conduct like contract fraud, sexual misconduct, illegal surveillance of American citizens, and illegal "sneak an peek" break-ins of the homes of NSA employees and contractors by NSA Q Group personnel and FBI agents.
NSA insiders lay blame for the problems at NSA’s Fort Meade, Maryland headquarters squarely on the shoulders of agency Director Air Force General Michael V. Hayden and his small coterie of close advisers, a few of whom have no substantive intelligence background. Hayden has been NSA Director since March 1999, the longest tour for any NSA Director. Not only did the White House extend Hayden’s NSA tour, but also nominated him to be the first Deputy Director of National Intelligence, where he will serve under John Negroponte.
Hayden’s reign at NSA has been marked by the emaciation of the career civilian corps through forced retirements and resignations, outsourcing of government positions to contractors, intimidation, forced psychiatric and psychological examinations for "problem" employees, increased workloads for shift personnel with no personnel augmentation, unreasonable personal searches by security personnel, and withholding salary increases for career personnel. A number of NSA employees are suffering from stress and fatigue and that is adversely affecting their job performance.
One of the most pervasive operational problems at NSA stems from the fact that when newly trained civilian and military linguists, analysts, and other operational personnel arrive at NSA for duty and are integrated into various operational work centers, they are soon quickly transferred to Iraq. This puts an inordinate workload on the career civilian NSA personnel . . .
Career NSA personnel claim that their most senior member, Deputy Director of NSA William B. Black, Jr., shows little interest in their plight. One long-time NSAer said Black often nods off at Hayden’s staff meetings. In 2000, Black, a retired NSA employee with 38 years of service, was rehired by Hayden from Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) to be his deputy. Hayden’s selection of Black from outside the agency was considered a slap in the faces of those line NSA officers who would have been normally considered next in line for promotion to the much-coveted post. That slight began to severely affect agency morale a little over a year before the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington.
After 911 and subsequent revelations that NSA had intercepted two Arabic language phone calls on September 10, 2001 ("Tomorrow is zero hour" and "The match is about to begin") that indicated an imminent attack by Al Qaeda but failed to translate and analyze them in a timely manner to be effective, Hayden was looking for scapegoats. According to NSA insiders, he found one in Maureen A. Baginski, the Director of NSA’s Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) Directorate. According to the NSA insiders, Baginski, a 27-year NSA veteran and Russian and Spanish linguist, was set up for a fall by Hayden and his team. In 2003, Baginski was named Executive Assistant Director of the FBI for Intelligence. According to NSA sources, it was Baginski who carried out Hayden's directives that farmed out many Fort Meade functions to other facilities. Another Hayden project, "Groundbreaker," the outsourcing of NSA functions to contractors, has also been used by Hayden’s advisers to assign blame for the 911 failures at NSA. According to NSA insiders, Groundbreaker has been a failure . . .
Another one of Hayden's projects that has been criticized by the NSA rank-and-file is "Trailblazer," the program to modernize NSA's SIGINT systems. For example, operators in U.S. electronic warfare aircraft rely on NSA to provide accurate electronic intelligence (ELINT) data in order to program their radar warning receivers and jamming pods. However, NSA data, provided from two databases known as EPL (Emitter Parameter List) and "Kilting." 70 percent of NSA's ELINT data is 30 years old. NSA management has forced field operators to use raw ELINT intercept data, culled from a database called "Wrangler," to program their ELINT systems. NSA operations and software engineers believe this function should be handled by NSA and not the "warfighters." Updated ELINT data is handled by ELINT Technical Reports or "ELTs." In 2003, the year the Iraq war started, there were 938 ELTs submitted on new emitter data. However, there were only 200 updates made to the ELINT databases.
The failure to update the ELINT databases may have had disastrous consequences in Iraq. For example, EPL and Kilting do not contain data on air traffic control radars and microwave communications links. Because current ELINT systems cannot differentiate between commercial signals and hostile target tracking emitters, U.S. forces in Iraq have launched attacks on non-threat targets in the belief they were hostile. NSA sources report that many of the cases of fratricide in Iraq has been due to faulty or old ELINT data. For example, the failure by NSA to update ELINT data and provide emitter parameter data to warfighting units led to the accidental shootdown by a Patriot missile of a British Royal Air Force Tornado fighter in March 2003 near the Iraqi-Kuwaiti border at the outset of the Iraq campaign. Two British crew members were killed. The ELINT data used by the Patriot misidentified the Tornado as an enemy missile and the U.S. Army blamed the British crew for the mistake, claiming they failed to switch on its Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) equipment. NSA insiders claim that allegation was false. They claim that "blue signals" (friendly) are not adequately included in the emitter data sent to field units by NSA and that claims by the Pentagon that the Tornado was shot down due to pilot error were false.
In other incidents, the radar warning receivers (RWRs) on U.S. F-16s flying over Iraq have either evaded or fired AMRAAM (Advanced Medium-Range, Air-to-Air) missiles on microwave communications towers because the microwave signals were identified as threat emitters from hostile aircraft. U.S. jammers are also adversely affected by the failure to update ELINT data.
In fact, many of NSA's developmental ELINT systems, with cover names like Beikao, Boomvang, Canyondust, Cape Lookout, Chartvein, Eagle Reach, Galaxydust, Harpstring, Hokusai, Irish Den, Jetavator, Monocle, Needleice, Platoonwolf, Quadrunner, Radiant Spruce II, Roman Alliance, Seadiver, Shadowboxer, Sharkbite, Shiloh, Starquake, Stouthearted,and Sunbeaver are not found in the master NSA ELINT project database, which also has a cover name: Brasscoin.
Many of NSA's other SIGINT systems are in the same conundrum. Rather than simplify and modernize NSA's SIGINT development and deployment, Trailblazer has done nothing to modernize or cut acquisition costs. In a suspicious move by NSA, the Trailblazer contract was sole-sourced to SAIC, the firm from which Hayden hired his deputy director. As with Groundbreaker, Trailblazer's contractors consist of a team led by a prime contractor. Trailblazer's team overlaps with Groundbreaker -- companies like CSC and Northrop Grumman are also found on the Trailblazer team. Booz Allen Hamilton and Boeing are also on the SAIC team. According to NSA officers, one SAIC official left the firm to work for Hayden at NSA during the time the Trailblazer bidding process was underway. The individual then returned to SAIC as a senior vice president, according to NSA sources. NSA employees, upset about the control that SAIC now has over the agency, refer to NSA as "NSAIC." . . .
At his Senate Select Intelligence Committee nomination hearing for Deputy Director of National Intelligence, Hayden confirmed that Trailblazer was over budget and behind schedule. He told the committee that Trailblazer's "cost was greater than anticipated in the tune, I would say, in hundreds of millions." Hayden confirmed the report of the joint congressional committee that probed the 911 intelligence failures that Trailblazer was several years behind schedule. NSA sources claim that Trailblazer is at least five years behind schedule and $600 million over budget.
However, the career NSA operational personnel may be getting squeezed not so much for policy and management differences but because of what they know about the lies of the Bush administration. In addition to the obvious lies about Iraqi WMDs, many personnel are well aware that what occurred on the morning of 911 was not exactly what was reported by the White House. For example, President Bush spoke of the heroic actions of the passengers and crew aboard United Flight 93 over rural Pennsylvania on the morning of 911. However, NSA personnel on duty at the NSOC that morning have a very different perspective. Before Flight 93 crashed in Pennsylvania, NSA operations personnel clearly heard on the intercom system monitoring military and civilian communications that the "fighters are engaged" with the doomed United aircraft. NSOC personnel were then quickly dismissed from the tactical area of the NSOC where the intercom system was located leaving only a few senior personnel in place. NSA personnel are well aware that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld did not "misspeak" when, addressing U.S. troops in Baghdad during Christmas last year, said, "the people who attacked the United States in New York, shot down the plane over Pennsylvania." They believe the White House concocted the "passengers-bring-down-plane" story for propaganda value.
Morale at NSA has plummeted from repeated cover-ups of serious breaches of security by senior officials. While rank-and-file employees are subjected to abusive psychological and psychiatric evaluations for disagreeing with summary intelligence reports provided to outside users or "consumers" and even for more mundane matters, others are given a pass. Ironically, one of the psychiatrists used by NSA to evaluate problem or disgruntled employees was recently found by police to be growing marijuana at his home in Crofton, Maryland.
In 2008, NSA and FBI surveillance of current and former NSA and Justice Department employees who were suspected of leaking information to the press about the NSA's super-classified STELLAR WIND warrantless digital surveillance program, called the "Terrorist Surveillance Program" by the Justice Department, was stepped up.
On March 10, 2008, Gorman wrote an article for the Journal titled, "NSA's Domestic Spying Grows As Agency Sweeps Up Data." Gorman wrote:
"According to current and former intelligence officials, the spy agency now monitors huge volumes of records of domestic emails and Internet searches as well as bank transfers, credit-card transactions, travel and telephone records. The NSA receives this so-called 'transactional' data from other agencies or private companies, and its sophisticated software programs analyze the various transactions for suspicious patterns. Then they spit out leads to be explored by counterterrorism programs across the U.S. government, such as the NSA's own Terrorist Surveillance Program, formed to intercept phone calls and emails between the U.S. and overseas without a judge's approval when a link to al Qaeda is suspected."
The previous year, as WMR reported in May 12, 2009, former Justice Department prosecutor Thomas Tamm's home was invaded by a SWAT team of federal agents:
In 2007, Tamm's home in Potomac, Maryland was raided by zealous FBI agents who suspected him of leaking details of the so-called "Terrorist Surveillance Program" (TSP) to journalists. Tamm tried to inform Congress about the illegal program but was rebuffed by, among others, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, Representative John Conyers (D-MI).
At the time of its inception after 9/11, the TSP or as NSA and the Oval Office referred to it, "Stellar Wind," was so classified that only the Attorney General and one other person in the Justice Department knew about it. The TSP totally bypassed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants that the OIPR prepared for approval by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC). U.S. Judge James Robertson was so incensed about the bypassing of the FISC, he resigned from it in protest on December 20, 2005. U.S. Judge Royce Lamberth, nominated by President Ronald Reagan and who served as Presiding Judge of the FISC until 2002, was also adamantly opposed to TSP and its systematic bypassing of his court.
WMR's report continued: Tamm was also the first person within Justice who corroborated what NSA personnel were reporting about the agency conducting illegal data mining. One of those individuals was NSA employee Russell Tice, who was also subjected to an FBI investigation and government harassment.
Although the government employees who brought attention to the high-level criminality involving the TSP/Stellar Wind were and, in some cases like that of Tamm, are still being investigated, no criminal investigations were brought against the telecommunications companies that participated in the criminal conspiracy to spy on Americans illegally. In fact, Congress gave the telecommunications firms immunity from lawsuits and prosecution as a result of a deal worked out with the Bush administration. One of those senators who voted for the immunity deal is Barack Obama.
After the FBI conducted interviews of all OIPR employees in their quest for the leaker, on August 1, 2007, 12 government vehicles pulled in front of Tamm's home in Potomac, Maryland. Eighteen armed federal agents wearing body armor stormed into Tamm's home while his wife was cooking breakfast. Tamm was removed from his home by the agents who spent seven hours going through his and his family's property. The FBI agents even asked Tamm if there were any "secret rooms" in his house. They also inquired about any weapons in the house and whether he had been visited at home by reporters from The New York Times.
The agents tore through every room, awakening Tamm's son and daughter. The agents seized all the lap top computers, including those of Tamm's children, and a 10-year old lap top. Also seized were the Tamm family's Christmas card list and a calendar with doctors appointments.
After two days, Tamm was offered a deal that he could plead guilty to a felony in return for his testifying against journalists, including the New York Times' James Risen, and their sources at the NSA. Three days later Michael Isikoff of Newsweek phoned Tamm -- someone had leaked information about the FBI raid to Isikoff. Tamm's identity as a source about the TSP was revealed by Isikoff in the December 22, 2008, issue of Newsweek.
In 2008, one of WMR's sources discovered that his home had been broken into and anything that could store digital data had been stolen: laptops, digital cameras, USB thumb drives, etc. Moreover, relatives of the individual discovered that the lock to their home had been drilled out in what was an obvious "black bag" sneak and peel operation.
That same year, this editor discovered that the lock to his apartment door at Potomac Towers in Arlington, Virginia had been drilled out by a circular saw drill bit that drilled around the lock cylinder. When the apartment maintenance man was called to check the lock, he discovered the fragments of the lock pins scattered on the floor at the base of the door. He stated at the time that he had never experienced anything like it in the past.
FBI and NSA surveillance of people affiliated with NSA continued through last week, with this editor and one of his sources being tailed in 2009 in the suburban Maryland suburbs of Washington, DC and an additional tail of a source being conducted last week in Annapolis, Maryland.
The indictment of Drake in reminiscent of the case brought against former NSA signals intelligence (SIGINT) analyst Ken Ford, Jr. in 2006. In March 2006, Ford was sentenced to six years in prison in a case replete with prosecutorial and judicial misconduct by Rosenstein, Assistant US Attorney David Salem, and US Judge Peter Messitte. On April 30, 2007, WMR reported: "Ford was set up in a clumsy Justice Department, FBI, and NSA Security Division operation to punish him for his May 2003 signals intelligence (SIGINT) analysis report that concluded, based on intercepts of Iraqi communications, there was no truth to the Bush administration’s claim that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Ford’s report, with his name and that of his supervisor on it, ended up on Vice President Dick Cheney’s desk. From that time on, Ford was a marked man for the neo-con cabal operating within the White House, Justice Department, Pentagon, and US Intelligence Community senior staff."
At one point during Ford's trial, Messitte called Ford to his bench and asked him if he had spoken to this editor. Ford replied that he had not, whereupon Messitte asked, "Is Mr. Madsen in the court room?" I was not present at the time but I was later told by an informed source that Messitte was prepared to call me to the stand to be asked about the sources of my stories on the case. Such a development would have required me to invoke my First Amendment rights, as the press is the only occupation identified by name in the Bill of Rights as being protected. There was a risk of a contempt ruling and possible federal prison had I been present during Messitte's "kangaroo court" proceedings.
Ford continues to serve his six year sentence at Lewisburg federal prison in Pennsylvania. Attorney General Eric Holder was sent a letter by Ford's parents on November 18, 2009, calling for the appointment of a special prosecutor in the case against their son. To date, Holder has not responded to the letter.
The letter follows:
|November 18, 2009
SENT CERTIFIED MAIL / E-MAIL / FACSIMILE
Honorable Eric H. Holder. Jr.
Attorney General of the United States
Honorable David W. Ogden
Deputy Attorney General of the United States
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 2053 0-0001
United States v. Kenneth Wayne Ford. Jr.
Criminal Case No(s): 04-cr-l l8JKS, 05-cr-0098PJM and 05-cr-0235PJM
Messrs. Holder and Ogden:
In the interest of justice, we, the parents of Kenneth Wayne Ford, Jr., ("hereafter Mr. Ford") request an immediate appointment of Special Counsel to investigate unwarranted prosecutorial misconduct, vehement malicious persecution and prosecution of Mr. Ford under the Espionage Act §793 (e) - Gathering, Transmitting or Losing Defense Information. On Wednesday, September 23,2009, President Obama mandated that DOJ establishes New State Secrets Policies and Procedures.1
President Obama's implementation of State Secrets and Policies encompasses matters in this case. Prosecutors knowingly and willfully engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit and misrepresentation throughout this case and trial. Mr. Ford was convicted under 793(e) - Espionage and 1801 - Making A False Statement On A Government Form. Mr. Ford was sentenced to 6 years in prison for Count 1 and 3 years in prison, to be served concurrently with Count 1, for Count 2. After imprisonment, Mr.
1 “It sets out clear procedures that will provide greater accountability and ensure the state secrets privilege is invoked only when necessary and in the narrowest way possible...” Attorney General Eric Holder September 23, 2009
Ford is to be on probation for 3 years. He also was ordered to pay a $200.00 assessment. Mr. Ford began serving this unjust prison sentence on May 16. 2006. He has been in prison for over 3 years and 6 months for doing absolutely nothing, except being a patriotic American and a good person.
Not only is Mr. Ford innocent, but nothing happened. This case is totally fabricated by the FBI and all involved, specifically the prosecutors and judge know it. Mr. Ford is a victim of a hate crime, a malicious prosecution and a tragic rush to jail an innocent man. See North Carolina v. Seligmann 06-cr-4332-33 (Dismissed 4/712007), Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (1978) and Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963). These cases demonstrate that 'false' arrest can happen to anyone - as in the matter of distinguished Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr., one of the nation's pre-eminent African-American scholars, falsely arrested in his own home.
A. Prosecutors Willfully Withheld Exculpatory Evidence From Defense
DOJ prosecutors repeatedly invoked state secret privileges, suppressed evidence as classified and deliberately withheld from Mr. Ford's defense exculpatory FBI Search Warrant Affidavits for well over 19 months. Ultimately, these search warrant affidavits were suppressed from Mr. Ford's trial. We have recently discovered that these affidavits have never been filed and are not apart of Mr. Ford's official court file.
On December 15, 2005, United States Attorney For The District of Maryland Rod J. Rosenstein and Criminal Division Assistant Attorney General Alice Fisher issued a press release in Mr. Ford's case, which stated in part, that: (Though there was conflicting evidence of what Ford intended to do with the classified information - the jury's verdict demonstrates that it was satisfied that Ford had unauthorized possession of the information". With the admission of Rosenstein that there existed "conflicting evidence" in Mr. Ford's case and the fact that the judge removed the required elements of 'belief... and intent...' from the jury instructions, should have rendered the indictment defective. (See Exhibit A - Rosenstein Press Release dated 12/15/2005)
FBI Special Agents Michael L. Thompson and Frederick C. Marsh both submitted sworn search warrant affidavits to a federal judge alleging that a Tonya Tucker had contacted the NSA to report Ford's alleged espionage. (Ford had known Tucker for 9 weeks - from 11/13/2003 to 1/11/2004 - and decided that she definitely was not his type. He later realized Ms. Tucker is a FBI confidential informant and was placed into his life by Special Agent Michael L. Thompson.) Defense counsel subpoenaed cell phone records of Tonya Tucker from Sprint, which clearly listed the voice call details of Date, Time. Phone Number. Destination, etc. (Tucker's alleged cell phone calls were described in the Thompson affidavit and completely identified in the Marsh affidavit.
From this, we were able to subpoena thru our attorney, her cell phone records.) Sprint records affirmed that Tonya Tucker Did Not contact NSA on January 5.2004. January 9. 2004. January 10. 2004 and January 11, 2004 from her cell phone number 407-616-5683 listed on the Sprint telephone record print-out and on page 5 of 12 of FBI Special Agent Frederick C. Marsh's sworn search warrant affidavit, which he wrote was "in support of the sworn search warrant affidavit" submitted the previous day, to the same judge, by FBI Special Agent Michael L. Thompson.
With the introduction of the subpoenaed cell phone records, it is apparent the Thompson and March search warrant affidavits are perjured and fabricated. Both agents are therefore subject to penalties of perjury. Also. very importantly. the cell phone (It should be noted here that prosecutors told the jury that Ms. Tucker was a friend of Mr. Ford's and simply was a "tipster".) (See Exhibit B - FBI Affidavits and Tonya Tucker's Cell Phone Records)
Mr. Ford, as required by NSA regulations, earlier reported a threatening e-mail sent to him on Tuesday, November 25th2003 at his "AOL" address a month and a half before his arrest. The e-mail was sent by a "Dr. Takiya", who claimed to be a friend of Tonya Tucker. Based on newly discovered evidence on September 1.2009, it was confirmed that Ms. Tucker is the author of the e-mail. Ms. Tucker signed her name onto an internet guest book August 15, 2006 with the e-mail address of Msunique_2@yahoo.com, which is the same e-mail address of the treat letter sent to Kenneth Wayne Ford, Jr. on Tuesday, November 25 .2003.
The e-mail threatened Ford that his security clearances would soon be revoked. She said she knew people at NSA who had clearances just like he did. Ford reported the e-mail the very next day to NSA Head Security Officer Anne Mennis. She ignored the email, not taking it seriously at all.. Ultimately, the admission of the e-mail as exculpatory evidence to Mr. Ford was suppressed from the trial by the judge. (See Exhibit C - Threatening E-Mail / Newly Discovered Evidence).
Newly discovered evidence of a newsletter dated March 31. 2006, states that FBI Special Agent Dave Evans was the lead FBI supervisor in the case against Mr. Ford. The defendant, Mr. Ford, was never aware that FBI Special Agent Dave Evans existed. (We, his parents, discovered this newsletter on the internet in 2008.) FBI Special Agent Evan's newsletter was titled, Maryland Man Sentenced For 'Stealing Secret Documents'. However, indictments alleged that Mr. Ford was charged with 'Unauthorized Possession of National Defense Documents" - not theft of secret documents.
FBI Special Agent Evans also said that: “As it turned out, our tipster was and didn't even make the drive to the airport." Nonetheless, the prosecutors continued to prosecute and incarcerate an innocent man.
FBI Special Agent Evans also stated that: (Our agents ultimately determined ultimately ended up in." Nonetheless, prosecutors indicted and incarcerated Mr. Ford with knowledge that 6'qonflicted evi4ence" existed in this case. (See Exhibit D – FBI Special Agent Dave Evans' Newsletter dated 3/31/2006)
Certainly, the defense has a right to depose and cross-examine the FBI Special Agent who was the lead supervisor in this case. Prosecutors withheld FBI Special Agent Evans from the defense. They also withheld Special Agent Frederick C. Marsh from the defense. The Marsh affidavit was suppressed during the suppression hearing by the judge, Judge Peter J. Messitte, before the trial began on 11/29/2005. Thus, that which brought Mr. Ford into the legal system and ultimately into a federal courtroom for prosecution, was not allowed into the trial. The jury was unaware of the affidavits. (The defense did not get them until 19 months after Mr. Ford’s arrest. Please keep in mind Mr. Ford has been totally under arrest the entire time since 1/11/2004 to the present.) To date, those affidavits have never been filed. They are not listed on the docket page of the case and they are not physically in the court file. It was represented and testified to the jury by DOJ prosecutors and FBI Special Agent Michael L. Thompson that he was the lead agent and only agent assigned to the Ford Case.
