Mercury Rising 鳯女

Politics, life, and other things that matter

Archive for December 9th, 2013

Tech giants tell NSA to limit bulk spying

Posted by Charles II on December 9, 2013

I blogged this over at DK.

The Guardian has a version here.
The NYT has a version here.

Advertisements

Posted in NSA eavesdropping, wiretapping | Comments Off on Tech giants tell NSA to limit bulk spying

Juan Cole made the Bush White House Enemies’ List

Posted by Charles II on December 9, 2013

Congratulations, Juan! And thank you, James Risen (via Eschaton):

Glenn L. Carle, a former Central Intelligence Agency officer who was a top counterterrorism official during the administration of President George W. Bush, said the White House at least twice asked intelligence officials to gather sensitive information on Juan Cole, a University of Michigan professor who writes an influential blog that criticized the war.

Posted in abuse of power, Bush, Busheviks, Juan Cole | Comments Off on Juan Cole made the Bush White House Enemies’ List

Hersh: Obama lied about Syrian sarin

Posted by Charles II on December 9, 2013

Via DemocracyNow, Sy Hersh in the 8/12/13 London Review of Books:

Barack Obama did not tell the whole story this autumn when he tried to make the case that Bashar al-Assad was responsible for the chemical weapons attack near Damascus on 21 August. In some instances, he omitted important intelligence, and in others he presented assumptions as facts. Most significant, he failed to acknowledge something known to the US intelligence community: that the Syrian army is not the only party in the country’s civil war with access to sarin, the nerve agent that a UN study concluded – without assessing responsibility – had been used in the rocket attack.

That lede makes it sound as if it were more of a fudge than a lie. But when one digs into the details, the real lede is buried.

But in recent interviews with intelligence and military officers and consultants past and present, I found intense concern, and on occasion anger, over what was repeatedly seen as the deliberate manipulation of intelligence. One high-level intelligence officer, in an email to a colleague, called the administration’s assurances of Assad’s responsibility a ‘ruse’. The attack ‘was not the result of the current regime’, he wrote. A former senior intelligence official told me that the Obama administration had altered the available information – in terms of its timing and sequence – to enable the president and his advisers to make intelligence retrieved days after the attack look as if it had been picked up and analysed in real time, as the attack was happening.

The complaints focus on what Washington did not have: any advance warning from the assumed source of the attack.

The absence of immediate alarm inside the American intelligence community demonstrates that there was no intelligence about Syrian intentions in the days before the attack. And there are at least two ways the US could have known about it in advance: both were touched on in one of the top secret American intelligence documents that have been made public in recent months by Edward Snowden, the former NSA contractor.

What the US did not have was reaction from sensors that it has placed near Syrian chemical weapons facilities. If the Syrian army had planned the attack, they would have mixed the binary system, and it would have been picked up by sensors. It also had a gap in wiretapping of Bashar al-Assad.

The sensors had worked in the past, as the Syrian leadership knew all too well. Last December the sensor system picked up signs of what seemed to be sarin production at a chemical weapons depot. It was not immediately clear whether the Syrian army was simulating sarin production as part of an exercise (all militaries constantly carry out such exercises) or actually preparing an attack.

The US continued to lie about the more likely source of the attack, an extremist Islamist group called al-Nusra.

In both its public and private briefings after 21 August, the administration disregarded the available intelligence about al-Nusra’s potential access to sarin and continued to claim that the Assad government was in sole possession of chemical weapons. This was the message conveyed in the various secret briefings that members of Congress received in the days after the attack, when Obama was seeking support for his planned missile offensive against Syrian military installations. One legislator with more than two decades of experience in military affairs told me that he came away from one such briefing persuaded that ‘only the Assad government had sarin and the rebels did not.’ Similarly, following the release of the UN report on 16 September confirming that sarin was used on 21 August, Samantha Power, the US ambassador to the UN, told a press conference: ‘It’s very important to note that only the [Assad] regime possesses sarin, and we have no evidence that the opposition possesses sarin.’

Posted in NSA eavesdropping, Obama Administration, Syria | Comments Off on Hersh: Obama lied about Syrian sarin

 
%d bloggers like this: