Tag Archives: congress

NSA leaks

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

Officials disclose details of plots to bomb New York’s subway system, stock exchange
Secret surveillance programs helped uncover more than 50 terrorist acts, officials say
The NSA chief says intelligence leaks about the surveillance programs harmed security
NEW: Official: “If you’re looking for the needle in a haystack, you have to have the haystack”

Washington (CNN) — Bomb plots targeting the New York Stock Exchange and the city’s subway were among more than 50 terrorist acts worldwide thwarted by top-secret surveillance programs since the 2001 al Qaeda attacks on the United States, security officials said Tuesday.

The startling details disclosed at a House intelligence committee hearing reflected a unified effort by the Obama administration and legislators to defend the telephone and e-mail surveillance made public this month by classified leaks to newspapers.

Testimony by Gen. Keith Alexander, the National Security Agency director, as well as officials from the FBI, Department of Justice and the Director of National Intelligence office called the programs created under the Patriot Act in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks a vital tool against terrorist plots.

NSA: 50 plots prevented since 9/11

Thwarted terror plot details revealed

Analysis of Obama on NSA policies

Joined by panel Chairman Rep. Mike Rogers and other legislators, they condemned the document leaks by former government contractor Edward Snowden as harmful to the United States and its allies.

The leaks also led to what officials called widespread public misinformation about the surveillance programs that necessitated the relatively rare open hearing by the intelligence panel, where they detailed previously classified information in order to set the record straight.

It was the most comprehensive and specific defense of the surveillance methods that have come under ferocious criticism from civil liberties groups, some members of Congress and others concerned about the reach of government into the private lives of citizens.

National security and law enforcement officials repeated that the programs are tightly run with significant regulation and oversight by federal judges and Congress.

Addressing the most basic questions that have emerged, Rogers asked Alexander if intelligence workers have the ability to simply “flip a switch” in order to listen to phone calls or read the emails of Americans.

When Alexander replied “no,” Rogers asked again to reinforce the message for anyone listening.

“So the technology does not exist for any individual or group of individuals at the NSA to flip a switch to listen to Americans’ phone calls or read their e-mails?” he repeated.

“That is correct,” Alexander answered.

He and others also asserted that the leaks were egregious and carry huge consequences for national security.

“I think it was irreversible and significant damage to this nation,” Alexander said when questioned by Rep. Michele Bachmann.

“Has this helped America’s enemies?” the conservative Minnesota Republican asked.

“I believe it has and I believe it will hurt us and our allies,” Alexander said.

President Barack Obama has defended the programs as necessary in an era of terror.

In an interview with PBS’ Charlie Rose broadcast on Monday night, Obama said the situation requires a national debate on the balance between security and privacy.

Obama bristles at suggestion he’s shifted on snooping

Alexander told a Senate committee last week that the surveillance programs helped stop dozens of terror plots, but he was unable then to provide classified details.

Under pressure from Rogers and other legislators, Alexander joined law enforcement officials Tuesday in making public some declassified details of the Patriot Act provisions.

In recent years, Alexander said, information “gathered from these programs provided government with critical leads to prevent over 50 potential terrorist events in more than 20 countries around the world.”

Details of most of the thwarted terrorism acts remain secret, but national security officials said they were working on declassifying more information and could have a report to Congress as early as this week.

Sean Joyce, the deputy FBI director, detailed how email surveillance of foreigners under one program helped authorities discover the two New York City plots.

In the fall of 2009, Joyce said, the NSA intercepted an e-mail from a suspected terrorist in Pakistan. That person was talking with someone in the United States “about perfecting a recipe for explosives,” he said.

Authorities identified Afghan-born Najibullah Zazi of Denver. The FBI followed him to New York and eventually broke up planning to attack the city’s subway system. Zazi pleaded guilty and is currently in prison.

Snowden claims online Obama expanded ‘abusive’ security

In the other New York case, the NSA was monitoring a “known extremist” in Yemen who was in contact with a person in the United States, Joyce said. The FBI detected “nascent plotting” to bomb the stock exchange, long considered a target of terrorists, and the plotters were later convicted, according to Joyce.

He also said e-mail surveillance disrupted an effort to attack the office of a Danish newspaper that was threatened for publishing a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed in 2006.

The plot involved David Headley, a U.S citizen living in Chicago. The FBI received intelligence at the time regarding his possible involvement in the 2008 Mumbai terror attack that killed 164 people, Joyce said.

The NSA, through surveillance of an al Qaeda-affiliated terrorist, found that Headley was working on a plot to bomb the newspaper.

Headley later confessed to conducting surveillance and was convicted. He also pleaded guilty to conducting surveillance in the Mumbai case.

In a fourth case, secret surveillance “tipped us off” to a person who had indirect contacts with a known terrorist group overseas, Joyce said.

“We were able to reopen this investigation, identify additional individuals through the legal process and were able to disrupt this terrorist activity,” Joyce said.

In an exchange with Joyce, Rep. Mac Thornberry of Texas said the case involved someone financing a designated terrorist group in Somalia.

Rogers, who scheduled the hearing in recent days after Alexander pledged to declassify information on terror plots thwarted by the secret programs, said it was necessary to clear up public confusion caused by misinformation.

“If half the things I read in blog and other places were true, I wouldn’t support it,” the Michigan Republican said, later adding that skeptics “have no understanding” of what is going on.

In particular, he said Snowden disclosed only a sliver of information about the programs without knowing the full extent of what they did and the strict regulation and oversight of them.

“None of the things he talked about were accurate,” Rogers said of Snowden.

The hearing came one day after Snowden defended his actions in leaking classified documents to Britain’s Guardian newpaper and the Washington Post.

In a series of blog posts on the Guardian website, the 29-year-old Snowden said he disclosed the information because Obama worsened “abusive” surveillance practices instead of curtailing them as he promised as a presidential candidate.

The former NSA contractor insisted that U.S. authorities have access to phone calls, e-mails and other communications far beyond constitutional bounds. While he said legal restrictions can be easily skirted by analysts at the NSA, FBI and CIA, Snowden stopped short of accusing authorities of violating specific laws.