B. Even If Papers Had Been Present – The Text of §793 Is Vague And Should Not Have Been Applied In This Case
First, the statutes require that a defendant transmit information relating to the national defense. There are no allegations that Mr. Ford ever transmitted, sold, stole, secreted, purloined, paid for or otherwise obtained classified information inside or outside the government - by any illegal means. Legislative history of $793 makes plain that [Congress was concerned with spying].
The government never charged Mr. Ford with spying, injury to the United States on behalf of a foreign nation or communication to any person not entitled to receive classified information. Due process requires that a criminal statute provide a person of ordinary intelligence fair notice that his contemplated conduct is forbidden. See Thomas v. Davis, 192 F.3d 445,45514n Cir. 1999). If a law is "vague or highly debatable, a defendant - actually or imputably - lacks the requisite intent to violate it." See United States v. Mallas. 7 62 F .2d 36r , 363 14'n cir.1985). criminal prosecution for the violation of an unclear duty itself violates the clear constitutional duty of the government to warn citizens whether particular conduct is legal or illegal. See U.S. v. Rosen and Weissman 05-cr-225.
A statute cannot be construed so as to delegate to prosecutors and juries the "inherently legislative task" of determining what type of possession of national defense information are so reprehensible as to be punished as crimes. See United States v. Kozminski. U.S. 93 1,949 (1988) (rejecting construction of criminal statute that would *delegate to prosecutors and juries the inherently legislative task of determining what type of coercive activities are so morally reprehensible that they should be punished as crimes").
Second, the canon of strict construction of criminal statutes and the rule of lenity ensure fair warning by resolving ambiguity in a criminal statute as to apply it only to conduct clearly covered. Lanier, 520 U.S. at 266. Third, due process bars courts from applying a novel construction of a criminal statute to conduct that neither the statute nor any prior judicial decision has fairly disclosed to be within its scope. Each of these three elements is based on the fact that it must have been reasonably clear the time that the defendant’s conduct was criminal.”
United States Attorney for the District of Maryland Rod Rosenstein confirmed by his own statement that: "Though there was conflicting evidence of what Ford intended to do with the classified information – the jury’s verdict demonstrates that it was satisfied that Ford had unauthorized possession of the information.”
Therefore, one would conclude that it was apparently not 'reasonably clear' that Ford's alleged conduct was criminal. Our son was incarcerated based on “unclear conflicting evidence'. An egregious miscarriage of justice at the highest level is evident throughout this case.
Each of these three manifestations is based on the notion that it must have been "reasonably clear at the time that the defendant's conduct was criminal". Elements applied to Mr. Ford's case affirm that reasonable clarity was severely lacking. Courts have ruled that §793 (d) and (e) apply only to the transmission of tangible information. ln fact, these rulings were the basis of Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald's explanation as to why he did not bring charges under the Espionage Act §793 against either the government officials who leaked the name of CIA agent Valerie Plame to the press or the reporters who subsequently reported that name to millions of readers around the world.
The following exculpatory evidence, which would have exonerated our son, was suppressed from the trial and jury: 1) FBI Form 302 Statement by Tonya Tucker (FBI Confidential Informant), 2) Tonya Tucker's threatening e-mail to Mr. Ford and 3) Special Agents Thompson's and Marsh's Search Warrant Affidavits. Special Agent Marsh's affidavit clearly affirmed on January 11, 2004, page 6 of 12 that: “A review of criminal history records reflect that TUCKER has a number of arrests, including arrests for Driving while suspended, Criminal trespassing, Robbery, among others."
Courts have repeatedly ruled that the government may not excuse its presentation of false testimony by claiming that: (a) it did not know, (b) it did not understand what other agencies knew, or (c) it believed the testimony. It cannot use these excuses because they are not the law and the facts do not support them. See Mesarosh. et al v. United States, 352 U.S. I (1956); Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972); and United States v. Mason, et al., 293 F.3d, 826 (5th Cir.2002). Fourth Amendment violations enumerated in the matter of Franks v. Delaware were repeated violations perpetrated on Kenneth Wayne Ford, Jr. by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ). In the matter of Franks v. Delaware, the Court held that: "Where the defendant makes a substantial preliminary showing that a false statement that a hearing be held at the defendant's request."
Federal prosecutors in Mr. Ford's case willfully applied national security standards of the suppression of evidence and discovery. DOJ prosecutors willfully enforced national security clearances upon defense counsel with full knowledge that DOJ did not obtain mandatory FISA applications and approvals.
Prosecutors ignored strict procedural requirements in accordance to the Foreign Reform Act of 2000"). Prosecutors clearly violated Title VI §603, 605 and 607. This case should never have been prosecuted. Title VI $608 provides, in part, that: "If any provision of this title (including an amendment made by this title), or the application thereof, to any person or circumstance, is held invalid, the remainder of this title (including the amendments made by this title), and the application thereof. to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.”