Instead, he said toothless regulations and policies were to blame for what he called “suspicionless surveillance,” and he warned that policies can be changed to allow further abuses.

At Tuesday’s hearing, officials detailed how the programs operate and the judicial and legislative oversight involved, repeating several times how access to the content of e-mails or telephone calls — or even the names of people involved — required authorization.

Deputy Attorney General James Cole noted that basic phone records collected under Section 215 of the Patriot Act were not protected by Fourth Amendment rights to privacy, citing a 1979 Supreme Court ruling.

In the case, Smith v. Maryland, the justices ruled that information about telephone calls — such as their time and duration — was different from the content of the calls and therefore not protected under the Fourth Amendment.

Cole also provided a detailed description of the legal framework of the programs, noting that the anti-terrorism surveillance effort is not “off the books” or “hidden away.”

“This is part of what government puts together and discusses,” he said. “Statutes are passed. It is overseen by three branches of our government — the Legislature, the Judiciary, and the Executive Branch.”

He described the U.S. phone records collected under Section 215 as basic information “just like what you would get in your own phone bill.”

“It is the number that was dialed from, the number that was dialed to, the date and the length of time. That’s all we get,” he said. “We do not get the identity of any of the parties to this phone call. We don’t get any cell site or location information as to where any of these phones were located. And, most importantly, and you’re probably going to hear this about 100 times today, we don’t get any content under this. We don’t listen in on anybody’s calls under this program at all.”

Tech companies jockey to seem the most transparent

Instead, it takes permission from a special court to get access to further information, based on a verifiable link to a terrorism investigation, Cole explained. Such links have mostly come from another surveillance program that collects communications information of foreign terrorism suspects living overseas.

Critics question the need to store the vast amount of U.S. phone records, saying it creates a database prone to abuses and provides little return for the risk and privacy concerns.

Alexander said Tuesday the phone database played a role in stopping 10 terrorist acts since the 9/11 attacks. At the same time, he and other officials said there were no cases they knew of in which anyone willfully misused the system to access information.

“If you’re looking for the needle in a haystack,” Cole said, “you have to have the haystack.”

Comments »

SHARE THIS

Print
Email
More sharing

Reddit

StumbleUpon

Delicious

See the original post:

NSA leaks

Protesters: How does Cup help us?

People walk in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, on Tuesday, June 18. Brazilians took to the streets across the country to protest a 9 cent rise in bus fares. Brazil is building massive stadiums and revamping infrastructure ahead of the soccer World Cup, which it hosts next year.

HIDE CAPTION

Government protests in Brazil

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

Protesters and police have battled each other in some Brazilian cities
The protests, sparked by a rise in bus fares, point to deeper discontent
Some protesters say they are unhappy at the cost of next year’s World Cup
FIFA president Sepp Blatter booed by crowd at opening ceremony for Confederations Cup

Editor’s note: James Montague is the author of When Friday Comes: Football, War and Revolution in the Middle East (deCoubertin Books). He is in Brazil for the Confederations Cup. Follow him @JamesPiotr

Belo Horizonte, Brazil (CNN) — At 11 pm, the tired and the injured gathered in Belo Horizonte for one last expression of discontent.

More than a thousand sat in Praca Sete de Setembro, a square in the center of the city, chanting against the government and the police. But they weren’t the crowd’s only enemy. A sign hung from a nearby balcony. It read: “Anti Copa.” On the pavement the words “A FIFA be Foda” had been written in chalk: “F*** You, FIFA,” in Portuguese. The roads had been blocked off by the military police, who watched the protesters from afar. A bank of police horses chewed on piles of hay left for them on the road.

Daniel Sanabria, a technician in his 20s, stood nearby cradling his arm, an ice pack on top of a bloody bandage. He peeled it off to reveal an ugly red welt on his left hand. “A bullet,” he explained.

Tiny price hike triggers huge protests

Read: 9 cent hike leads to clashes on Brazil’s streets

The day was supposed to have been something of a coronation for Belo Horizonte, a relatively quiet and small city — if a population of 2.5 million people could ever be called small — surrounded by mountains, an hour’s flight north of Rio de Janeiro.

Its famous Mineirao football stadium had just hosted its first match of the 2013 Confederations Cup, a 6-1 victory for African champions Nigeria against the tiny Pacific islanders of Tahiti. It was a dry run for next year’s World Cup finals which return to Brazil for the first time since 1950, a chance to prove that the country was ready to host the most world’s most popular sports tournament.

Instead, military and civilian helicopters flew overhead, roads were blocked and military police stationed throughout the city as a series of protests sparked by anger about the cost of living, poor quality education and high transport costs took place at the same time as the match.

The initial spark for the protests was a rise in bus fares in Sao Paulo. The anger was such that, even in a country often caricatured for its deification of soccer, the World Cup, its surrogate cousin the Confederations Cup and the game’s global governing body FIFA, have all become symbolic of corruption and waste.

Protesters believe the tournament has seen the rich line their pockets, while the poor make do with crumbling public services. The World Cup, it seems, has sparked something that has lain dormant for a long time.

“Tonight this is about all of Brazil, we are moving against corruption. We have been suffering for too many years,” said Tainara Freitas, a teacher who had remained with the protest until the end.

“And this year we rise. We have woken up. We are on the streets like in Turkey and Greece. They have made us wake up about this. The World Cup in Brazil is about too much money. There are too many poor people suffering. The World Cup isn’t good for Brazil. It will bring tourists and money but this is not good for poor people.”

Earlier in the day 15,000 protesters had marched towards the Mineirao as hundreds of thousands of Brazilians took to the streets across the country in the first coordinated mass protests of this size since the end of Brazil’s military dictatorship in the mid 1980s.

Police responded with tear gas, firing rubber bullets into the crowd, and beat protesters who burned barricades in return. I watched Tahiti’s brave performance on the pitch as the protesters gathered outside, speaking to Brazilian sports writer Igor Resende at half time about the match and the reasons for the anger. A few hours later he was in hospital after apparently being shot in the back with a rubber bullet.

“The police came with a brutal force,” recalled Resende. “I didn’t see the protesters do anything. The police threw a bomb and it exploded in the middle of the protest. Then police began to shoot.”

Resende said he was hit in the back by a rubber bullet as he ran away.

“In that moment I just ran. I thought that if I looked back the police would probably shoot me again. I don’t think the police are well prepared. They are badly paid. They have a bad life. They act like this because they are scared.”

But Resende said he has doubt that the police response was related to the Confederations Cup.

“I spoke to one of the highest ranked police guys in state yesterday. He told me 3,500 policeman were on the streets because of the game. They are acting to avoid conflict near the stadiums. The police and FIFA don’t want the protesters near the stadiums.”

For FIFA, who have been critical of Brazil’s preparations for the World Cup, the protests are an unwelcome complication for a tournament already long behind schedule. “People are using the platform of football and the international media presence to make certain demonstrations,” said FIFA president Sepp Blatter who, alongside the Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff, was booed by the crowd at the opening ceremony on Saturday.

Speaking in an interview in Rio on Monday, he said: “You will see today is the third day of the competition this will calm down. It will be a wonderful competition.”

But the protests have not calmed down. The day after Blatter’s interview, the biggest demonstrations yet took place. Sanabria and Freitas agreed that the Confederations Cup, which continues for another 12 days, is an opportunity to make their voices heard.

I asked them both what messaged they wanted to send FIFA and the football world.

“Please, please, make more pressure on our government, on the Brazilian government to look out for us,” said Freitas before she made her way back into the protest, Sanabria still clutching his injured hand.

“They are looking out for people outside the country, they aren’t looking for us, for the poor people.”

The protestors now have the world’s attention.

Comments »

SHARE THIS

Print
Email
More sharing

Reddit

StumbleUpon

Delicious

Source article -

Protesters: How does Cup help us?

President Obama: If you are a US citizen the NSA can’t listen to your calls, or target your emails

Broadcasting later tonight is a long interview between President Obama, and Charlie Rose. Topics discussed include recently reported NSA programs that target some Internet data, and cellular records.

Buzzfeed obtained a partial transcript, which I’ve excerpted to drill down onto the key questions that have been asked in recent days. This interview – we’ll post the full video as soon as we can get our hands on it – matters because it contains the President’s own explanation, and argument in favor of twin NSA programs that have endured withering criticism from companies, privacy groups, and activists of every stripe.

We’ll proceed by topic. All bolding and formatting are courtesy of TNW. No commentary will provided alongside the President’s words, but will instead be held to the space following.

Privacy v. Security

[W]e don’t have to sacrifice our freedom in order to achieve security. That’s a false choice. That doesn’t mean that there are not tradeoffs involved in any given program, in any given action that we take. [...] To say there’s a tradeoff doesn’t mean somehow that we’ve abandoned freedom. I don’t think anybody says we’re no longer free because we have checkpoints at airports.

How he vets NSA programs

The way I view it, my job is both to protect the American people and to protect the American way of life which includes our privacy. And so every program that we engage in, what I’ve said is “Let’s examine and make sure that we’re making the right tradeoffs.”

What the NSA is doing, and is not doing

What I can say unequivocally is that if you are a U.S. person, the NSA cannot listen to your telephone calls, and the NSA cannot target your emails … and have not. They cannot and have not, by law and by rule, and unless they — and usually it wouldn’t be “they,” it’d be the FBI — go to a court, and obtain a warrant, and seek probable cause, the same way it’s always been, the same way when we were growing up and we were watching movies, you want to go set up a wiretap, you got to go to a judge, show probable cause….

So point number one, if you’re a U.S. person, then NSA is not listening to your phone calls and it’s not targeting your emails unless it’s getting an individualized court order. That’s the existing rule.

The phone records program

Program number one, called the 2015 Program, what that does is it gets data from the service providers like a Verizon in bulk, and basically you have call pairs. You have my telephone number connecting with your telephone number. There are no names. There is no content in that database. All it is, is the number pairs, when those calls took place, how long they took place.

So that database is sitting there. Now, if the NSA through some other sources, maybe through the FBI, maybe through a tip that went to the CIA, maybe through the NYPD. Get a number that where there’s a reasonable, articulable suspicion that this might involve foreign terrorist activity related to Al-Qaeda and some other international terrorist actors.

Then, what the NSA can do is it can query that database to see — did any of the — did this number pop up? Did they make any other calls? And if they did, those calls will be spit out. A report will be produced. It will be turned over to the FBI. At no point is any content revealed because there’s no content that —

So, what happens is that the FBI — if, in fact, it now wants to get content; if, in fact, it wants to start tapping that phone — it’s got to go to the FISA court with probable cause and ask for a warrant.

PRISM

There is a second program called the 702 program. And what that does is that does not apply to any U.S. person. Has to be a foreign entity. It can only be narrowly related to counter-terrorism, weapons proliferation, cyber hacking or attacks, and a select number of identifiers — phone numbers, e-mails, et cetera. Those — and the process has all been approved by the courts — you can send to providers — the Yahoos or the Googles, what have you. And in the same way that you present essentially a warrant. And what will happen then is that you there can obtain content.

But again, that does not apply to U.S. persons. And it’s only in these very narrow bands.

Oversight, and the coming declassification of certain information

So, you asked, what should we do? …What I’ve said is — is that what is a legitimate concern — a legitimate critique — is that because these are classified programs — even though we have all these systems of checks and balances, Congress is overseeing it, federal courts are overseeing it — despite all that, the public may not fully know. And that can make the public kind of nervous, right? Because they say, “Well, Obama says it’s okay — or Congress says it’s okay. I don’t know who this judge is. I’m nervous about it.”

What I’ve asked the intelligence community to do is see how much of this we can declassify without further compromising the program, number one. And they are in that process of doing so now so that everything that I’m describing to you today, people, the public, newspapers, etc., can look at because frankly, if people are making judgments just based on these slides that have been leaked, they’re not getting the complete story.

A supposed change of heart?

Charlie Rose: Should [the NSA programs] be transparent in some way?