Kenneth Wayne Ford, Jr. is now 38 years old. He is the cream of the crop of young American citizens. He is an African-American and is highly educated. Mr. Ford graduated from DeMatha Catholic High School in Hyattsville, Maryland in 1990. He then went to the University of Miami in Coral Gables, Florida and graduated from there in 1995 with a Bachelor of Business Administration in Management and Organization degree. Mr. Ford served 4 years in the Uniformed Division of the Secret Service, where he received two cash awards in consecutive years for outstanding service. While in the Secret Service, Mr. Ford continued his education and enrolled into Strayer University. To his credit, he graduated in 2001, summa cum laude" earning a Bachelor of Science in Computer Networking degree. Later, Mr. Ford enrolled in the Masters program at Strayer University, earning in 2004, a Master of Science in Information Technology degree.
In 2001, Mr. Ford accepted employment at NSA as a Signals Intelligence Analyst. While employed at NSA, he received a cash award for outstanding service. Later, he was recognized with a large plaque - his name listed, among others, for outstanding work on a particular project. It was disclosed in the trial by a State Department officer that Mr. Ford had security clearances that less than 150 people in the entire country hold. Mr. Ford has worked extremely hard all his life, as he was not born with a silver spoon in his mouth, inherited wealth or privilege. He has spent over 23 years acquiring an education. He would never do anything to jeopardize his life or his accomplishments. After Mr. Ford's conviction, Mr. Lambert, the probation officer assigned to formalize his pre-sentencing report, commented to me (his mother) and included in his report that "Kenneth has not even had a traffic ticket."
D. Case Overview
On Sunday, January 11. 2004. FBI Special Agent Michael L. Thompson and NSA Security Officer Robert McCaslin arrived at Mr. Ford's home at approximately 5:50 p.m. and fabricated that they wanted to talk to him about his former position. Mr. Ford invited them in because he was led to believe they wanted to get his expertise on a work-related situation. About ½ hour later, their attitudes changed and Mr. Ford realized they were unjustly accusing him of espionage. Simultaneously, with these accusations, they began searching his home - 2-I/2 hours before the search warrant arrived. FBI Special Agent Frederick Marsh arrived with a search warrant and about 23 additional agents.
During the course of this ordeal, Mr. Ford was threatened by Special Agent Michael L. Thompson's unnecessary withdrawal of his gun. He was terrorized for 7-1/2hows as the agents rampaged his home. He was not allowed to leave his residence, contact his parents or answer his telephone. He was denied food and water. He was not allowed to use his own bathroom until Thompson took him away from his home -7-1/2 hours later. See Title 18, Part I, Chapter 113C - Torture - "an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control." (See Exhibit E -Letter by Kenneth W. Ford, Jr. Documenting Events)
E. DOJ Triple Jeopardy Indictments
The government's 1st indictment, and 2nd case number, was filed on 3/4/2005. U.S. District Court Judge Peter J. Messitte dismissed the case without prejudice on 5/162005. The 2nd indictment, and 3rd cse number, dated 5/23/2005, contained the exact charges and language as the ls indictment. The 3rd indictment, which we had no knowledge of until recently, is dated 11/28/2005. The docket indicates that there was a superseding indictment, arraignment and plea of not guilty all on the same day – 11/28/2005. It indicates Mr. Ford appeared before Judge Messitte and gave a plea of 'not guilty' to each of the two counts against him. This is untrue. Mr. Ford never appeared before Judge Messitte or any other judge on 11/28/2005. His trial started the next day, 11/29/2005. It is impossible to appear for an arraignment one day and be tried by jury the very next day.
It should be noted here that on March 30,2006, at the end of Mr. Ford's 2ndsentencing hearing, Judge Messitte dismissed the original indictment. He and Prosecutor Salem signed papers to that effect. Judge Messitte said several times during the trial, Mr. Ford was being prosecuted on the superseding indictment. (Of course, this is impossible.) Apparently, at some point, Judge Messitte and Mr. Salem realized this. Consequently, this dismissal has never been filed, is not in Mr. Ford's court file and is not on the docket. (See Exhibit F - Indictments, Docket Listings of 1//28/2005 Superseding Indictment, Arraignment and Not Guilty Plea and Transcript Page of Dismissal of Original Indictment) Also See $3434 - Presence of Defendant - (Rule) 3
Also, there appears on all three indictments: 'Aiding and Abetting (1S U.S.C. §2)'. Mr. Ford was never charged with this crime. It does not appear anywhere else in the indictment nor was it addressed in the trial to the jury. In addition to the indictments being illegal, these acts make the indictments themselves faulty.
The 1st count was cited under Federal Criminal Code 793(e) - Espionage. FBI Receipt For Property Seized / Form 597 listed all items seized from Mr. Ford's residence. Ironically, there was not one (1) document identified as 'classified papers' prosecutors falsely alleged were taken from Mr. Ford's residence.
At the trial, FBI Special Agent Bridget Bigham, Seizing Agent, testified that she was told to put a classified sticker on a Fed Ex envelope found in a suitcase which belonged to career criminal Tonya Tucker. (The envelope is listed by FBI Special Agent Bigham as #9 on the FBI Form 597.) (See Exhibit G -FBI Form 597) Special Agent 3
3 In United States v. Randall, f 71 F.3d 195,203 (4th Cir. 1999) The Supreme Court ruled that the Fifth Amendment's grand jury guarantee does not permit a defendant to be tried on charges that are not made in the indictment against him, and therefore, 'after an indictment has been returned its charges may not be broadened through amendment except by the grand jury itself. See United States v. Randall, 471 U,S. 130, 143 (1985). See United States v. Brady, 456 U.S. 152; and United States v. Young, 470 U.S. 1, 16 (1985).