Pres. Obama: It is transparent. That’s why we set up the FISA court….The whole point of my concern, before I was president — because some people say, “Well, you know, Obama was this raving liberal before. Now he’s, you know, Dick Cheney.” Dick Cheney sometimes says, “Yeah, you know? He took it all lock, stock, and barrel.” My concern has always been not that we shouldn’t do intelligence gathering to prevent terrorism, but rather are we setting up a system of checks and balances?

So, on this telephone program, you’ve got a federal court with independent federal judges overseeing the entire program. And you’ve got Congress overseeing the program, not just the intelligence committee and not just the judiciary committee — but all of Congress had available to it before the last reauthorization exactly how this programworks.

–

The full interview will be illustrative, but the above should provide a fair fist of the President’s explanations of his actions, policies and views. He felt a bit stiff, but that could simply be his careful treading around what he can say, and what he cannot; not everything is public, quite obviously, and it wouldn’t do to have the President leak accidentally something during his interview to clear up former leaks.

However, the discussion concerning PRISM and the phone records programs is only a part of the larger NSA conversation. Over the weekend, the AP published an article concerning the wholesale collection of digital information. In its story, an expert questioned was blunt: “You have to assume everything is being collected.”

Thus, while the President is drawing clear lines around the authority of the programs detailed above, it might be a small distinction, and more canard than assuaging disclosure.

For more, now infamous leaker Edward Snowden answered a bundle of questions this morning; his answers are worth reading.

Top Image Credit: TexasGOPVote.com

Source:

President Obama: If you are a US citizen the NSA can’t listen to your calls, or target your emails

Do we need surveillance at all?

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

Edward Snowden leaked classified intelligence about government surveillance
Glenn Sulmasy: Enhanced intelligence activities are necessary in the war on terror
Abuse can occur if Congress is not aware of tactics like data-mining, he says
Sulmasy: Snowden should be extradited back to the U.S. for interviews and potential trial

Editor’s note: Glenn Sulmasy is professor of law and chairman of the department of humanities at the U.S. Coast Guard Academy. He is the homeland and national security law fellow at the Center for National Policy in Washington and author of “The National Security Court System — A Natural Evolution of Justice in an Age of Terror.”

(CNN) — Edward Snowden‘s leaks of classified intelligence already have him being compared to Daniel Ellsworth of the Pentagon Papers and Bradley Manning of the WikiLeaks fame. Snowden felt compelled to leak valuable documents about the NSA’s surveillance programs.

The 29-year-old was willing to give up his $200,000 job, girlfriend, home in Hawaii and his family. He boldly pronounced, “I’m willing to sacrifice all of that because I can’t in good conscience allow the U.S. government to destroy privacy, Internet freedom and basic liberties for people around the world with this massive surveillance machine they’re secretly building.”

The uproar over the recent revelations about government surveillance programs has raised eyebrows and concerns across the political spectrum. Many on the left have been surprised that most of the same policies (now even the surveillance of U.S. citizens and phone companies) that President George W. Bush initiated, are being used, and expanded upon, by the Obama administration.

Glenn Sulmasy headshot

Many on the right say it is government overreach and that Congress should have been briefed on the broad programs. Although the cause for alarm in political or policy circles might have merit, the exercise of these authorities by the executive branch does, in fact, appear to be legal. Once again, the war on al Qaeda is pitting national security against America’s longstanding commitment to the promotion of civil liberties and human rights.

Opinion: Edward Snowden is a hero

The current threat by al Qaeda and jihadists is one that requires aggressive intelligence collection and efforts. One has to look no further than the disruption of the New York City subway bombers (the one being touted by DNI Clapper) or the Boston Marathon bombers to know that the war on al Qaeda is coming home to us, to our citizens, to our students, to our streets and our subways.

This 21st century war is different and requires new ways and methods of gathering information. As technology has increased, so has our ability to gather valuable, often actionable, intelligence. However, the move toward “home-grown” terror will necessarily require, by accident or purposefully, collections of U.S. citizens’ conversations with potential overseas persons of interest.

Where is NSA leaker Edward Snowden?

What could authorities do with Snowden?

Snowden’s path to top secret clearance

Where is Edward Snowden?

An open society, such as the United States, ironically needs to use this technology to protect itself. This truth is naturally uncomfortable for a country with a Constitution that prevents the federal government from conducting “unreasonable searches and seizures.” American historical resistance towards such activities is a bedrock of our laws, policies and police procedures.

But what might have been reasonable 10 years ago is not the same any longer. The constant armed struggle against the jihadists has adjusted our beliefs on what we think our government can, and must, do in order to protect its citizens.

However, when we hear of programs such PRISM, or the Department of Justice getting phone records of scores of citizens without any signs of suspicious activities nor indications of probable cause that they might be involved in terrorist related activities, the American demand for privacy naturally emerges to challenge such “trolling” measures or data-mining.

The executive branch, although particularly powerful in this arena, must ensure the Congress is kept abreast of activities such as these surveillance programs. The need for enhanced intelligence activities is a necessary part of the war on al Qaeda, but abuse can occur without ensuring the legislative branch has awareness of aggressive tactics such as these.

Our Founding Fathers, aware of the need to have an energetic, vibrant executive branch in foreign affairs, still anticipated checks upon the presidency by the legislature. Working together, the two branches can ensure that both legally, and by policy, this is what the citizens desire of their government — and that leaks such as Snowden’s won’t have the impact and damage that his leaks are likely to cause.

As for Snowden, regardless of how any of us feel about the national security surveillance programs at issue, he must be extradited back to the U.S. for interviews and potential trial — if for no other reason than to deter others from feeling emboldened to break the law in the same way in the future.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.

Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Glenn Sulmasy.

Comments »

SHARE THIS

Print
Email
More sharing

Reddit

StumbleUpon

Delicious

Read original article:

Do we need surveillance at all?

Report: Leaker in ‘safe house’

Former intelligence worker Edward Snowden revealed himself as the source of documents outlining a massive effort by the NSA to track cell phone calls and monitor the e-mail and Internet traffic of virtually all Americans. Snowden, 29, fled to Hong Kong after copying the last set of documents. He says he just wanted the public to know what the government was doing. “Even if you’re not doing anything wrong you’re being watched and recorded,” he said. The Justice Department has begun a preliminary investigation into what it called “the unauthorized disclosure of classified information by an individual with authorized access.”

Military analyst <a href='http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/03/19/wikileaks.ellsberg.manning/index.html'>Daniel Ellsberg</a> leaked the 7,000-page Pentagon Papers in 1971. The top-secret documents revealed that senior American leaders, including three presidents, knew the Vietnam War was an unwinnable, tragic quagmire. Further, they showed that the government had lied to Congress and the public about the progress of the war. Ellsberg surrendered to authorities and was charged as a spy. During his trial, the court learned that President Richard Nixon’s administration had embarked on a campaign to discredit Ellsberg, illegally wiretapping him and breaking into his psychiatrist’s office. All charges against him were dropped. Since then he has lived a relatively quiet life as a respected author and lecturer.” border=”0″ height=”360″ id=”articleGalleryPhoto002″ style=”margin:0 auto;display:none” width=”640″/><cite style=

Military analyst Daniel Ellsberg leaked the 7,000-page Pentagon Papers in 1971. The top-secret documents revealed that senior American leaders, including three presidents, knew the Vietnam War was an unwinnable, tragic quagmire. Further, they showed that the government had lied to Congress and the public about the progress of the war. Ellsberg surrendered to authorities and was charged as a spy. During his trial, the court learned that President Richard Nixon’s administration had embarked on a campaign to discredit Ellsberg, illegally wiretapping him and breaking into his psychiatrist’s office. All charges against him were dropped. Since then he has lived a relatively quiet life as a respected author and lecturer.

Starting in 1932, the U.S. Public Health Service studied untreated syphilis in black men who thought they were getting free health care. The patients weren’t told of their affliction or sufficiently treated. Peter Buxtun, who worked for the Public Health Service, relayed information about the Tuskegee syphilis experiment to a reporter in 1972, which halted the 40-year study. His testimony at congressional hearings led to an overhaul of the Health, Education and Welfare rules concerning work with human subjects. A class-action lawsuit was settled out-of-court for $10 million, with the U.S. government promising free medical care to survivors and their families. Here, participants talk with a study coordinator.

In 2005, retired deputy FBI director Mark Felt revealed himself to be the whistle-blower “Deep Throat” in the Watergate scandal. He anonymously assisted Washington Post reporters Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward with many of their stories about the Nixon administration’s cover-up after the June 1972 break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters. The stories sparked a congressional investigation that eventually led to President Nixon’s resignation in 1974. The Post won a Pulitzer Prize for its coverage. Felt was convicted on unrelated conspiracy charges in 1980 and eventually pardoned by President Ronald Reagan before slipping into obscurity for the next quarter-century. He died in 2008 at age 95.

<a href='http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/05/23/israel.vanunu.jailed/index.html'>Mordechai Vanunu</a>, who worked as a technician at Israel’s nuclear research facility, leaked information to a British newspaper and led nuclear arms analysts to conclude that Israel possessed a stockpile of nuclear weapons. Israel has neither confirmed nor denied its weapons program. An Israeli court convicted Vanunu in 1986 after Israeli intelligence agents captured him in Italy. He was sentenced to 18 years in prison. Since his release in 2004, he has been arrested on a number of occasions for violating terms of his parole.” border=”0″ height=”360″ id=”articleGalleryPhoto005″ style=”margin:0 auto;display:none” width=”640″/><cite style=

Mordechai Vanunu, who worked as a technician at Israel’s nuclear research facility, leaked information to a British newspaper and led nuclear arms analysts to conclude that Israel possessed a stockpile of nuclear weapons. Israel has neither confirmed nor denied its weapons program. An Israeli court convicted Vanunu in 1986 after Israeli intelligence agents captured him in Italy. He was sentenced to 18 years in prison. Since his release in 2004, he has been arrested on a number of occasions for violating terms of his parole.

President Ronald Reagan addresses the media in 1987, months after the disclosure of the <a href='http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/reagan.years/whitehouse/iran.html'>Iran-Contra affair</a>. A secret operation carried out by an American military officer used proceeds from weapons sales to Iran to fund the anti-communist Contras in Nicaragua and attempted to secure the release of U.S. hostages held by Iran-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon. Mehdi Hashemi, an officer of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, leaked evidence of the deal to a Lebanese newspaper in 1986. Reagan’s closest aides maintain he did not fully know, and only reluctantly came to accept, the circumstances of the operation.” border=”0″ height=”360″ id=”articleGalleryPhoto006″ style=”margin:0 auto;display:none” width=”640″/><cite style=

President Ronald Reagan addresses the media in 1987, months after the disclosure of the Iran-Contra affair. A secret operation carried out by an American military officer used proceeds from weapons sales to Iran to fund the anti-communist Contras in Nicaragua and attempted to secure the release of U.S. hostages held by Iran-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon. Mehdi Hashemi, an officer of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, leaked evidence of the deal to a Lebanese newspaper in 1986. Reagan’s closest aides maintain he did not fully know, and only reluctantly came to accept, the circumstances of the operation.

Tobacco industry executive Jeffrey Wigand issued a memo to his company in 1992 about his concerns regarding tobacco additives. He was fired in March 1993 and subsequently contacted by

The Insider.”" border=”0″ height=”360″ id=”articleGalleryPhoto007″ style=”margin:0 auto;display:none” width=”640″/>

For 10 years, <a href='http://www.cnn.com/US/9802/27/fbi.whitehurst/'>Frederic Whitehurst</a> complained mostly in vain about practices at the FBI’s world-renowned crime lab, where he worked. His efforts eventually led to a 1997 investigation that found lab agents produced inaccurate and scientifically flawed testimony in major cases, including the Oklahoma City and World Trade Center bombings. The Justice Department recommended major reforms but also criticized Whitehurst for “overstated and incendiary” allegations. He also faced disciplinary action for refusing to cooperate with an investigation into how some of his allegations were leaked to a magazine. After a yearlong paid suspension he left the bureau in 1998 with a settlement worth more than $1.16 million.” border=”0″ height=”360″ id=”articleGalleryPhoto008″ style=”margin:0 auto;display:none” width=”640″/><cite style=

For 10 years, Frederic Whitehurst complained mostly in vain about practices at the FBI’s world-renowned crime lab, where he worked. His efforts eventually led to a 1997 investigation that found lab agents produced inaccurate and scientifically flawed testimony in major cases, including the Oklahoma City and World Trade Center bombings. The Justice Department recommended major reforms but also criticized Whitehurst for “overstated and incendiary” allegations. He also faced disciplinary action for refusing to cooperate with an investigation into how some of his allegations were leaked to a magazine. After a yearlong paid suspension he left the bureau in 1998 with a settlement worth more than $1.16 million.