Bigham testified she did not look at the papers while in Ford's home. She further testified the alleged papers seized were not photographed in Ford's home as required by procedures, but were photographed days later at an FBI facility. (See Exhibit H - Excerpt of Agent Bigham's Transcript Testimony)
DOJ prosecutors testified during the trial that it did not have any 'surveillance evidence' nor 'any eyewitness accounts' of Mr. Ford allegedly removing classified documents from NSA. Prosecutors should have dismissed all charges against Mr. Ford.
The 2nd count was Title 18 U.S.C. $ 1801 - Making A False Statement On A Government Form. Mr. Ford accepted employment with Lockheed Martin. Prosecutor David Salem had already gotten him fired from Northrop Grumman and after working for 3 weeks at Lockheed Martin, Salem was successful in getting him fired from there also. Ford truthfully provided Lockheed Martin a 1-1/2 page written account of alleged charges against him. At the trial, Judge Messitte allowed Prosecutor Salem to severely redact Ford's written statement. Salem told the judge the statement "prejudiced him". (See Exhibit I - E-Mail Dated 10129/2004 to Lockheed Martin) AUSA David I. Salem and DOJ National Security Division Trial Attorney Mariclaire D. Rourke testified that Mr. Ford backed his pick-up truck to the loading dock and loaded these papers into his truck.
In contradiction of their testimony, Mr. Ford's former NSA supervisor, Ms. Jacqueline Welch ("hereafter Jacqueline W") testified that she in fact had seen Mr. Ford on the day in question - December 19,2003 - standing in the parking lot beside his 'cream-colored 4 door sedan (car)'. Former Counsel on redirect, ascertained whether or not she knew the difference between a 'pick-up truck and a car . She affirmed that she did. Jacqueline W further testified that she never knew Mr. Ford had a pick-up truck. At that point, DOJ's over zealous prosecutors' alleged pick-up truck was referred to as a 'vehicle'. (See Exhibit J - Excerpt of Jacqueline W's Testimony)
Special Agent Michael L. Thompson admitted under oath that there were no fingerprints belonging to Mr. Ford found on any of the thousands of sheets of classified papers allegedly found in Mr. Ford's home. Once again, none of these alleged papers were listed on the FBI's official seized evidence Form 597. (See Exhibit K - Excerpt of FBI Special Agent Michael L. Thompson's Testimony)
Mr. Ford is the only American citizen in the history of the Espionage Act, to be charged, prosecuted and convicted under the statute without meeting the requirements of the statute. The United States Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit recently upheld the requirements that in order to charge under the Espionage Act of 1917 - §793(e) one has to have the belief that what one is doing will harm the United States and/or help a foreign entity and one must have the intent to harm the United States and/or help a foreign entity. See United States v. Rosen and Weissman,557 F.2d 192 4th Cir.2009).
Judge Peter J. Messitte, during the suppression hearings, willfully discarded the requirement that the government had to prove the “belief” 'element. Judge Messitte, while charging the jury, willfully eliminated the need for the government to prove the element of "intent.”
Under the federal sentencing guidelines, espionage (Federal Criminal Codes §793(d) and (e) cannot be sentenced unless there is the element of transmittal. So, effectively, since a transmittal is a prerequisite for sentencing under §793(e), then without it, there cannot be a charge. The government never alleged Ford transmitted anything. As a matter of fact, NSA Security Officer Robert McCaslin sent a letter to Prosecutor David Salem dated 713112004 saying Ford's electronic equipment at work and at home were analyzed by NSA and were found to be clean. The letter was not allowed into the trial.
Subsequently, the "CIPA" Intelligence Authorization Act for 2001- Title VI §607 - Coordination Requirements Relating to the Prosecution of Cases Involving Classified information was totally ignored by Assistant United States Prosecutor David I. Salem and Dept. of Justice Trial Attorney Mariclaire D. Rourke.
The National Security Procedure Statute 9-90.020, provides that DOJ prosecutors had no authority to make decisions in this case. "CIPA" $607 - $1.1 of Executive Order No. 12958, provides that a Senior Official, the President of the United States, must be notified prior to prosecution. ln this case, that President was former President George W. Bush, Jr. - another statutory mandate ignored and violated in the matter of Kenneth Wayne Ford, Jr. $793(e) 'unauthorized possession' is contradictory to the National Security Act which provides that NSA employees have a life-time obligation and commitment regarding NSA classified documents.
G. Violation of Dept. of Justice Guidelines/National Security Procedures
DOJ's USAM guidelines regarding National Security Procedures §9-90.020 clearly dictates that the authority to conduct prosecutions relating to the national security lies with the Justice. USAM unequivocally states, in part that:
All prosecutions affecting, involving or relating to the national security, and the responsibility for prosecuting criminal offenses, such as conspiracy, perjury and false statements, arising out of offenses related to national security, is assigned to the Assistant Attorney General of the National Security Division or higher authority. See 28 C.F.R. S 0.61 The Counterespionage Section of the National Security Division, under the supervision of the Assistant Attorney General or higher authority, conducts, handles, and supervises prosecutions affecting, involving or relating to the national security." DOJ trial attorney Mariclaire D. Rourke and AUSA David I. Salem did not have authority to prosecute a National Security Espionage case against Kenneth Wayne Ford, Jr.
We recently reviewed Mr. Ford's court file. Although there are a few orders, from 8/2005 to 1112005, appearing in the case file that indicate the Assistant Attorney General was in compliance with that particular order, it is with great concern that we ask you to investigate this. We have no proof or certification that the Assistant Attorney General's alleged involvement with this case was authentic. As in other things involving Mr. Ford's case, we suspect this too is a fabrication.