FBI whistle-blower <a href='http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/05/27/time.fbi/'>Coleen Rowley</a> accused the bureau of hindering efforts to investigate a suspected terrorist that could have disrupted plans for the September 11, 2001, terror attacks. In 2002 she fired off a 13-page letter to FBI Director Robert Mueller and flew to Washington to hand-deliver copies to two members of the Senate Intelligence Committee and meet with committee staffers. The letter accused the bureau of deliberately undermining requests to look into <a href='http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/03/us/zacarias-moussaoui-fast-facts'>Zacarias Moussaoui</a>, the only person convicted in the United States of playing a role in the attacks. She testified in front of Congress and the 9/11 Commission about the FBI’s mishandling of information. Rowley was selected as one of Time magazine’s <a href='http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/0,28757,2022164,00.html' target='_blank'>People of the Year in 2002</a>, along with whistle-blowers Sherron Watkins of Enron and Cynthia Cooper of WorldCom.” border=”0″ height=”360″ id=”articleGalleryPhoto009″ style=”margin:0 auto;display:none” width=”640″/><cite style=

FBI whistle-blower Coleen Rowley accused the bureau of hindering efforts to investigate a suspected terrorist that could have disrupted plans for the September 11, 2001, terror attacks. In 2002 she fired off a 13-page letter to FBI Director Robert Mueller and flew to Washington to hand-deliver copies to two members of the Senate Intelligence Committee and meet with committee staffers. The letter accused the bureau of deliberately undermining requests to look into Zacarias Moussaoui, the only person convicted in the United States of playing a role in the attacks. She testified in front of Congress and the 9/11 Commission about the FBI’s mishandling of information. Rowley was selected as one of Time magazine’s People of the Year in 2002, along with whistle-blowers Sherron Watkins of Enron and Cynthia Cooper of WorldCom.

Sherron Watkins, a former vice president at Enron, sent an anonymous letter to founder Kenneth Lay in 2001 warning him the company had accounting irregularities. The memo eventually reached the public and she later testified before Congress about her concerns and the company’s wrongdoings. More than 4,000 Enron employees lost their jobs, and many also lost their life savings, when the energy giant declared bankruptcy in 2001. Investors lost billions of dollars. An investigation in 2002 found that Enron executives reaped millions of dollars from off-the-books partnerships and violated basic rules of accounting and ethics. Many were sentenced to prison for their roles in the Enron scandal.

<a href='http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1709695,00.html' target='_blank'>Cynthia Cooper</a> and her team of auditors uncovered <a href='http://money.cnn.com/2002/06/25/news/worldcom/index.htm'>massive fraud at WorldCom</a> in 2002. They found that the long-distance telephone provider had used $3.8 billion in questionable accounting entries to inflate earnings over the past five quarters. By the end of 2003, the total fraud was estimated to be $11 billion. The company filed for bankruptcy protection and five executives ended up in prison. Cooper started her own consulting firm and told her story in the book “Extraordinary Circumstances: The Journey of a Corporate Whistleblower.”

In 2003, federal air marshal <a href='http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/08/05/air.marshal.fired/index.html'>Robert MacLean</a> anonymously tipped off an MSNBC reporter that because of budget concerns, the TSA was temporarily suspending missions that would require marshals to stay in hotels just days after they were briefed about a new “potential plot” to hijack U.S. airliners. The news caused an immediate uproar on Capitol Hill and the TSA retreated, withdrawing the scheduling cuts before they went into effect. MacLean was later investigated and fired for the unauthorized disclosure of “sensitive security information.”

<a href='http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/anderson.cooper.360/blog/2006/08/abu-ghraib-whistleblower-i-lived-in.html'>Joe Darby</a> is the whistle-blower behind the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal in Iraq. He says he asked Army Reserve Spc. Charles Graner Jr. for photos from their travels so he could share them with family. Instead, he was given photos of prisoner abuse. Darby eventually alerted the U.S. military command, triggering an investigation and global outrage when the scandal came to light in 2004. Graner was sentenced to 10 years in prison for his part in the abuse. He was released in 2011 after serving 6 years of his sentence. The military and members of Darby’s own family ostracized him, calling him a traitor. Eventually he and his wife had to enter protective custody.” border=”0″ height=”360″ id=”articleGalleryPhoto0013″ style=”margin:0 auto;display:none” width=”640″/><cite style=

Joe Darby is the whistle-blower behind the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal in Iraq. He says he asked Army Reserve Spc. Charles Graner Jr. for photos from their travels so he could share them with family. Instead, he was given photos of prisoner abuse. Darby eventually alerted the U.S. military command, triggering an investigation and global outrage when the scandal came to light in 2004. Graner was sentenced to 10 years in prison for his part in the abuse. He was released in 2011 after serving 6½ years of his sentence. The military and members of Darby’s own family ostracized him, calling him a traitor. Eventually he and his wife had to enter protective custody.

<a href='http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/politics/16program.html' target='_blank'>The New York Times reported in 2005</a> that in the months after the September 11, 2001, attacks, President George W. Bush authorized the U.S. National Security Agency to eavesdrop without a court warrant on people in the United States, including American citizens, suspected of communicating with al Qaeda members overseas. The Bush administration staunchly defended the controversial surveillance program. Russ Tice, an NSA insider, came forward as one of the anonymous sources used by the Times. He said he was concerned about alleged abuses and a lack of oversight. Here, President Bush participates in a conversation about the Patriot Act in Buffalo, New York, in April 2004.” border=”0″ height=”360″ id=”articleGalleryPhoto0014″ style=”margin:0 auto;display:none” width=”640″/><cite style=

The New York Times reported in 2005 that in the months after the September 11, 2001, attacks, President George W. Bush authorized the U.S. National Security Agency to eavesdrop without a court warrant on people in the United States, including American citizens, suspected of communicating with al Qaeda members overseas. The Bush administration staunchly defended the controversial surveillance program. Russ Tice, an NSA insider, came forward as one of the anonymous sources used by the Times. He said he was concerned about alleged abuses and a lack of oversight. Here, President Bush participates in a conversation about the Patriot Act in Buffalo, New York, in April 2004.

<a href='http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/02/us/manning-court-martial'>Army Pfc. Bradley Manning</a> is accused in the largest leak of classified documents in U.S. history. His court-martial began on June 3. He has pleaded guilty to 10 of 22 charges against him and could face up to two decades in jail. He has pleaded not guilty to the most serious charge – that of aiding U.S. enemies, which carries the potential for a life sentence. At a February proceeding, Manning read a statement detailing why and how he sent classified material in 2010 to <a href='http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/03/world/wikileaks-fast-facts'>WikiLeaks</a>, a group that facilitates the anonymous leaking of secret information.” border=”0″ height=”360″ id=”articleGalleryPhoto0015″ style=”margin:0 auto;display:none” width=”640″/><cite style=

Army Pfc. Bradley Manning is accused in the largest leak of classified documents in U.S. history. His court-martial began on June 3. He has pleaded guilty to 10 of 22 charges against him and could face up to two decades in jail. He has pleaded not guilty to the most serious charge – that of aiding U.S. enemies, which carries the potential for a life sentence. At a February proceeding, Manning read a statement detailing why and how he sent classified material in 2010 to WikiLeaks, a group that facilitates the anonymous leaking of secret information.

HIDE CAPTION

Notable leakers and whistle-blowers

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

U.S. hacks computers in China, NSA leaker Edward Snowden tells paper
Snowden claims U.S. intelligence taps into major Internet lines
South China Morning Post says it has seen documents but been unable to verify claims
Snowden revealed details of secret U.S. surveillance programs

Hong Kong (CNN) — U.S. intelligence agents have been hacking computer networks around the world for years, apparently targeting fat data pipes that push immense amounts of data around the Internet, NSA leaker Edward Snowden claimed Wednesday to the South China Morning Post newspaper.

Among some 61,000 reported targets of the National Security Agency, Snowden said, are thousands of computers in China — which U.S. officials have increasingly criticized as the source of thousands of attacks on U.S. military and commercial networks. China has denied such attacks.

The Morning Post said it had seen documents but was unable to verify allegations of U.S. hacking of networks in Hong Kong and mainland China since 2009.

Snowden told the paper that some of the targets included the Chinese University of Hong Kong, public officials and students. The documents also “point to hacking activity by the NSA against mainland targets,” the newspaper reported.

In the Morning Post interview — published one week after the British newspaper The Guardian revealed the first leaks attributed to Snowden — he claimed the agency he once worked for as a contractor typically targets high-bandwith data lines that connect Internet nodes located around the world.

Manhunt under way for NSA leaker

Ron Paul on Snowden: It’s a heroic effort

Snowden’s life before leak

Obama open to NSA changes

“We hack network backbones — like huge Internet routers, basically — that give us access to the communications of hundreds of thousands of computers without having to hack every single one,” the newspaper quoted him as saying.

A “backbone” is part of the inner workings of a computer network that links together different parts of that network. It is used to deliver data from one part of the network to another and, as such, could expose data from multiple computers if hacked.

‘Trying to bully‘

Snowden, 29, worked for the Booz Allen Hamilton computer consulting firm until Monday when he was fired after documents he provided to journalists revealed the existence of secret programs to collect records of domestic telephone calls in the United States and the Internet activity of overseas residents.

While he has not been charged, the FBI is conducting an investigation into the leaks, and he has told The Guardian that he expects the United States will try to prosecute him.

Snowden told the Morning Post that he felt U.S. officials were pressuring his family and also accused them of “trying to bully” Hong Kong into extraditing him to prevent the release of more damaging information.

He vowed to resist extradition efforts if it comes to that, saying he “would rather stay and fight the United States government in the courts, because I have faith in Hong Kong’s rule of law.”

“My intention is to ask the courts and people of Hong Kong to decide my fate,” the South China Morning Post quoted Snowden as saying. “I have been given no reason to doubt your system.”

But Hong Kong lawmaker Regina Ip, a former secretary of security for the territory, said Tuesday that while any extradition process could take months, Snowden isn’t necessarily beyond the reach of the United States.

“If he thought there was a legal vacuum in Hong Kong which renders him safe from U.S. jurisdiction, that is unlikely to be the case,” she said.

The newspaper said Snowden has been hiding in undisclosed locations inside the semi-autonomous Chinese territory since checking out of his hotel room Monday — a day after he revealed his identity in an interview with The Guardian.

Snowden told the Morning Post he is not trying to evade U.S. authorities.

“People who think I made a mistake in picking Hong Kong as a location misunderstand my intentions,” the newspaper quoted him as saying. “I am not here to hide from justice; I am here to reveal criminality.”

On the defensive

The revelations have renewed debate over surveillance in the United States and overseas in the name of fighting terrorism, with supporters saying the programs revealed by Snowden are legal and have helped stop terror plots. Civil liberties advocates, however, call the measures dangerous and unacceptable intrusions.

Such criticisms have put President Barack Obama and his allies on the issue — both Democrats and Republicans — on the defensive against mounting criticisms from a similarly bipartisan group of critics demanding changes to rein in the programs.

NSA leaker back in shadows

Why did U.S. leaker hide in Hong Kong?

Where could NSA leaker go?

Prosecution for journalists in leak?