H. DOJ Violated FISA Court Statutes
FISA Court specifically prescribes procedures for the physical and electronic surveillance and collection of "foreign intelligence information" between "foreign powers" and "agents of foreign powers" (which may include American citizens and permanent residents suspected of being engaged in espionage and violating U.S. law on territory under United States control).
FISA allows a federal officer, authorized by the President of the United States acting through the Attorney Gener4l to obtain from a judge appointed by the FISA Court, search warrants and approval of electronic surveillance of a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power for the purpose of obtaining foreign intelligence information. Mandated strict FISA Court procedures were ignored by the FBI, DOJ Prosecutors and U.S. District Court of Maryland Judge Peter J. Messitte, who is not an appointed FISA Court Judge.
Specifically, FISA requires that where the target of the search or surveillance is a "United States person" - a U.S. Citizen or permanent resident alien - the judge must find that the Executive Branch's certification that a significant purpose of the search or surveillance is to obtain foreign intelligence information is not "clearly erroneous". See 50 U.S.C. §1805 and 1824. Also see Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 33 (1963); Strickler v. Greene, 119 S.T. 1936 (1999).
The elements of violations are: (1) the evidence must be favorable to the accused, either because it exculpates the defendant or because it impeaches the government; (2) the evidence must have been suppressed by the government, either willfully or inadvertently; and (3) prejudice must have been ensued. See Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (1978); See Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963); See USA v. Rosen & Weissman 05cr-225 (E.D.Va.)
We are not elected or high level corporate officials. We are "grass roots" people who are honest and hard working. President Obama stated at the 2009 NAACP 100th Anniversary celebration, that: "America is a place where, if you work hard, you can achieve success." A grave injustice has been done to a good American citizen (Kenneth Wayne Ford, Jr.). American citizens rely upon the United States Department of Justice to follow the rule of law.
In good faith, the initiation of a formal procedural investigation and the appointment of a Special prosecutor on behalf of our son, Kenneth Wayne Ford, Jr., is warranted and specifically should include an investigation of prosecutorial misconduct, violations of national security procedures, violations of FISA Court procedures, violations of issues in applying states secrets rules and the willful suppression of exculpatory affidavits and other exculpatory evidence in this case.
We are available at any time that is convenient to you to discuss this case. The elements in this letter by no means cover all the infractions against Mr. Ford. There were just too many illegal things done to put in a letter.
We seek an immediate vacation of Mr. Ford's conviction, full restoration of his revoked clearances and an immediate apology from the Department of Justice (DOJ).
Kenneth W. Ford, Sr.
Gloria D. Ford
l) Exhibit A - Rosenstein Press Release dated December 15, 2005
2) Exhibit B - Affidavits by SA Michael L. Thompson & SA Frederick C. Marsh and Tonya Tucker's Subpoenaed Cell Phone Records
3) Exhibit C - Tonya Tucker's threatening e-mail to Mr. Ford/Newly Discovered Evidence
4) Exhibit D - FBI Special Agent Dave Evans' Newsletter dated 3/31/2006
5) Exhibit E - Letter from Kenneth Wayne Ford, Jr. / Document of Events
6) Exhibit F - DOJ's Double Jeopardy Indictments; Docket of 11/28/2005
Indictment; Transcript Page of Dismissal of Original Indictment
7) Exhibit G - FBI Form 597 (Seized Items) w/ Computerized Listing Of Items
8) Exhibit H - Excerpt of Agent Bridget Bigham's Testimony
9) Exhibit I - E-Mail dated 10/29/2004 from Kenneth W. Ford, Jr. to Lockheed Martin
l0) Exhibit J - Excerpt of NSA Jacqueline Welch's Testimony
1l) Exhibit K - Excerpt of FBI Special Agent Michael L. Thompson's Testimony
President Obama, who prides himself as a constitutional scholar, having taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago, is about to become the subject of a major constitutional case in the indictment of Thomas Drake. Drake was not only exposing high level contract fraud involving two NSA directors -- Generals Michael Hayden and Keith Alexander -- but also allegedly involved a constitutionally-protected entity -- the press -- in making details of the fraud known to the American taxpaying public. Not since Watergate have the American people been subject to runaway surveillance by the NSA and FBI.
Obama, who supported retroactive immunity from prosecution for telecommunications companies that swept up the digital communications of all American after proclaiming he was against it, will be the person on trial in the Drake case. And Obama may very well end up like Richard Nixon if the government does not impose restrictions on the public's right to know through imposition of the draconian Classified Information Procedures Act and the State Secrets Privilege.
As one NSA insider tersely put it: "I truly believe that NSA has some illegally wiretapped information (big-time dirt) on Mr. Obama, and NSA has been using it (via blackmail) against him ever since he flip-flopped on the vote for retroactive immunity for the telecommunication firms that insisted they did nothing illegal when they joined in with the Bush administration in comprehensive, 'sea to shining sea' warrantless wiretapping of all domestic U.S. communications."
Investigative journalist, author and syndicated columnist. His columns have appeared in a wide number of newspapers and journals. Madsen is a regular contributor on Russia Today. He has written The Handbook of Personal Data Protection (London: Macmillan, 1992); Genocide and Covert Operations in Africa 1993-1999 (Edwin Mellen Press, 1999); Jaded Tasks: Big Oil, Black Ops & Brass Plates and Overthrow a Fascist Regime on $15 a Day and co-authored America’s Nightmare: The Presidency of George Bush II (Dandelion, 2003).