Those differences will likely be on display Wednesday when the Senate Appropriations Committee holds a hearing into cybersecurity technology and civil liberties. Gen. Keith Alexander, director of the National Security Agency, is among those scheduled to testify.

While not on the roster for Wednesday’s hearing, another administration official in the spotlight is Director of Intelligence James Clapper, whom Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden has singled out for how he answered questions about the telephone surveillance program in March.

In March, Wyden asked Clapper if the NSA collects “any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?”

“No sir,” Clapper said.

On Saturday, Clapper told NBC News that he answered in the “most truthful or least most untruthful manner” possible.

He told NBC that he had interpreted “collection” to mean actually examining the materials gathered by the NSA.

He previously told the National Journal he had meant that “the NSA does not voyeuristically pore through U.S. citizens’ e-mails,” but he did not mention e-mails at the hearing.

NSA leaker’s girlfriend says she’s ‘lost at sea’

CNN’s Jethro Mullen reported and wrote from Hong Kong, and Michael Pearson reported and wrote from Atlanta. CNN’s Doug Gross, Chelsea J. Carter, Brian Walker and Pamela Boykoff contributed to this report.

Comments »

SHARE THIS

Print
Email
More sharing

Reddit

StumbleUpon

Delicious

Link:

Report: Leaker in ‘safe house’

When are you old and useless?

Should judges have a mandatory retirement age?

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

Dean Obeidallah: Each day, people hear the catch phrase, “Happy Birthday: You’re fired!”
Obeidallah: Despite age discrimination law, workers are let go because of their age
He says mandatory retirement age doesn’t make sense for people who are fit to do the job
Obeidallah: Judges, for example, shouldn’t have to retire so long as they are mentally agile

Editor’s note: Dean Obeidallah, a former attorney, is a political comedian and frequent commentator on various TV networks including CNN. He is the editor of the politics blog The Dean’s Report and co-host of a new CNN podcast “The Big Three” that looks at the top three stories of the week. Follow him on Twitter @deanofcomedy.

(CNN) — “Happy Birthday: You’re fired!”

No, that’s not the catch phrase from a new reality show hosted by Donald Trump. It’s worse than that — assuming there could be something worse than a new Donald Trump reality show.

This statement is in essence what many Americans around the country hear each day because of legally mandated retirement age. Even though you may have been an outstanding worker the day before, because you are now one day older and have reached the retirement age limit, you are tossed in the waste bin.

Dean Obeidallah

Just so it’s clear, age discrimination in most fields is prohibited by the Age Discrimination in Employment Act passed by Congress in 1967. This law protects workers between 40 and 70 from age discrimination.

The law was amended in 1986 to expand protections to workers over 70 years old. Fittingly, this extension was signed into law by then 75-year-old President Ronald Reagan, who remarked: “We take another important step by ensuring that the many individuals 70 years of age and older, who have valuable contributions to make, will now have the opportunity to do so.”

The problem is that this law provides numerous exceptions that result in legally sanctioned age discrimination in various professions.

For example, federal air traffic controllers cannot be older than 30 when starting their employment and must retire by 56.

FBI agents can say, “Freeze FBI!” up until they are 57 years old. But then they have to turn in their FBI windbreaker. (The FBI director can extend an agent’s service a few more years depending on circumstances.)

Airline pilots must leave the cockpit and became permanent passengers at 65 years of age. National Park rangers must retire at 57. And numerous state and local governments are able to mandate that firefighters and police officers be sent off to pasture at a certain age.

Sure, some of these professions involve a standard in physical competency, which was the rationale for the age limit. But every 57-year-old isn’t the same. Nor is every 77-year-old. As opposed to blanket firings based on age, testing can easily be implemented to ensure that each individual is still capable of executing the tasks required of the job.

Mandatory age restrictions are not just limited to occupations that have a physical component. Judges in 33 states are required by law to retire between 70 and 75 years of age. A judge doesn’t do much physically — they put on a robe, walk to the bench, strike the gavel a few times — done. Sure, every now and then they raise their voice when angry at a lawyer- being a former lawyer I can attest to being on the receiving end of their barbs — but not much more.

For judges it’s all about mental fitness. The good news is that 10 states are currently considering raising the mandatory retirement age, including New York where the issue is being discussed in the state’s legislature this week.

Thankfully, life expectancy in the United States is an ever-improving proposition. It is now up to 78 years old, an increase of approximately eight years since the 1960s. If you want to see how long the U.S. government thinks you will live to the exact month, check out the creepy life expectancy calculator on the Social Security Administration’s website.

A recent poll found that most Americans are delaying their retirement. It is now up to 61 from 57 years old in the 1990s. And non-retired workers plan to retire at 66, up from 60 in 1995.

Certainly, this can be attributed to the fact that some don’t have the funds needed to retire earlier. But for many, it’s that they are physically and mentally adept enough to keep working. I’m sure there are some people who love their jobs and want to work as long as possible.

Why shouldn’t older Americans be able to work as long as they choose to as long as they are physically and mentally fit enough?

Legally mandated retirement ages don’t make sense from a business point of view either. Why wouldn’t employers want to retain older employees who have rich experiences and skills that are assets?

The concept that a person should be let go solely because of age is just as wrong as discrimination based on race, gender or ethnicity.

Plus, legally sanctioned age discrimination sends a horrible message that older workers are inherently less valuable than younger ones.

Changing perceptions about older workers will take time, but a great step forward would be for Congress to amend the Age Discrimination in Employment Act to make it clear that age discrimination in all professions will no longer be tolerated in the United States of America.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.

Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Dean Obeidallah.

Comments »

SHARE THIS

Print
Email
More sharing

Reddit

StumbleUpon

Delicious

Link -

When are you old and useless?

On Spying, A Deficit Of Trust

After it was revealed that the National Security Administration was collecting phone records of every single U.S. call on the Verizon network, even President Obama’s most ardent supporters are losing faith that he would usher in a more transparent government. Loyal Democrat, former Vice President and Internet inventor, Al Gore called the NSA’s massive spying program ”obscenely outrageous”.

On Spying, A Deficit Of Trust